I think that socialism will spread to the third world, and then return to the second, and that the Anglosphere will be the last holdouts of the capitalist world as Europe flips too. I think this process will play out over the next century, and that every political entity that clings to capitalism will go full fascist and burn itself out before being destroyed and replaced with a socialist one.
So yes, but only after everybody else.
What if instead, we ended up going Cyber Punk?
We arguably do live in a cyber punk work already.
Correct, and it’s the most boring cyberpunk world. I was told I’d at least be able to find a street doc to install some pimped-out chrome, we don’t even have proper chrome here; never mind the street docs!
I thought we had a lot more threads about this, here’s one of them
Every empire falls, it’s just a matter of time until the USA does. Especially in this case, you can’t oppress 99% of your population forever, regardless of how much you try to indoctrinate them.
I don’t believe that the entity that is currently known as the USA will ever be socialist, but I also don’t believe that entity will be around for too terribly much longer, either
Why is that?
There’s zero class consciousness in the US is the easiest answer. You can see even now as contradictions continue to mount still few people accept a Marxist view of why that is. Unionization rates are still in the toilet with little movement (although existing ones are being more active recently). There are effectively zero socialists (real socialism) in the US and due to complete alienation and indoctrination that is extremely unlikely to change until conditions become much much much worse here for workers.
I do not agree the US will be going anywhere anytime soon though. The decline could and I’d lean into “probably will” take decades if not centuries depending on variables we can’t predict the fallout from such as wars, climate change, etc. If this shithole was gonna split the time where that was possible came and went and those who wanted a split lost for now. They’ll keep trying of course, but things are still relatively very comfy in the US so people adopting radical ideologies (of any sort) is unlikely and demand from the ruling capitalist class for a split is also nearly non existent, and you obviously need class traitors (or opportunists at least) willing to undermine the institutions in an effective way that leads not to just more misery, as they’re doing, but workers actually, legitimately being desperate and seeing a real opening to force a change.
deleted by creator
Alright, let me clarify.
When I say I believe the US will continue on for perhaps centuries I don’t mean as it exists now as a liberal democracy, essentially sole world superpower (although that’s already debatable, but you see what I mean), able to coup, invade, etc. and exploit and do whatever capitalists here want. No, I believe that time is already over and the continent of Africa, recently in South America and Russia/Ukraine is showing that to some degree. It doesn’t mean the tide of falling US influence won’t end and swing back, but I don’t see how it can at the moment. I think we agree generally that the US empire is very much so on its decline trajectory.
But I just don’t see any splits within the US arising within the ruling capitalist class and that’s key. Yes, the two lib sides are as angry as ever over the manufactured BS that they always focus on, and that just shows the solidarity amongst the capital class remains unshaken as far as I can tell. I don’t see billionaires, actual power holders, coming out and advocating for any real undermining and changing of the institutions. Of course it would be to favor them eventually, but their singular power (or collective. A small group of hundred-millionaires or something) and influence is required to catalyze any real move towards destruction of the state.
I think it was Lenin (might be wrong) that suggested that revolutions happen when you have people at the top who are class traitors or opportunists, it doesn’t matter that much, who want to see the system changed and exert their outsized power to aid those with little power. It’s been the case, to my knowledge, with every revolution. You get discontented elites, some break off and start ratfucking the others, institutions start crumbling, etc. I just do not see real movements towards that in the US. I see grifters and liars (Elon on the capitalist side and, I dunno, MTG/Boebert/even Trump on the politician side) who play to increasingly slightly more revolutionary reactionary elements, but they don’t make actual, real attempts to destroy things. Because ultimately I think they see the way things are now is beneficial for them still. Will that change FOR THEM anytime soon? Unlikely, I’d say. It will absolutely get far worse for workers, regular people, petit bourgeois types even, but for the power holders and capital holders, I just do not see anything changing for decades or 10s of decades as everything just gets shittier and shittier and shittier for everyone but what do they care? That’s kind of the entire hinge to this thing. It doesn’t really matter if 1000 people a day are being tossed in Bezos volcanoes to sacrifice for Elon bucks or something, if the capitalist class is generally united and remains so, nothing will change. They can feed the military and provide them and cops with a comfy life. And everyone else will continue on under increasingly more authoritarian, hellscape rules. More direct violence. More open misery and death. But it’s a loooooooong way down to the bottom for America on average before I think people really snap and really demand anything changes.
So, I just don’t see a breakup of the USA anytime soon really, although anything can happen. But I do see (and it’s happening already) growing irrelevance of the US worldwide, slowly relegated to a non-entity like the British were post-WWII as China rises and surpasses the US globally and as we see rising African nations and South American nations. The biggest unknown variable right now is… what do US capitalists do about this? Do they just accept what they have now and just kinda keep doing what they’re doing and progressively losing power and capital? The only alternative is actually (insanely) trying to challenge China. They’re certainly putting on that face right now in the state dept/congress, but what comes of it ultimately is impossible to say at the moment. Could go to nuclear annihilation of all life on earth, could go to some sort of half-assed cooperation and agreements, could continue on in some sort of cold war, proxy war fueled hellworld for 100 years (probably this). I think China or at least something stemming from what they’re doing will clearly be the victor in such a competition, but, nukes are always the wild card and an increasingly losing and rabid American leadership might start seeing annihilation as a “win” condition when compared to accepting irrelevancy.
deleted by creator
Not as the USA, naturally, but I’d give it a decade or two for that part of the world to go socialist. I don’t have any sort of complicated analysis for this, just the fact that my cousin used to work in a movie theater in the heart of conservative Montana, and reported that all her coworkers were communists; the fact that the settler libs I know are complaining about all the commies and pinkos around these days; all the record-breaking or otherwise historically significant strikes and protests and so forth in the past decade; the epidemics of this and that in American society; January 6th and the War in Ukraine showing a growing conflict in the world’s ruling class; things like that. The young don’t want to inherit a dying world; marginalized groups want justice; workers want their due; people are losing faith in the government.
I will not say that class consciousness is at the level it should be — for God’s sake, the last time I was in the occupied Dakota homeland, I saw some white guy with a 3%ers “Let’s Go Brandon” shirt at Culver’s. But I don’t think it will take centuries for class consciousness to grow in America. Not in our days of global connectivity. We can absolutely continue to grow the leftist movement in America, into something genuinely powerful, even without “mainstream” (i.e. Anglo) approval.
How many people alive in the early 20th century believed that revolution in Russia was just two decades away? If everyone else is saying it’ll take two hundred years, then I’ll say it will take twenty.
For as long as it is USA? Never.
Don’t worry, we’ll have the last laugh when the USA finally collapses.
By looking at the objective reality, there’s two possibilities: global socialism or the break down of modern society as we know it (and I’m trying to avoid being overly pessimistic and talking about extinction).
If the capitalist production continues in the direction it’s going, climate change will get so extreme in the next couple of centuries that the very existence large scale human organization will become less and less probable.
That much I think even left liberals will admit.
Now, we as Marxists know that the forces within capitalism prevents reforming it. So we know that only revolutionary change will prevent this collapse of contemporary capitalism. So either way capitalism will eventually collapse under the weights of its own contractions, either by revolutionary change or by extinguishing itself.
As climate change fucks up the lives of more and more people, revolutionary change gets more and more likely. So I do believe we’ll have a revolution in most parts of the world before the final collapse of everything. I’m actually very optimistic and I think the contradictions of capitalism are rapidly marching towards another cycle of intensification of class struggle that might kick off a revolutionary cycle.
If this is true and we really witness revolutions starting to pop in the next 10-20 years, remains to be seen though. And honestly, I think futurology exercises of this type are kind of meaningless. As Marxists we should adhere strictly to materialism and avoid idealistic speculation. We can and should evaluate the material reality, its contradictions and movements. But we should avoid idealistic projections. A revolution will happen when the material conditions for it are satisfied: a revolutionary class exist, it’s conscious of its class and organized, and the levels of class struggle are getting to a point of inflection where the cost of enduring oppression are bigger than the risks of revolution, and so on.
We can only talk in those terms: is it likely that those conditions materialize in the USA in the next decades? In my opinion it isn’t impossible, but I don’t think it will start there. But this is a futile exercise.
Trying to predict if or when is kind of meaningless. What we can and must do is organize ourselves, and bring about the conditions we can control: class consciousness, worker organization and intensify the struggle in a way that makes the working classes ready and able to recognize the moment, seize it and fight for it when it comes.
No. I believe there will eventually, maybe if we (as in humanity) are actually around another 300 years, for there to be another nation, or multiple nations where Amerika once was that may have one socialist contingent. But I do not believe Amerika as we know it will Ever be capable of sustaining socialism. Too many hyper-propagandized settler gusanos who physically can’t see themselves as the antagonists in anyone else’s stories.
Even if the USA were to miraculously transition to socialism geographically intact and with minimal bloodshed, I highly doubt it would keep the name.
Why is that?
Even the constitution allows slavery. These kinds of things will need to go, there’s too many to be able to say that the thing that remains afterwards is still the USA.
America is already socialist, we have food stamps which is socialism.
/s
We also have libraries, fire fighters and public parks which are socialist 😂 /j
It will likely be one of the later ones, potentially even after Western Europe.
Given what the US did to the EU by blowing up that pipeline and the gouging Europe with energy prices, I remain reasonably confident that the US will suck dry all its vassal states first before it collapses
If the USA exists, will Europe ever get another chance at socialism?
It would be harder, but I don’t see it being impossible.
I kinda wandered off from this response. Ain’t doing great mentally.
So, what I imagine will happen as the US, as the centre of capital, will continue to alienate “allies” as various economic forces get tighter and tighter. This will cause socialist sentiment to rise in what used to be considered the Imperial core. Whether any revolutionary action or legalistic “democratic” socialist action is successful during that time is a matter of happenstance; supply, the presence of fascist paramilitaries, the divisions between industries and nationalities etc. are impossible to predict. What does matter is that the US will preference stability (or instability favouring capitalists e.g. fascist rioting) within its own borders compared to stability for its historical allies. The preponderance of history would then suggest that the US would be one of the last places to go (alongside geographically isolated capital fortresses, see later)
Notes: So, when I say that the US is the centre of capital, what do I mean by that? Let’s say that the US increased taxes and instituted massive inheritance taxes. Would not capital migrate to Lichtenstein or the Maldives or whatever? Unfortunately for our hypothetical capitalists, their networth is reliant on the systems that US maintains through its military power. Thus capitalists could flee to the Maldives and enjoy daiquiris on the beach to the end of time, but all the industry, technical skills, workers etc. would be left in the US and its subordinate nations. I think deep down they understand this, even if individually it might be preferable to flee to the Cayman islands. Systems like global food production or the petrodollar are similar; Johnny capitalist is not going to be able to yank the food chain in Western Africa from Monaco. A capitalist who flees to Monaco who owns several billion dollars of farming real estate does not have the capacity to maintain their grip on that farming real estate. Ergo, it always comes back to systems of production and the military force required to actively maintain those systems. Thus, the US is the centre of capital.
Geographically isolated capital fortresses: You must have heard about various capitalists building survivalist bunkers in New Zealand or whatever. Similar things happen in other island nations. I feel like why should be obvious: an island is substantially more defensible than a place where angry mobs can just walk to your house. I live in a virtual island (Perth, Australia). I want to write a short essay on Fortress Perth, and why Perth would be a good place for both Capitalists to bunker down in, but also a good place for revolution. But once the capitalists’ control over the vast military reserves of the US is relinquished, and for a while before, they’d hunker down in distant fortress to hatch plots and hopefully inevitably break apart. That said, these locations are small and incapable of mounting the sort of political offensives that the US, with all of its wealth and resources, can.
deleted by creator
Maybe, around the end of the century.
Why that timeline? Do you have an idea of what might cause it?
The point was that I don’t see it happening anytime soon.
Objectively, I think that the conditions for socialism exist in the USA. The population is increasingly disenchanted with its constitutional and economic institutions; criticism of capitalism itself has moved from unthinkable to accepted (if not mainstream); and the imperialist state apparatus is a bloated paper tiger that can barely win a war without hiring a suite of incompetent contractors and bribing the enemy’s generals with millions of dollars (and is incapable of reform due to being waist-deep in its own neoliberal dogma). The wannabe-fascists of the Republican Party (and cop-funded mayors like Eric Adams) are a threat to any emergent socialism (and human rights generally), but they have no power base outside of the same haute-and petty- bourgeoisie that would constrain their ability to deal with the crises of capitalism; this is in contrast to 30s-style fascism, in which the national bourgeoisie were content with letting fascist corporatism manage the crises of capitalism their own class leadership couldn’t. If there were a political vanguard that was capable of exploiting these conditions and winning the peoples’ hearts and minds, I would be cautiously optimistic about the prospects for socialism (although via horrific struggles with the previously-mentioned wannabes committing heinous crimes).
Oh yeah, about that last part…
