• freagle@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The question itself is problematic. What does it mean for it to be good? In a vacuum, no, multipolarity is not inherently good for the working class, and the evidence is forms of multipolarity that were bad for the working class. For multipolarity to be good, it must be inclusive of an anti-imperialist pole at minimum and an explicitly socialist pole must develop as well. Becker doesn’t say China isn’t that, but we all know that Russia isn’t socialist so it’s not enough for Russia to challenge the US. He’s correct on this. The situation is terribly fraught right now. We are all waiting to see what BRICS announces in late August and we are all watching China without making predictions or value judgments hoping that we end up in the multipolar chess board we need. Until then, focus at home where you have power.

    Listen to Becker’s podcast and it becomes abundantly obvious that Shea is full of shit and acting in bad faith.

    • cucumovirus@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree that the question is problematic, but he doesn’t challenge it. He answers as if the assumption of an abstract multipolarity is valid. I think he should’ve answered concretely, in accordance with today’s material reality.

      Again, I don’t care about Shea, I’m not defending him, and I don’t care what he’s saying. I’m commenting on the interview in question.

      • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, at this point, you’re just saying he didn’t answer it the way you would have answered it and that you think there’s a correct answer and that he failed you personally. Going through life like that isn’t going to lead to good outcomes. Trotsky was like that, too. Becker’s answer to the question was not revisionist, it was not imperial apologia, it was not incorrect. The logical inference we can draw from Becker’s response is that more must be done to secure the revolution, even if Russia and China are bringing about multipolarity, and this inference is correct. So you may disagree with the answer, but it leads to the correct outcome. There must be a socialist revolution in Russia at some point if the global working class is to be liberated. Just having a multipolar world replete with non-socialist powers is insufficient to the task. As socialists in all countries hear this answer, the only inference to be made is that we each have work to do building socialist revolutions domestically so that when the multipolar world emerges and as it develops, it is the workers that drive what comes next.