GenZhou

1036 readers

1 users here now

GenZhou is GenZedong without the shitposts

See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space (shared with GenZedong). See this thread for more information.

Rules:

This community is explicitly pro-AES (China, Cuba, the DPRK, Laos and Vietnam)
No ableism, racism, misogyny, transphobia, etc.
No pro-imperialists, liberals or electoralists
No dogmatism/idealism
For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
Shitposts will be removed (please post them to /c/GenZedong or elsewhere instead)

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml

ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml

Soooo...Caesarism and Bonapartism and...uhhhh (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 6 months ago by King_Simp@lemmygrad.ml to c/genzhou@lemmygrad.ml

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Basically, I was reading Gramsci's work again and reread his thing on caesarism/bonapartism. He places Julius Caesar and Bonaparte the actually competent as progressive caesarist/bonapartist, and then places Napoleon the stupid and...Bismark(?) as regressive caesarist/bonapartists.

If I'm understanding him correctly, the idea is that two forces, progressive classes (such as the proletariat now and Bourgeoisie then) and regressive classes (landowners then and the Bourgeoisie now) essentially don't have the ability to overthrow each other or to end the conflict, so a Bonapartist enters the scene and gives the slight nudge needed to either side to tip the balance and resolve the conflict.

I...do have a couple questions I can't figure out myself.

1.Did Caesar succeed or fail? What were the progressive classes at the time? The small landowners? The proletarii? Did the roman economic system change between before he came to power and after he came to power? If he did fail, what would have success look like? How did the roman class system survive for several hundred years after him, if the class system didn't change?

2.Did Napoleon help reestablish the Bourgeois dictatorship in France over the Feudal manoralists, or did he simply "solidify" the victory after taking control from the thermidorians? Would it have mattered if he did or did not?

3.Bismark? I don't really get this one.

(P.S, is Putin a modern bonapartist or no? If so, reactionary or progressive?)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] King_Simp@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 6 months ago

Mm, right. I think my actual question was "what was the primary contradiction?" [Not your fault that you answered what you did obviously, I just couldn't remember the term. Sorry]. Obviously there were many progressive classes, but what was the main contradiction at the time? (Similar to how you had the contradiction between the landowners and Bourgeoisie during the Feudal periods. While there was also a progressive proletariat/proto-proletariat, the primary contradiction was between the landowners and Bourgeoisie). If Caesar's bonapartism had succeeded and power was transferred from the senate to the people, what economic system would have resulted? Would it have been medieval feudalism, or maybe closer to the Chinese system?

Or was he just a reformist who wouldn't gave actually changed the base structure of Roman society, compared to say Gaius Marius?