[late]

So, in other words, what's keeping the Executive Branch from provoking a *constitutional crisis* and then bringing in the military -- ?

The military won't help; and wannabe dictators need the military..

[Rugoz]

You want to take a shot at it, then -- ?

The "Rätesystem" (Soviet-style revolution) didn't have the support of the population, the military or the unions. It was doomed to fail.

[late]

The "Rätesystem" (Soviet-style revolution) didn't have the support of the population, the military or the unions. It was doomed to fail.

It didn't fail because of politics, because there wasn't any politics outside the party.

It was an economic failure, largely from their trying to do a command economy.

[ckaihatsu]

The military won't help; and wannabe dictators need the military..

What happens when the military *is* the dictator, as in Myanmar -- ?

Why would social democracy do us like that -- ! (grin)

[ckaihatsu]

The "Rätesystem" (Soviet-style revolution) didn't have the support of the population, the military or the unions. It was doomed to fail.

It didn't fail because of politics, because there wasn't any politics outside the party.

It was an economic failure, largely from their trying to do a command economy.

Yeah -- not a Stalinist, so there's no point there.

Relying on the military isn't any better than the social-democracy ritual of electoralism, though -- it just gets *politicized*, as with Milley overruling Trump (good), or *this* from history:

Morale in the High Seas Fleet

Following the Battle of Juttingland in 1918, many of the capital ships of the Imperial Navy had seen reduced activity outside the Baltic and had remained in harbor. Many officers and crewmen volunteered to transfer to the submarines and light vessels which still had a major part to play in the war. The discipline and spirit of those who remained, on lower rations, with the battleships tied up at dock-side, inevitably suffered. On 2 August 1917, 350 crewmen of the dreadnought Prinzregent Luitpold staged a protest demonstration in Wilhelmshaven. Two of the ringleaders were executed by firing squad while others were sentenced to prison. During the remaining months of the war, secret sailors' councils were formed on a number of the capital ships.[1] Richard Stumpf wrote a book Warum die Flotte zerbrach – Kriegstagebuch eines christlichen Arbeiters (Why the fleet broke up – war diary of a Christian worker) of his war memories, explaining the conditions that led to the demise of German Imperial Navy. This was later presented to German Weimar Republic parliament (Reichstag) commission and is discussed at Naval Academy Mürwik naval history classes.

Naval order of 24 October 1918

Main article: Naval order of 24 October 1918

In October 1918, the imperial naval command in Kiel under Admiral Franz von Hipper planned to dispatch the fleet for a final battle against the Royal Navy in the English Channel.[2] The naval order of 24 October 1918 and the preparations to sail triggered a mutiny among the affected sailors and then a general revolution which was to sweep aside the monarchy within a few days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiel_mutiny

[Steve_American]

@late,

late, what is it about Prof. Stiglitz that makes you think he is a better source of economic thinking than Prof. Michael Hudson?

Neither Stiglitz nor Hudson say much positive about MMT, but Hudson teaches at the Univ. Of Missouri, at Kansas City, which is the leading Univ. for MMT profs.
.

[Rugoz]

It didn't fail because of politics, because there wasn't any politics outside the party.

It was an economic failure, largely from their trying to do a command economy.

I'm talking about Germany in 1918.

[late]

@late,

late, what is it about Prof. Stiglitz that makes you think he is a better source of economic thinking than Prof. Michael Hudson?

Neither Stiglitz nor Hudson say much positive about MMT, but Hudson teaches at the Univ. Of Missouri, at Kansas City, which is the leading Univ. for MMT profs.

Stiglitz is a better speaker. I haven't paid attention to Hudson, but from that video I can say I prefer Stiglitz. Just type Stiglitz into the Youtube taskbar, and watch a few.

[late]

What happens when the military *is* the dictator, as in Myanmar -- ?

Why would social democracy do us like that -- ! (grin)

The Modern world has 3 crucial parts, Rule of Law, education institutions and capitalism.

Myanmar came up short on all 3, which is why a military takeover happened in the first place.

You babble.

[Rich]

Again, you mean 'Stalinism', and not actual working class control.

Why do you keep bringing up Stalinism? The independent power of the Factory Committees, the Soldier committees, the city Soviets, the Trade unions and the local Dumas were all crushed under Lenin long before Stalin became dictator. "We shot them down like partridges" was Trotsky's response to the ordinary working class members of the Kronstadt garrison that demanded any say in the running of their own lives.

[ckaihatsu]

What happens when the military *is* the dictator, as in Myanmar -- ?

Why would social democracy do us like that -- ! (grin)

The Modern world has 3 crucial parts, Rule of Law, education institutions and capitalism.

Myanmar came up short on all 3, which is why a military takeover happened in the first place.

You babble.

What's with all of these snide off-handed little insults -- ? Stop that.

Why does your glorified social-democracy allow a *military junta* to remain in charge, in Myanmar -- !

[ckaihatsu]

Why do you keep bringing up Stalinism? The independent power of the Factory Committees, the Soldier committees, the city Soviets, the Trade unions and the local Dumas were all crushed under Lenin long before Stalin became dictator. "We shot them down like partridges" was Trotsky's response to the ordinary working class members of the Kronstadt garrison that demanded any say in the running of their own lives.

Just like at the other thread:


---

The Kronstadt rebels and even the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine stood no chance against Lenin and Trotsky.

You're oversimplifying history again, Rich.

[T]he Red Terror was modeled on the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution,[6] and sought to eliminate political dissent, opposition, and any other threat to Bolshevik power.[1] More broadly, the term is usually applied to Bolshevik political repression throughout the Civil War (1917–1922),[7][8][9] as distinguished from the White Terror carried out by the White Army (Russian and non-Russian groups opposed to Bolshevik rule) against their political enemies, including the Bolsheviks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror

---

The bitter price: the seeds of Stalinism

The failure to spread the revolution left Russia isolated, and it had to suffer not just a material blockade but all the horrors of foreign invasion by some 16 armies, civil war, devastation, disease and hunger. Industrial production sank to a mere 18 percent of its 1916 figure, and the small rump of the working class which remained in the cities could only feed itself by travelling to the countryside to engage in individual barter with peasants. As typhus spread and even cannibalism appeared, the Bolsheviks increasingly held on to power through a party regime rather than as direct representatives of a virtually non-existent working class. That they survived says an enormous amount about the revolutionary courage and endurance of the workers who still made up the bulk of the party. But that did not stop them having to pay a political price for survival.

This was shown starkly in March 1921 when sailors in Kronstadt, the naval fort outside Petrograd (St Petersburg), rose up, blaming the revolutionary government for the incredible levels of poverty. Kronstadt had been one of the great centres of Bolshevik strength in 1917, but its composition had changed as old militants went to fight in the Red Army and were replaced by men fresh from the countryside. The rising could not present any programme for overcoming poverty, since this was not a capitalist crisis caused by the existence of wealth alongside poverty but rather the product of a whole country impoverished by civil war, foreign invasion and blockade. There was not one class living in affluence and another in starvation, but simply different degrees of hunger. The generals of the old regime, only finally defeated in civil war a few months before, were waiting for any chance to stage a comeback, and a few eventually established friendly relations with some of the Kronstadt rebels. Time was not on the revolutionary government’s side. The ice surrounding the fortress was melting and it would soon become difficult to recapture.122 All these factors gave the Bolsheviks little choice but to put down the rising—a fact recognised by the ‘workers’ opposition’ inside the Bolshevik Party, who were in the forefront of those to cross the ice to take on the sailors. Yet Kronstadt was a sign of the wretched conditions to which isolation and foreign intervention had reduced the revolution. It could only survive by methods which owed more to Jacobinism than to the Bolshevism of 1917.

Harman, _People's History of the World_, pp. 446-447

viewtopic.php?p=15210089#p15210089

[late]

What's with all of these snide off-handed little insults -- ? Stop that.

What's with all the insulting goal post moving?

You keep being wrong, and then instead of acknowledging it, you do it again.

Wtf..

[ckaihatsu]

What's with all the insulting goal post moving?

You keep being wrong, and then instead of acknowledging it, you do it again.

Wtf..

Where's that handy list notepad of yours -- let's get a list going. (Otherwise STFU.)

[late]

(Otherwise STFU.)

[ckaihatsu]

[img]https://dangerousminds.net/content/uploads/images/made/content/uploads/images/Eight-Ball-not-so-good_465_283_int.jpg[img]

You don't listen that well, do you -- ?

Petty antagonism *isn't* politics.

[late]

Petty antagonism *isn't* politics.

Neither is fantasy.

[ckaihatsu]

Neither is fantasy.

Okay, that counts as your list.

Where's the "fantasy" -- ?

[Potemkin]

You don't listen that well, do you -- ?

Petty antagonism *isn't* politics.

Actually, it is.

[ckaihatsu]

Actually, it is.

Giving away all your tricks for free, huh -- ?

(grin)

My powers are lowlier and I find that I have to soften them up a little first, but, hey, whatever works -- ! (grin)