It’s -Socialism in One Country-, and it always takes on a determinate -national character-, and that was Stalin’s break from Trotsky’s abstract and indeterminate “permanent revolution”, since socialism has to -actually exist- somewhere concrete.
It has to organize and develop the forces of production, and subordinate the nation to a Dictatorship of the Proletariat… otherwise it remains abstract, weak, and prone to collapse so long as imperialist powers exist.
Liberalism, having taken up Karl Popper’s philosophical system to make indeterminacy -absolute- and thereby save itself from a crisis of legitimacy in its immediacy, integrated the anti-Stalinist “left” into the Liberal Cold War.
It thus took on a -permanent and indeterminate- form, waging its own “permanent revolution” on a planetary scale as a matter of survival.
The falling rate of profit under the bourgeois system forced a turn toward finance and credit, where capital expands through rent extraction rather than -costly productive investment-. In doing so, finance came to dominate the productive economy itself.
Living labor becomes relatively superfluous to capital’s expansion, i.e. increasingly unprofitable. Instead of resolving this contradiction, the bourgeoisie displace it -globally-, using the World as the site of production while concentrating control over credit -within- the imperialist nations.
The Dictatorships of the Proletariat (AES) don’t face this same contradiction (namely the supremacy of the Parasite of the Nation) since they are not governed by the extraction of surplus value from living labor as an end in itself, but by the conscious organization of production toward the development of socialism.
The -rootless Bourgeoisie- requires precisely this free movement -across and BEYOND nations- to protect its power, which is -TRANS-NATIONAL- in character, i.e. -Finance Capital-.
A balance of payments map tells you who the Fascists are in concrete terms, as Lenin defined… I’m talking about -concrete reality-, not the abstract “Third Way” that’s long since been dissolved.
Except it’s not. Dugin has explained his position on Fascism countless times. If he were what you claim, why is he now getting attacked by people like Spencer for opposing this newer liberal tendency within the right? Everyone who’s not a Zionist is getting called a third worldist! 😹
The state is strongest in its decline, cuz it mobilizes every remaining resource for survival and functions as an objective, purely efficient killing machine. No citizen uprising has ever toppled a sovereign, legally constituted state purely by spontaneous revolt.
Every historical overthrow came from within the ruling apparatus itself, through splits in the army, security services, and bureaucracy, combined with organized, disciplined political leadership (as written by Marx in 18th Brumaire of Bonaparte, recommended reading).
Adventurist “revolutionary” fantasies ignore that reality and get crushed every time. They’re not just foolish, they’re anti-communist, cuz they substitute reckless theatrics for the long, disciplined work of building an authority that can unite and survive in these contradictions.
“Treat everyone kindly and look down on no one.”
— Sufi master Ghujdawānī (may Allāh sanctify his secret)
📚
Mawlānā ʿAlī ibn Ḥusayn al-Safī, Rashahāt ʿAin al-Ḥayāt
#sufism#tasawwuf
High school is the only site of the commons in america now— it’s the only place which is assumed collective understanding. This is where the imagination ends in terms of mass culture.