I would love to see a chapter on that symbol of American capitalism and cultural imperialism IOTL-namely, Coca-Cola.
The Stomach of Man Under Socialism: A Culinary History of Socialist America
- Thread starter JesterBL
- Start date
I'm still plotting out what (if anything) the "author" has to say about American fizzy drinks, but the mention of Moxie is not without some significance in terms of what I am imagining. The problem of course, in a chapter about Coca-Cola specifically would be that Coca-Cola has no special status in this world.
Thank you, it has been corrected.
American socialism (like socialism elsewhere, but especially Marxian socialism) was outright contemptuous of farmers and of agriculture. The American socialism of this TL is Marxian, specifically it is an ATL cousin of what would be called DeLeonism IOTL and will be called Marxism-DeLeonism here. Daniel De Leon's writings indicate that he opposed any form of farmer-laborer alliance and that he viewed farmers (even those engaged in the business of reform and of radical politics) as reactionary by default. While the possibilities of this American socialism (or any American socialism really) going full Bolshevik and instituting a neo-feudal extractive relationship with farmers are basically nil, I don't think it is hard to imagine an American socialism that at its best treats farmers and agriculture to benign neglect and at its worst actively denies them resources and tries to squeeze them out as class antagonists. That's a conceit I am sure plenty will disagree with (most of the socialist America timelines here seem to assume a rural/urban alliance including farmers succeeding) but I personally don't think it was possible.
An IWW (Chicago) / Homesteader / 40 acres and a mule / Sharecropper / Crossborder hand & fruitpicker alliance isn’t impossible.
This will walk straight into scale of production and mechanisation issues: the allies aren’t producing tens of thousands of head of cattle; millions of tonnes. Their scale of production is human not machine.
A Deleonist IWW (Detroit) alliance isn’t capable.
This will walk straight into scale of production and mechanisation issues: the allies aren’t producing tens of thousands of head of cattle; millions of tonnes. Their scale of production is human not machine.
A Deleonist IWW (Detroit) alliance isn’t capable.
Last edited:
Organizing farmworkers is not organizing farmers (and is in fact, antagonistic to most farmers who have to use any amount of seasonal labor). A system of political and economic organization based around industrial unions is going to naturally exclude most American farmers who are effectively, self-employed property owners.
To be clear, I agree with you about OTL's Detroit IWW (which like the SLP itself never had a chance once it was rejected by the trade unions, a pattern and tension likely important ITTL's America)- but I think an IWW that managed to keep De Leon and thread the needle between political action and direct action would have stood a chance of becoming something bigger.
To be clear, I agree with you about OTL's Detroit IWW (which like the SLP itself never had a chance once it was rejected by the trade unions, a pattern and tension likely important ITTL's America)- but I think an IWW that managed to keep De Leon and thread the needle between political action and direct action would have stood a chance of becoming something bigger.
Last edited:
"Farmer" is a very specific word, often distinguishable from "farm worker" and I think it's worth keeping that in mind. The US may have been a land of settler-farmers, and frankly labeling those as likely reactionary for propertarian reasons is probably accurate. But it also had a bunch of land trusts that reduced rural people to employed farm workers, who are proletarian and any Marxist should recognize that. Because of that, it's less likely to hit a wall of peasant class interests.
American Marxism could easily be antagonistic to farmers, but I don't think that extends to a general disdain of agriculture. Instead it's likely to invest in farmworkers as the answer.
All you’d need, and what you’d see on good country from the ag IU, is a displacement collectivisation by “teams,” resulting in the twenty district machine farms (owner operator) being run by a 40-80 adult work team collective.
The scale of production is still too low for machine survival (elevators and collectives). Socialist displacement will happen only on good land. The northern Scands and Finns will voluntarily reorganise even harder towards collectivisation with individual incentive, take over the regional IU, and achieve scale of production.
It’s the involuntary bad land “collectives” made up of the railway IU dictating to small holders and single family capitalists that’ll be the ugliness. Nobody *wants* to steal their land for socialisation.
The scale of production is still too low for machine survival (elevators and collectives). Socialist displacement will happen only on good land. The northern Scands and Finns will voluntarily reorganise even harder towards collectivisation with individual incentive, take over the regional IU, and achieve scale of production.
It’s the involuntary bad land “collectives” made up of the railway IU dictating to small holders and single family capitalists that’ll be the ugliness. Nobody *wants* to steal their land for socialisation.
"The duration and extent of this entente cordials, or co-operation, of the two classes, one of which is still largely imbued with individualistic ideas of private property in the means of production, would largely depend on economic developments under the new conditions. If the immediate result of the new measures were a marked relief in the situation of the farming class as indebted property holders, we might expect the latter to become every day more conservative; whereas any improvement in the condition of the wage workers would inevitably tend to render these more radical. Then, of course, co-operation would cease, until the temporary relief gained by the small farmers had been lost again through the natural operation of the fundamental laws of the capitalistic system, which nothing short of its complete removal can permanently prevent."- Daniel De Leon, The People Volume I No. 10 "Farmers and Wage-Workers"
"In the first place, is the farmer movement, as Mr. Wright asserts, a revolutionary movement? We must answer, No. Far from being a revolutionary movement, it is one of the most conservative and even retrograde attempts ever recorded in the history of economic evolution. Its object is to perpetuate a class that modern progress has doomed, and its only result can be to prolong the agony of the poor people who belong to it by deferring the day of their complete emancipation. Mr. Wright mistakes blind rebellion for intelligent revolution."- Daniel De Leon, The People Vol. II No. 3 "Socialism and The People's Party"
"In the first place, is the farmer movement, as Mr. Wright asserts, a revolutionary movement? We must answer, No. Far from being a revolutionary movement, it is one of the most conservative and even retrograde attempts ever recorded in the history of economic evolution. Its object is to perpetuate a class that modern progress has doomed, and its only result can be to prolong the agony of the poor people who belong to it by deferring the day of their complete emancipation. Mr. Wright mistakes blind rebellion for intelligent revolution."- Daniel De Leon, The People Vol. II No. 3 "Socialism and The People's Party"
Last edited:
So by the present day in which the book is written, they absolutely get there. But like with democratic and authoritarian governments the world over, it usually takes a disaster first.
Exactly. Estrangement combines bizarre, taken away, and inauthentic all in one more common English word than “alien” pretty beautifully. Even though historical materialist marxists focus mainly on the “taken away-“ness.
How did American go red? Was this a Kaiserreich Reds or Glowing Dream like scenario?
Great question! Definitely not a Central Powers victory a la Kaiserreich (which is why the author is writing from the United Kingdom). Haven't read Glowing Dream but should. Beyond that, I don't want to go into too much detail at this time.
Cheese was actually mentioned in two of the regional variants (the Juicy Lucy and the New Mexican burger) but good catch. Dairy is definitely less common in the American diet than IOTL. Cheeseburgers were actually invented post-POD and popularized well past the POD.
Last edited:
What type of socialism is being praticed? I think the most likely form is some type of council communism or syndicalism with maybe a sort of market socialism.
Thats surely a great way to get food security and would surely not create any unforeseen problems