• JohnDClay
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Except the transitional stage often leads right back to fudalism/oligarchy.

      • JohnDClay
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I don’t get how what you linked relates to what I said. Could you clarify?

        • culprit@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          the United States expanded the geographic scope of its actions beyond traditional area of operations, Central America and the Caribbean. Significant operations included the United States and United Kingdom–planned 1953 Iranian coup d’état, the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion targeting Cuba, and support for the overthrow of Sukarno by General Suharto in Indonesia. In addition, the U.S. has interfered in the national elections of countries, including Italy in 1948,[1] the Philippines in 1953, Japan in the 1950s and 1960s[2][3] Lebanon in 1957,[4] and Russia in 1996.[5] According to one study, the U.S. performed at least 81 overt and covert known interventions in foreign elections during the period 1946–2000.[6] According to another study, the U.S. engaged in 64 covert and six overt attempts at regime change during the Cold War.

          • JohnDClay
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            How does that information inform whether the revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat tends to lead to socialism or back to oligarchy.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Neither of those countries returned to a feudal system. Where are the nobles, with entrenched legal privileges, with titles passed down on a hereditary basis, commanding their own armies? What a ridiculous claim.

          • JohnDClay
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            That’s why I said /oligarchy. Both became oligarchys.

          • JohnDClay
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            3 months ago

            Feudalism specifically would be more north Korea.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              3 months ago

              Does North Korea have the noble class I described? Do you have any evidence that such a class exists?

              • JohnDClay
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                3 months ago

                Yeah, it has a king and royal family.

                • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That’s both not true and also not what I asked. The UK has a king and noble family, does that make it a feudal system?

                  • JohnDClay
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Mostly not because they don’t have the political power.