Jump to content

User:RD/9k/Private sector not bourgeoisie (Q26,15)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Philosophical Research
Revision as of 03:04, 25 March 2026 by Reversedragon (talk | contribs) (copy markup from 9k/Q21,82)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Main entry

  1. A private sector is not the bourgeoisie [1] -> wow! that cannot be true. out of all the things in Deng Xiaoping Thought, a great number of them are up in the air, but this is the first one I've seen that seems false on its face. like, you can claim the bourgeoisie is not bad or is not dangerous, and that maybe gains legs in a Trotsky situation, but you can't just say the bourgeoisie is not the bourgeoisie, because that's a logical contradiction against models that have previously worked.

Claims against

  1. If Cuba contains a private sector, it contains the bourgeoisie -> this should be a prosaic statement but it apparently needs to be said. why does Cuba contain a bourgeoisie? there is a big, sprawling discussion to be had about why exactly workers' states give up and start regenerating the bourgeoisie. is this a process that stops on a particular date in history, or is it more similar to a life history event that occurs in the life cycle of an individual which thus needs to be countered continuously at each moment society regenerates? with meta-Marxism I have been slowly leaning toward the latter, toward the hypothesis that even if defeating the bourgeoisie in a Communist revolution can help, it isn't a one-time process. this does, fortunately or unfortunately, open up vague possibilities of there being methods to block the regeneration of the bourgeoisie in a charcoal-tinted transition process. it had better be pretty good though, given that anarchism itself has a tendency to regenerate the bourgeoisie.

Ideologies or fields