Wouldn’t attempts at sabotage happen anyway by threat of capital which no longer needs to submit to social democracy demands as there is no leverage using a worker’s state? Like that’s how social democrats got concessions last time, they leveraged the USSR post October revolution. I’m too disillusioned about feel-good measures especially as my understanding of theory of political change has evolved; you need leverage and I am not sure what they have or even what they propose to attain this.
In reality, he would need to pivot the economy away from America and to China, which is difficult due to geography (although arctic trade routes will alleviate this over time). The United imperialist bourgeoisie of UK are very strong and in firm control, they would need to be replaced by a non-imperialist National Bourgeoisie in some kind of bourgeois revolution first I think.
Remember, UK is even more backwards than the US in some ways. Their aristocratic revanchism was never defeated and set in deep, they still have a monarchy.
In reality, he would need to pivot the economy away from America and to China
I strongly disagree, I believe they should pivot towards autarky and self-reliance. The UK is a central country in the imperialist system, they don’t need to replace one dependence with another (and China has no need for the UK specifically), and a lot of their integration with the US is already just parasitic rentier finance capital.
I also don’t see any reason for enabling a national bourgeoisie in the Mao Zedong Thought sense in a central country, as that applies specifically to dependent/colonial nations on the periphery. The UK does not need a national liberation revolution, and any strong enough national bourgeoisie would naturally metastasize beyond their national borders as they did in the past.
It’s hard to say what the correct path for a central nation towards revolution would be, since they all failed. But abandoning the imperialist system (economically and militarily) in favour of self-sufficiency and solidarity is, at the very least, useful for both their local working class and revolutionary movements abroad. It also signals the mounting strength of the opposition to NATO and neoliberalism movements in Europe.
The UK “going it’s own way” will always result in it becoming dependent on America again, see the EU’s efforts for the past 3 decades. China isn’t imperialist, it wouldn’t be “replacing one imperialist system for another” it would be replacing one imperialist system for a non-imperialist one
Wouldn’t attempts at sabotage happen anyway by threat of capital which no longer needs to submit to social democracy demands as there is no leverage using a worker’s state? Like that’s how social democrats got concessions last time, they leveraged the USSR post October revolution. I’m too disillusioned about feel-good measures especially as my understanding of theory of political change has evolved; you need leverage and I am not sure what they have or even what they propose to attain this.
In reality, he would need to pivot the economy away from America and to China, which is difficult due to geography (although arctic trade routes will alleviate this over time). The United imperialist bourgeoisie of UK are very strong and in firm control, they would need to be replaced by a non-imperialist National Bourgeoisie in some kind of bourgeois revolution first I think.
Remember, UK is even more backwards than the US in some ways. Their aristocratic revanchism was never defeated and set in deep, they still have a monarchy.
I strongly disagree, I believe they should pivot towards autarky and self-reliance. The UK is a central country in the imperialist system, they don’t need to replace one dependence with another (and China has no need for the UK specifically), and a lot of their integration with the US is already just parasitic rentier finance capital.
I also don’t see any reason for enabling a national bourgeoisie in the Mao Zedong Thought sense in a central country, as that applies specifically to dependent/colonial nations on the periphery. The UK does not need a national liberation revolution, and any strong enough national bourgeoisie would naturally metastasize beyond their national borders as they did in the past.
It’s hard to say what the correct path for a central nation towards revolution would be, since they all failed. But abandoning the imperialist system (economically and militarily) in favour of self-sufficiency and solidarity is, at the very least, useful for both their local working class and revolutionary movements abroad. It also signals the mounting strength of the opposition to NATO and neoliberalism movements in Europe.
The UK “going it’s own way” will always result in it becoming dependent on America again, see the EU’s efforts for the past 3 decades. China isn’t imperialist, it wouldn’t be “replacing one imperialist system for another” it would be replacing one imperialist system for a non-imperialist one