One thing I hate about the ''big versus small'' businesses stuff.

The interests of large and small businesses coincide more than they oppose each other.

The National Federation of Independent Business and the US Chamber of Commerce are on the same side of most policy issues.
Small businesses owners & corporate CEOs or investors alike are more likely to be Republicans.

All of capitalist industry, big and small, are on the same side.

Small businesses play a crucial role in maintaining expoitation and putting a friendly face upon grievous injustice.
This is also a contradiction.

Small businesses help broaden support for injustice as well as the conservative political preferences of capital, but at the same time, the destruction of small businesses is (to some degree) necessary for the furtherance of profit.
The continual advance of capitalist profit must eventually cannibalize the structures holding the capitalist economy together.
The large owners of capital themselves are numerically small, relatively speaking.

The owners of small capital (small business) number in the millions and often provide a broad enough support base for regressive policies such as low levels of taxation and lack of paid leave.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Tristam Pratorius the classical Social Democrat🌹

Tristam Pratorius the classical Social Democrat🌹 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TristamPratori1

13 Jan
A basic introduction to the old Swedish model and Ernst Wigforss 🔥 ❤️ ImageImage
Ernst Wigforss argued for a classless society on the basis that it was morally and spiritually healing. The gross class distinctions of capitalism eat away at the spirit of man and the only way to heal them is economic democracy.
As mentioned, the Swedish Social Democrats also interpreted a socialist planned economy to mean control over investment & production structure.

Many 20th century socialists did not associate a planned economy with a command economy that reaches to every price on the store shelf.
Read 5 tweets
9 Jan
Great article about Finnish social democracy and Väinö Tanner, who was also prime-minister from 1926 to 1927.

Tanner, in specific, was active in the co-operative movement and translated many Marxist works into Finnish. Pretty based.

puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/ele-rantasalmi…
Thanks to @tuukkasti
Tanner on the Marxism of the Finnish labor movement.
Read 7 tweets
9 Jan
I've been reading some of the takes from the tankies on social democracy.

It's as if they don't even know what it is. They're criticizing a spectre. This is like watching a conservative Republican explain what communism is.

Have a laugh at these brilliant, well-informed takes.
Looks like my crusade goes on...
Read 4 tweets
9 Jan
Western Communists also pushed for the welfare state.

The KPD's 1930 program calls for social insurance. France's social security law was introduced by a Communist Party (PCF) minister.

The way these arguments are being used is simply as an excuse not do anything to help now.
Chad communists in 1945: Yes, we're going to do a welfare state to help the workers and we are going to ally with reformist socialists

Virgin communists in 2020: NOOOO, don't help the workers and don't ally with other leftists
Here's the German Communist Party's 1930 program:

''We will operate all types of social insurance at the expense of the state (unemployment, disability, health, old-age, and accident insurance; support for disabled veterans and surviving dependents).''

germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.c…
Read 6 tweets
9 Jan
I've read 1984. It is not anti-socialist.

They say in the book that Ingsoc opposes socialist principles while appropriating the label from previous movements.

The Ministry of Plenty also isn't a dig at planning. Orwell was in favor of planning. Read his 6 points manifesto.
They say in the book that Oceania is a rigid class society (as opposed to a socialist one with minimal class differences or no classes) and they say that the state ownership of industry is only nominal.
There is this whole spiel about 3/4 of the way through the book were the main character reads Goldstein's book.

It's basically an analysis of class society and ideology. Hardly something a capitalist conservative would think of. It's Orwell's views leaking over into the book.
Read 4 tweets
8 Jan
I want to be clear: crude nihilism about capitalism makes for bad “socialism.”

The Swedish social democrat Gustav Möller was a genuine Marxist.

He wanted to the welfare state to develop the productive forces under capitalism & create the historical conditions for socialism.
Möller wasn’t a nihilist, like whoever is operating the Gravel account.

Extreme nihilism about capitalism isn’t Marxist or socialist, no matter how anti-capitalist and edgy it may appear.

Be more like Möller, less like Gravel. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Mö…

tidsskrift.dk/scandinavian_p…
@Noahpinion

I hope this answers your post on the poverty issue. ''Capitalism bad'' is vulgarized Marxism. Socialists should be nuanced.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!