• Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    7 months ago

    Nothing we could possibly do could make things worse faster than what the liberals are doing to themselves. All we can do is try to help some of them see what they’ve become, and show them an alternative exists.

    • JohnBrownNote [comrade/them, des/pair]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      a lot of the adventure-time we could do would make stuff worse faster because of the backlash. maybe you could get away with illegal-to-say if trump wins but liberals are so civility brained i wouldn’t count on it. Nobody to the right enough to be on TV or the NYT opinion page would be willing to say “actually it’s good he’s dead”, maybe hasan would get banned from twitch over that take.

    • Rx_Hawk [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Is it ethical to be somewhat glad (not sure if this is the right word) as things get worse, as it necessarily turns people to our viewpoint?

      • Assian_Candor [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        7 months ago

        Big assumption there that folks would break our way and not the fash way. If things fell apart right now we would be fucked. Long way to go in the way of education before the left is ready to capitalize on instability

      • Philosoraptor [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I’m not sure emotions really have an ethical valence at all. You can be happy or sad about whatever you want without it being blameworthy or praiseworthy. I don’t think it’s ethical to actively make things worse, though.

  • Dimmer06 [he/him,comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    7 months ago

    Accelerationism is petty bourgeois nonsense from people that don’t want to contend with the struggle of organizing as leftists in the imperial core. It’s also used as a boogeyman by “reformists” to juxtapose themselves against something that isn’t Marxism.

  • ChaosMaterialist [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 months ago

    The ideology of Accelerationism assumes that, in doing so, you bring about an inevitable contradiction/clash that, by working through the contradiction, will eventually result in a better world. This is not always the case, and in many cases the catastrophe/disaster resulted in a large shift Right.

    I think Accelerationism preys on Leftism by pushing an over-systematizing thinking towards our current environment to the point where human agency is moot. I think both Althusser and a-guy fell into this kind of Accelerationist thinking.

    Now, we can do some lower-case acceleration, like organizing a union in your workplace. That would accelerate a clash between management and your coworkers. It also means we aren’t relying on hardship and pain, but good argument and comradery, to convince people of our views.

    • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s pretty much what I think too. Accelerationism isn’t really something you can subscribe to, shit just happens because of circumstances WAY bigger than yourself, all you can do is form opinions and organize around them, which just makes you a Marxist/fascist.

  • footfaults [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    7 months ago

    Accelerationism implies that you actually get a choice in making things worse, or not. You, as an individual do not have that kind of power to make a society wide choice like that. It’s main character syndrome to think that you make a difference

    • Rx_Hawk [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t think that’s necessarily true. You don’t have to actively make things worse to believe its a good thing when they do.

    • HumanBehaviorByBjork [any, undecided]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      no more so than any other political project.

      i think it’s easy to make these sorts of claims because everyone is so vague about what “accelerationism” might even mean. most people seem to mean voting for a reactionary and not, for example, industrial sabotage.

      • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Industrial sabotage only goes so far in the sense that you and anyone who planned it with you and definitely going to jail and are fucked. It usually doesn’t spur copycats or anything, but when they do they’re like decades apart from one another which is too long to make a difference. The funko pops still get made in the mean time unfortunately. That’s why accelerationism isn’t really a think an individual can subscribe to really. It’s much different than communism which has multiple avenues of approach ranging from super harmless to actively subversive.

  • macerated_baby_presidents [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Not viable. It’s a vulgar materialist misunderstanding of Marxism. Class consciousness and material conditions tend to develop in concert, i.e. dialectically, but class consciousness doesn’t automatically develop in response to changing material conditions. Otherwise we could sit back and let the revolution plan itself. I think socialists should lead struggles, tailored to the current material conditions, for things that will help the working class in the short-term while also making the possibility of a better, socialist, world feel more realistic in order to build class consciousness. If we’re leading efforts to make things worse for working people, why the hell would working people become socialists?

    Besides, it’s not clear that the left has the power to “do” accelerationism anyway. Vote for trump? What would it matter, there’s probably a thousand active socialists tops in each major city.

  • TreadOnMe [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Acceleration is the brain child of libertarian meth addicts that skimmed Marx. It is not only not ethical, being even more devoid of ethical considerations than Marx, who didn’t disregard them out of ignorance, unlike most of the authors of accelerationism, but out of an understanding of how these ethical considerations are themselves also irrelevant and disregarded by the ruling class. An accelerationist is a full on unexamined consequentialist, where-as a Marxist understands that the difference between deontology and utilitarianism is mostly a matter of phrasing, and is therefore only worthy of consideration when society becomes democratic.

    Additionally, it is non-viable. If the ground-work is not done before the catastrophe, and education is not liberatory, the same cycles of materialism will repeat themselves.

  • D61 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    If you had the power, supervillian style, probably not an ethical worldview to have. Also, not viable.

    If you have no power but you know that the systems that we live within are pretty shitty, are causing massive harm by their very existence, and are in the process of failing it stops being about ethics and becomes cope. As a mental self defense mechanism its viable in a limited way but you’re going to come off like a super dickhead at best or a complete psychopath at worst.

    • Rx_Hawk [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I mean the longer that things stay the way they are, countless people suffer and die due to capitalism. You could argue that less would suffer in a fast transition than a slow one.

      • Llituro [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        that’s not what i asked though. i think it’s a psychologically easier premise if you expect the acceleration to kill people that aren’t you. it’s why the leopards eating faces party always exists despite the fact that there faces are going to be eaten.

        • Rx_Hawk [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yeah, fair. Besides my political leanings which can be easily hidden, I don’t think I would personally be targeted in said acceleration. Sometimes existing in capitalism just makes me wish for literally anything else.

          • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s very ironic since you’re the one who posed the question. The acceleration literally is happening as we speak, but it’s not something any one individual could have guessed or influenced, which is why accelerationism isn’t a real thing.

  • theposterformerlyknownasgood@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think the point is moot because accelartionists aren’t actually real. There are no actual left wing accelerationists. At best it’s a fun little thought exercise. “Oh but what about X”. X is some dipshit who knew Nick Land in college or something and writes essays no one reads. Whoever X is they don’t matter and aren’t real.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Very much this. “Accelerationism” is an internet thing, not a real world thing. How many times in the last decade has a leftist actually taken action to accelerate anything?

  • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Accelerationism isn’t actually real. This decade imho has proven that the shifts necessary to bring about the end of capitalism or any other system are so large that there pretty much is no way you or your individual actions would mean anything. What has caused US power to weaken over these two years? Multiple wars on different fronts that were caused and exacerbated by US meddling in global politics and the inability to manage its plans. That’s just one example but there are many others. There’s no reason to call yourself an accelerationist or subscribe individually to accelerationism at that point, all you can do is form opinions and actions of the events as they unfold really, but it’s not like you can affect them one way or another. You can get involved in collective action obviously, but that doesn’t make you an accelerationist imho.

  • imikoy [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    No. I’ll make a short point (longer ones were already given): class consciousness isn’t a prophecy that is inevitable, it has to be actively developed, by communists. To propose accelerationism is to propose that it is possible to develop class consciousness faster, which is laughable if the local communists aren’t doing enough for it already, and the proposition of doing it faster may itself be impossible in any case. It also implies that the same communists are able to make progress faster than fascism, which will also develop, and compete.

    In the context of the international-community-1international-community-2 , a communist’s work is made significantly harder due to multiple important reasons