/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(3.34 MB 1200x1869 Riddler.jpeg)
/QTDDTOT/ II Anonymous 12/08/2019 (Sun) 06:08:17 No. 151832
Questions That Don't Deserve Their Own Thread Thread.
What is best resourse for learning about the history of the american labor movement? from the 1850's to the 1950's
>>151835
Seconding this.
How much jailtime would I get if I spat on a well known political figure, let's call them .... Clillary Hinton.
>>151853
Hopefully you get a 🏅
>>151853
you could seek asylum somewhere else if you really wanted to do that.
I'm still having trouble understanding left communism. Isn't it basically "sit back and watch capitalism contradict itself into bringing true Marxism into play"?
>>151974
>I'm still having trouble understanding left communism.
What left communist theory have you read so far?
>>151832
What happened to the first thread?
>>152078
Looks like bump limit? well it is over 500 posts.
>>151835
Thirded.
My socdem-lite friend just linked me this article as some sort of argument against socialism: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/05/why-working-class-people-vote-conservative
How should I respond?
>>152208
Link him to here
Why is Winston Churchill quoted so often? Is it some kind of conspiracy?
What distinguishes capitalism with the socio-economic structure that preceded it?

Is the Meiji-era industrialisation of Japan comparable to Soviet industrialisation?
>>152705
>What distinguishes capitalism with the socio-economic structure that preceded it?
Household production was replaced by mass production in factories. Separate villages and towns became integrated into large-scale divisions of labor based upon trade between regions and countries. Commodity production (i.e. production for sale) became more generalized.
>Is the Meiji-era industrialisation of Japan comparable to Soviet industrialisation?
I don't know. I haven't studied Meiji industrialization.
I agree with the LTV in general but get tripped up when scarcity gets involved. Like imagine a flower that can only grow in one valley. It takes very little labor to harvest, but it feels like it should be more valuable than say, a dandelion, which exists in great abundance.

>no social value!
Imagine it has it. It cures cancer or some shit.

I know these are somewhat ridiculous complaints when the theory describes actual goods well, but it feels like a cop out to not address them.
>>152721
>Like imagine a flower that can only grow in one valley.
>It cures cancer or some shit.
An imaginary cancer-curing flower...
>I know these are somewhat ridiculous complaints when the theory describes actual goods well, but it feels like a cop out to not address them.
It's not a cop out since Marx's version of the LTV isn't meant to explain imaginary goods contrived simply to disprove the theory. Do you understand what I'm saying? Marx's LTV is meant to describe the value (not price!) of average goods being produced and sold in a capitalist society. In fact he wasn't even trying to create an "LTV" as such, but rather using the earlier concept to help explain value in capitalism. His goal was to explain the general laws of motion of capitalist society not create an air-tight theory that could explain contrived examples that don't even match reality.
Following up on that post, if you compare Marx's LTV with other theories of value it explains a great deal more. The subjective theory of value doesn't even explain anything. It just claims that value is whatever people choose it to be. Even supply and demand theory can't explain anything since it's non-falsifiable and one can justify any price/value by assuming that one variable or the other is responsible for whatever fluctuation occurs.
>>152725
>In fact he wasn't even trying to create an "LTV" as such, but rather using the earlier concept to help explain value in capitalism. His goal was to explain the general laws of motion of capitalist society not create an air-tight theory that could explain contrived examples that don't even match reality.

I did not know this, the way libs talk about it you'd think it was meant to be all encompassing. Do you have anything I can read on this?
>>151853
Probably maximum allowed penalty for assault and battery
This is is an off topic question, but how do I stop being an enormous retard and gain a better analytical, strategic mind? This may seem a bit petty but I suck ass at board games or even card games such as Monopoly, Risk, and Poker. It doesn't help that I'm not that sporty, so I'm not used to having a "competitive" mind. My best hope is to start learning Chess as a passive past-time to help me improve my brain, but is it even possible? Am I doomed to be a dummy?
>>152703
The British crown and it's secrets
>>152040
I've read Bordiga (seemed like rambling autistically about boats and planes and how Marxism is fucked because of it) and Camatte, who I actually agree with. Pannenkoek I haven't read
>>152786
Play XCOM 2
(189.69 KB 800x1280 Screenshot_20191209-032331.png)
Judging by this chart, who should I read?
>>152801
>radical centrist
>>152805
But wasn't Stalin more vanguard party than Union? I think the party process is outdated and true socialists should exempt themselves from bourgeois elections
>>152810
It fits with your centrism, and that you're in disagreement with some of the fundamentals will make the read more productive

No reason to study something that merely confirms your views
>>152815
Ok well is there anyone else to fill the gaps in?
>>152801
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm
Starting with anything other than dialectical materialism is a waste of your time. It's not possible to understand anything without it, not even dialectical materialism itself.
What was the point or purpose of cults of personality in socialist states (like Stalin's, Mao, the Kims, etc.)?
Aren't they "great man in history" tier idealism?
(484.49 KB 720x720 him.png)
>>152863
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Quotes/JosefStalin
>Stalin's Son Vasily: But I am a Stalin too.
>Josef Stalin: No you're not. You're not Stalin and I'm not Stalin. (Indicates Portrait of himself) That is Stalin. Stalin is Soviet power. Stalin is what he is in the newspapers and portraits, not you, no, not even me.
>>152786
Stop playing Monopoly, it's an intentionally bad game that got stolen by the Parker Brothers and stripped of its original satirical value.
(68.46 KB 782x518 egijtgi.jpg)
>>152863
>What was the point or purpose of cults of personality in socialist states (like Stalin's, Mao, the Kims

To piss off the potential up-start monarchs: "spot's taken". But also to communicate to other socialists that the system has reach into their locality, and that it will defend them. "If you fuck with me, Steel man will bring historic necessity down on you"

I'm not sure that they invented this, they might have realised that people were using their pictures this way, and doubled down on it.
(1.01 MB 1000x686 zizek_suit.png)
>>152863
>What was the point or purpose of cults of personality in socialist states (like Stalin's, Mao, the Kims, etc.)?
One thing that Zizek talks about is that the 20th century was the century of the "passion for the real." Passion for the real is like a totalizing drive towards a direct, unsymbolized experience. One reason why socialism failed in the 20th century, in this framework, is in the failure of the "direct, unsymbolized" part. Passion for the real is also associated with power and violence, but impotence is the main thing (and impotence can lead to violence).

An example of this is Bertolt Brecht, the German playwright who lived in the DDR, saying that the only time he was seriously tempted to join the Communist Party was when he saw a column of tanks rolling toward East Berlin to crush a workers' rebellion there in 1953. He meant this ironically, but it was a commentary on wanting to be part of a movement that was willing to put its finger (or boot) on the scale of history in an authentic and determined way, even if brutal and visceral. See, in the internal worldview of a Stalinist true believer, Stalin is not perceived to be the master who can do whatever he wants, but the perfect servant of these larger dialectical forces of history (which is the true "master" in this ideological system). But you can see the contradiction emerge here. Like, if I shoot you, "I'm not really shooting you, it's the force of history itself shooting you and I am just the agent." But you can see how this turns into its opposite where you can justify anything.
https://youtu.be/hbnvqWi_f88

You can see this drive towards the passion for the real in other 20th century left movements like anarchism or leftcom-type stuff, or Trotskyism, which seeks to bypass "messy" state politics for direct engagement with "the workers" or "the people." It's kind of the shadow of Stalinism and tends to be paralyzed because the subject, "the workers," never take power "directly" (without some mediating force like the state). Another example of terrorism, like groups in the 1970s that sought to bypass parliaments or unions for another "direct, unsymbolized" experience in the form of violence. But this is related to impotence again because they hope that terrorist destruction will inspire others -- which is actually an indirect act, not a direct one, because a small group of terrorists are unlikely to destroy the state on their own. This means terrorism is really a kind of absurd "acting out," demonstrating impotence.
We need a new word for tankies. They've reclaimed the word now so it's lost all the impact it used to.
Anyone has that meme of Adorno vs Cockshott on how socialism could be achieved?
>>153189
Shouldn't have used it with such reckless abandon. No Discipline
>>153189
This is like theocrats complaining that accusing someone of heresy no longer having any impact. By demanding that you can excommunicate "the tankies" you retroactively justify Stalin's purges.

You can question the methods and the strategies, but you cannot claim that the USSR was not a genuine socialist movement, that's just intellectual dishonesty. Do you understand that there is a difference of proclaiming somebody to be wrong, vs somebody to have malicious intent.

It's a sign of progress that your slur has been eroded.
Can someone explain to me how China could be considered socialist without resorting to “they call themselves socialist” or “the Chinese government does stuff and socialism is when the government does stuff.”
>>153360
It isn't. Calling China socialist is just wishful thinking.
(64.75 KB 900x1114 comiepanda.jpeg)
>>153360
Marxists theory posits that states, are tools for class-rule. Also that there has to be a rupture of some sort for there to be a change in which class controls the state. If you agree that Mao installed a proletarian state, and China has not seen a rupture, then China still has a proletarian state.

If you look at the Soviet Union there was a rupture (a particularly brutal kind of neo-liberal shock doctrine) that ended the proletarian state, and replaced it with a bourgeois state.

If you compare China to other capitalist states, life for example India, there is clearly are large differences. Particularly the poverty reduction programs.

Also the official CCP line is that they are only in the process of building a socialist society. What they label as primary/preliminary stage of socialism.

Also to paraphrase Eric LI, China is not a capitalist because because there is no way a bunch of billionaires can control the Polit Buro, Capital does not have enshrined rights, it does not rise above political authority. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3HCv2Sf_7Q

China does have a capitalist mode of production, but the strategical industries are in public hands, which means that the state can control the inputs and outputs of the private sector. This means that a neo-liberal counter revolution of the kind that overthrew the Social Democracies in western world is not possible.

Another aspect is that labour protections in china aren't as good as for example in the first world, but You have to consider that China is at another level of development and much less wealthy. The labour-union does seem to have some problems. But they might still get universal healthcare before the US.
>>153418
>China does have a capitalist mode of production, but the strategical industries are in public hands, which means that the state can control the inputs and outputs of the private sector.
So they are basically authoritarian socdems.
>>153436
That's not what socdem means, you imbecil
>>153442
Your "reasons" for why China is supposedly socialist show that you don't know what socialism means.
>>153418
>Marxists theory posits that states, are tools for class-rule. Also that there has to be a rupture of some sort for there to be a change in which class controls the state. If you agree that Mao installed a proletarian state, and China has not seen a rupture, then China still has a proletarian state.
Not all ruptures are violent or quick. Soft coups are a thing.
>>153418
>If you compare China to other capitalist states, life for example India, there is clearly are large differences. Particularly the poverty reduction programs.
During the development of the west at the early twentieth centuary they all had similar poverty reduction rates to modern China.
>>153418
>Also the official CCP line is that they are only in the process of building a socialist society. What they label as primary/preliminary stage of socialism.
But their is no way of knowing wether they will fulfill this or are just lying to get ligitimacy from the general population.
>>153418
>China is not a capitalist because because there is no way a bunch of billionaires can control the Polit Buro, Capital does not have enshrined rights, it does not rise above political authority
The state is part of the superstructure. The superstructure alone can’t control the base. It’s the other way around.
>>153418
>China does have a capitalist mode of production, but the strategical industries are in public hands, which means that the state can control the inputs and outputs of the private sector.
So does Norway, (oil) doesn’t make them capitalist
>>153418
>This means that a neo-liberal counter revolution of the kind that overthrew the Social Democracies in western world is not possible.
Except it totally is, all that needs to happen is for the Politburo to approve it.
>>153483
doesn’t make them *socialist
>>152801
link to quiz?
>>153483
>Not all ruptures are violent or quick. Soft coups are a thing.
can you write up a howto manual, you know because that might be useful to us
>During the development of the west at the early twentieth century they all had similar poverty reduction rates to modern China.
What are you talking about Industrialisation in the west was particularly brutal, live expectancies dropped, and large a amounts of people were cast into desperation.
>But their is no way of knowing whether they will fulfill this or are just lying to get legitimacy from the general population.
That's true, but the point of bringing up the line about the preliminary stage of socialism, was to highlight that they them self's don't consider china to be socialist, yet.
Also you can listen to mainstream media particularly the ones from burger-land, they declare any country authoritarian if the powers of capital are limited
>The state is part of the superstructure. The superstructure alone can’t control the base. It’s the other way around.
The private Sector capitalists are not the base
>So does Norway,
Norway control's the in/out-puts of it's private sector, via it's public sector ?
>Except it totally is, all that needs to happen is for the Politburo to approve it.
Well look what happened Xi purged the neo-liberal wing of the party, and it will never rebuild because You gotta have good social-credits for positions in the party bureaucracy, which means no fraud, clean financials,..., there's no neo-liberal that is capable of that. And it's not like somebody could impose it from the outside.
(257.60 KB 1200x1176 BaseSuperstructure.png)
>>153618
>can you write up a howto manual, you know because that might be useful to us
A slow change in policy in a country that at first doesn’t look like much, but over time as a significant impact on how the country operates (what Deng did) can have as much of an effect as an outright over through of the government.
>>153618
>What are you talking about Industrialisation in the west was particularly brutal
And foxcon sweatshops aren’t?
>>153618
>The private Sector capitalists are not the base
The base is the means of production and the relationship of production (wage labor, private property, markets)
>>153618
>Norway control's the in/out-puts of it's private sector, via it's public sector ?
NOrway has a state owned oil company whcich is a big chunk of it’s GDP, similar to the state owned companies in China Dengists love to chirp about. Also through regulations every government has some degree of control over what the private sector does. It’s just that China has a higher then average amount of regulation, except in the special economic zones.
>>153618
>Well look what happened Xi purged the neo-liberal wing of the party, and it will never rebuild because You gotta have good social-credits for positions in the party bureaucracy, which means no fraud, clean financials,..., there's no neo-liberal that is capable of that. And it's not like somebody could impose it from the outside.
It’s not about ideology but what is in the intrest of the Chinese rulling elites. Right now mass deregulation and privatization isn’t beneficial to Chinese Porky because they don’t need to do it because they have a high rate of profit. Once the rate of profit gets lower the CCP will privatize to keep it back up.
So, a lot of communists are anti-porn. I get their reasoning, and I think I agree. The porn industry is incredibly exploitative and not something we should be supporting.
I am wondering though what these people feel about other forms of erotica, erotic stories, drawings, animated shit, etc. Or are you all jerk it to imagination alone, or no fap?
(124.53 KB 939x1024 honor for us to be stalinists.jpg)
>>153189
The modern revisionists and reactionaries call us "tankies", thinking that they insult us, and in fact, that is what they have in mind. But, on the contrary, they glorify us with this epithet; it is an honor for us to be tankies.
>to be a good looking man is a gift of the circumstances, but being able to read and write comesfrom nature
What did he mean by this?
(268.49 KB 2048x1724 USSR-Broly.jpg)
>>153657
What about Ultra Superstructure?
(77.54 KB 416x435 npc.png)
>>152786
>This is is an off topic question, but how do I stop being an enormous retard and gain a better analytical, strategic mind?
Look into mindfulness and realize that strategic thinkers are very deliberately and purposefully thinking. They are methodically planning things out. It's not the same kind of thing as reacting and doing what seems right or makes sense. It's a very active process that's qualitatively different from normal passive thought. It's a skill that you develop through use and is (purposefully) not taught to most children. The part of your brain that you use for that stuff has to be "manually activated" in a sense, and if it's not something you're used to you might have to try some tricks to lean how to "use the muscles." A common way of doing it is to breath "manually" and deliberately, because your breathing can be either automatic or deliberate. The contrast here can help show you the difference between automatic and deliberate thought.
>>154168
I'm looking it up and it looks like some new age woo, you're not pulling my leg?
(70.69 KB 960x1116 the thinker.jpg)
>>154209
There's woo attached to it, but the core is that you do have to have self-discipline over your thoughts. The more you can control your mind, the more you can use it to do useful things. Strategic thinking for example requires you to exercise a lot of control, but if you get good at it, you can do incredible shit. Master chess players burn a fuckton of calories just sitting there thinking about future moves. It's not some super power or magic shit (although hucksters will take advantage of the poor general understanding). It's just a cognitive skill that is rarely developed and that isn't well understood by most. In the same way that you can learn self-control or identifying colors or notes or any other number of cognitive skills, you can learn to control your thoughts and to use that to analyze a situation, think ahead, and make plans.

This is kind of a lost skill because porky doesn't want workers to think too much. Part of the reason for the "really makes me think" meme is because people who are weak at the skill of deliberately thinking come to bad conclusions (like someone doing a bad job of any skill). Porky wants you to make fun of thinking because he doesn't want you to think. He wants to to make fun of poor thinking because it discourages people from trying to get good at thinking. Remember that you're probably going to be incompetent when you start to learn anything. Thinking isn't something you're just naturally good at or not. Doing it right takes effort and experience hones it. Why do you think this famous statue is in a pose like this? With all that effort going to the brain, there's not enough left for proper posture.

The reason this shit is being "rediscovered" by woo or silicon valley types is because it's actually very useful, but it's like the microdosing with LSD thing where they want to bend it toward making money for the business.
>>154237
Where do I begin though? when I search all I get is people trying to sell me shit.
Can someone explain to exact difference between Debord's idea of the Spectacle and Adorno's idea of the Culture Industry. I have the read half of Debord but decided to start all over to get a better understanding and have started Dialectic of the Enlightenment and have read some bits on the Culture Industry. I just want some clarification on the two before reading further.
>>154299
You can find free stuff online, like mindfulness and meditation guides. The products people try to sell are probably less good anyway. The important thing is to get used to exercising conscious control over your body and mind, and then use that to think more complex thoughts. Simplest thing to do is pay close attention to your breathing or other movement (especially your hands) and pay as close attention as possible, controlling what you do as much as possible. Get used to deliberately controlling your attention and you can direct it toward other things too. Exercise it while playing chess against the computer for example. Don't worry about being good at chess (people who are really good at it memorize a bunch of things about board configurations), but see how far ahead you can plan the moves. See how many alternative moves you can plan out. The more you work on that, the better you will get. Apply the same logic to your actions in your life or to political players. The more you practice the better you can get. There's no proper guide to it really, it's just figuring out how to "think manually" and do it often.
Please explain to me, what does your fancy pants dialectical materialism say about bitcoin?
>>154410
I have no real interest in bitcoin as things stand so I can't answer that
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm
However if you study this introductory text and respond with a first attempt at placing it in the framework I'm sure I and others will be able to assist you in answering this question
>>154410
Bitcoin is just late capitalism scamming. The thing is a pyramid scheme. I don't know what more you could get with that kind of analysis.
>>154484
It's slightly more than that I suspect since best korea uses it to bust the illegitimate sanctions placed on them
Is social ecology compatible with mutualism? I'm already an established mutualist but I've started reading Bookchin and a lot of the stuff he says is fucking based.
>>152727
Capital, volume 1.
>>153444
He didn't say they were socialist, either. Reading comprehension is important, kiddo.
>>153666
Well, Satan, I personally consider 2D porn to be good praxis; I veer away from the actual doujins since that industry benefits the porkies, but browsing Hentai Foundry or a similar site is perfectly acceptable.
What's the class character of Islamism/Jihadism or whatever you want to call it?
Why should I care?
So what exactly is proletarian art and what are some examples?
I don't think the term just refers to propaganda posters and the like
Is cultural marxism real?
>>166473
only in lobster mans head.
>>160313
Mutualism is compatible with everything.
>>166473
>>166475
It's real in the sense that social darwinism is real. "Cultural Marxists" wildly misapply concepts from Marx. They take the final conclusions that Marx got from years of intense scrutiny and slap them onto identity politics. They paint over "proletariat" and "bourgeoisie" with "women" and "men" or "POC" and "whitey." The typical conception of idpol you get from intersectionality is "cultural marxist" in the sense that it conceives of identitarian issues as class struggle. You will often hear these people (when they talk to commies especially) outright say race or gender or whatever is class.
(31.17 KB 620x349 ComfyArmchair.JPG)
>>166475
Lobster man figured out ages ago that Adorno wasn't trying to steal Lenin's precious bodily fluids and shifted to Neo-Marxism years ago, then Zizek convinced him in the debate of the century that Foucault was in opposition to Marxism and now he's shifted to calling the phenomena post-modern-quasi-marxism
>>166482
*Foucault was a neoliberal who was in opposition to Marxism
>>166482
s/convinced/explained
I listened to the whole communist manifesto on audio book and didn't understand it. Were they against the family? because they mentioned the Bourgeoisie family and the dynamic between children and their parents.
>>167081
>>167100
>I listened to the whole communist manifesto on audio book and didn't understand it.
Please ask literally any question you want.
>Were they against the family?
No. They were against the particular social system propped up by capitalism.
>because they mentioned the Bourgeoisie family and the dynamic between children and their parents.
That's about seeing your kids as assets akin to employees. Remember they had common child labor in Marx's time. The "bourgeois family" and "nuclear family" are modern inventions. The traditional family was a lot different and a much bigger family unit. People used to have much stronger connections with their communities and families. Capitalism has eroded this. Capitalism has atomized people to make them more at the disposal of businesses, and because splitting people up means you can sell them more shit. Fewer people per household? Sell more houses. Sell more of every amenity you'd have in one.
what do you guys think of Renegade Cut? he seems liberal.

https://invidio.us/channel/UC9infsKo33_2LUoiqXGgQWg
>>167114
>vaporwave aesthetic
not gonna waste my time tbh
>>167100
No, they just saw the nuclear family as a bourgeois concept since it divided a extended family into family units whose purpose was to wage for porky.
>>167114
>Star Wars
>Road to Fascism
Pretty dumb. I had seen his video on Metropolis and how it related to Marxist view of class and it was pretty basic stuff of Proletariat v. Buorgiosie.
(56.69 KB 584x649 1390082944631.jpg)
>>167114
I lied. I started watching the video about Rick and Morty. The thesis is that the show is telling you that being smart equals being mean, and that's bad. It's mostly a bunch of examples of the author being offended by edgy shit like the word retarded or rape jokes. I had to call it quits when he starts calling Rick's existential angst "man-pain."

This is just some radlib.
(19.00 KB 700x479 Trashpocalypse.jpg)
>>167139
>>167119
Ok, I lied again. I kept watching. The conclusion is that because Rick is "always right" the show is justifying his behavior, even though the show regularly displays the emotional toll of his abuse on his family. I don't think this guy understands nuance. He compares Rick and Morty to BoJack Horseman, but it seems like the difference is that he expects Rick and Morty to consistently deconstruct Rick's problems instead of simply portraying the problems and consequences. That and he seems to want it to have the self-seriousness of BoJack Horseman. Basically just a twit attaching a moral dimension to his tastes. The main difference between Rick and Morty and BoJack Horseman is that the former simply portrays a character's actions and the consequences while the latter makes sure to tell the audience what they're supposed to think.
>>167139
>>167158
He also has a video in intersectionality and queer theory. He sounded like a liberal but he kept calling himself leftist which as confusing me, since the leftists here are against liberals.
>>151832
To you guys, is politics essentially "it's ok when we do it"? I mean, we always condemn the US for sabotaging foreign elections, economies, etc and shit like that but if a socialist country did all this things to capitalist nations, would you be ok with it?
>>167111
>Please ask literally any question you want.
that was my only current question, Thank you for the reply.
>>167160
"Left" is just a direction. In the context of mainstream politics liberals are "on the left." The difference is those people are fine with capitalism and imperialism as long as it's woke (moar wimmin drone pilots), and we want to replace the current system with socialism. The social issues side of the radical left (socialists) is not really united. The liberals want to make it seem that way though because that's what they care about. Most of us want equal treatment regardless of race and shit, but we would say those kinds of issues are a product of capitalism and not really solvable while we have capitalism.

>intersectionality
This is liberal meme and a bad analysis of how social issues work.
>queer theory
This is pretty much histrionics tbh. I say this as an LGBT. Almost all [identity] studies are just masturbation. Getting a degree in it is an excuse to feel superior to normal people.

>>167161
>To you guys, is politics essentially "it's ok when we do it"?
No, there's much more to it than that. But as to this actual question, that depends on what "it" is. Capitalism has inherent problems. Supporting that is bad. Supporting socialism is good. These apply in general, but there absolutely are bad methods that are bad no matter who does it.

>I mean, we always condemn the US for sabotaging foreign elections, economies, etc and shit like that but if a socialist country did all this things to capitalist nations, would you be ok with it?
It depends on the context, i.e. who the target is. If it's some small country being fucked with, it's bullying no matter who does it. Interfering with a country to make them like you is imperialism no matter what kind of flag it's done under. Even with good intentions it's most likely going to backfire. True for capitalism and communism. The difference where "imperialism" is ok is when the people of a country call for aid (usually against a foreign invader like the US). If it's the global superpower getting fucked with then attacking them is undermining their bullying, so it might be justified. It's honestly way more complicated than this, but that's the gist.

Any political action has to be considered in the context of its consequences. Like, sure you could say the US "deserved 9/11" but what did that accomplish? How many of the deaths were really related to US involvement in Afghanistan? Some for sure, but most people even in finance in the WTC weren't involved there. And it ended up being a huge benefit to the US empire's propaganda and surveillance state tendencies. So while it might be "justified" in the sense that it was retributive for very real harm done by the US, it only made shit worse for everybody.
>>167289
It's an interesting thing to discuss, a proper thread could be made about what are the most effective ways to spread socialism internationally. I mean it could be argue that the only nations that could spread socialism to other countries are superpowers, like the USSR in its time but maybe countries with less influence but more power in their specific regions could still do it.

For example, I'm chilean and obviously Chile is by no means a global superpower, but its economic situation compared to other South American countries could potentially mean that if we were to be socialist, we'd have some chance of being able to spread it somewhat to close countries while managing ourselves just fine.
(807.42 KB 3300x1619 US coups.jpg)
>>167353
>I mean it could be argue that the only nations that could spread socialism to other countries are superpowers, like the USSR in its time but maybe countries with less influence but more power in their specific regions could still do it.
Or you could argue from Marx that socialism naturally follows capitalism and you will see people develop it on their own if they're not stopped.
Or you could make the same argument from history, since this has been vindicated. The main reason we don't have socialism is the US empire overthrowing anybody who approaches socialism.
Of course, you can't just with the empire away. So sending aid to socialist movements can be a big help. The real question and distinction from imperialism is whether the operations benefit the country or extract resources from it. The point of imperialism is to turn a country into a banana republic and leech off it.
>>167420
>you can't just WISH the empire away
>>167289
Aren't liberals part of identity politics though?
>>167443
Liberalism is the political theory of capitalism + democracy.
Nobody can really agree what identity politics is, but it's some kind of politics that focuses on identity.
Is David's Harvey reading of Capital any good, cause I'm reading through Capital right now and need some help understanding the more nuance bits.
https://youtu.be/gBazR59SZXk
>>152078
It hit the bump limit, and was bumped blocked.
>>153274 We were never claiming that the USSR wasn't a genuine socialist movement, wtf were talking about.
>>168246 David Harvey has made some odd statements about Capital that really makes me question his work, but I'll admit I haven't sat down and read his work. If you have questions about Capital you can ask them here and I'll respond. There's also a reading thread on Reddit's r/stupidpol.
>>168246 IMO Harvey is one of those people who doesn't really take Marx that seriously. There's a tendency for some people to read Marx and take away the bits they like while finding an excuse (other than the argument not being good) to disregard what they don't like. It's to the effect of "well this is a good analysis and very useful, but some of these implications and conclusions make me feel uncomfortable, so I'm going to ignore them or rationalize why they're wrong." Contrast that with someone criticizing Marxist states as they were actually implemented or criticizing the Marxist theory in earnest on its arguments (like Bakunin did). You see a lot of "progressives" who read Marx end up accepting a lot of the criticisms of capitalism but believing that Marx was wrong that capitalism will necessarily end or that it would be better to put an alternative system in place. These people at best need to be taken with a grain of salt and at worst are our opponents. After all, if your project is to legitimize everything but the conclusion, you are effectively working to stop people from accepting the really important ideas. It's recuperation. And it's often done by people who are relatively comfortable in capitalism and uncomfortable with the prospect of change or of how socialists would see them for their position or their politics. For the record I think Harvey is on the better end of that scale, but you definitely should recognize that he's "critical" of Marx in the disingenuous sense that he doesn't like some conclusions and works backward to explain why they're wrong. Whether it's deliberate or not, he is actively misleading people and you should be cautious about him.
There was this rap music video posted on here sometime ago, and I'm struggling to find it. It was made by a Ukrainian rapper and it's about the Donbass War. I think the title was "Crows" or something like that. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
>>151832 Why don’t we have military hardware and strategy threads anymore. Those seems to went extinct when 8chan got nuked. Those threads were a great place to get sources to btfo neocons and nazis about military history especially the shit smearing during the Cold War. Also the discussion on Spanish anarchist militia was great. Anyone still have archive of those threads?
When did the stereotype of communists being lazy start? It's just so weird to me that people accuse communists of both being lazy and work people to death in slave camps. It's so weird that a workers movement is now associated with laziness and wanting free things.
Why don't people on /lefty/ take developments in Marxism after Leninism seriously? It seems like few people here read anything past the 1940s
>>168535 Same anon, I have trouble understanding commodity fetishism. How exactly do we fetish-size it, and can you give me examples please. Also can some mod delete this spam please >>168773 >>169013 >>170128 >>170146 >>170196 >>170597 >>171125 >>171196 >>171449 >>171679 >>171691 >>171811 >>175271 >>175271
>>183550 >Same anon, I have trouble understanding commodity fetishism. How exactly do we fetish-size it, and can you give me examples please. The phrase 'commodity fetish' is used to explain the idea that the relationship between things is really a relationship between people. Commodities - goods, aren't valuable based on anything intrinsic. They're valuable because they are the embodiment of human labor. It's this relationship that gets 'mystified' or hidden by focusing on the existence of a commodity as a "thing" or a "product". Does that make sense? When you compare the prices of two products you're actually comparing an underlying social relation.
Where can I read about Marx's (or a Marxian) analysis of the concept of the nation?
>>183666 Thank you. Do you know if there are any works by Marx, or at least references in his work, related to nations, nationalism etc?
>>152208 >the guardian >an argument of any sort Reminds me of when my friend started spamming me with VICE and Huffington Post articles.
So what happened to the wealth of the Romanovs after the revolution in Russia and the wealth of the Qing dynasty and the KMT after the revolution in China?
>>168762 There are definitely some good things written after the 40s that people should be reading, but a huge amount of it is pretty garbage, including pretty much everything "marxist" that emerged from western academia.
I support Cuba and the DPRK as the last existing socialist states, but China? How can I be a socialist and support a country that has a shitload of private corporations, the second-highest number of billionaires worldwide, terrible worker's rights...? Just because they claim that they will be socialist in 2050? Are there any actual policies that hint on China still being committed to socialism, or do we just have to take the CCP's word for it? Is China doing anything to spread socialism like the USSR did back then? Of course the HK protests and a lot of the Uygur stuff are bullshit, but should we really glorify China economically?
Is there any reason not to re-formulate our metaphysics from materialism to naturalism after the quantum revolution revealed that matter was not the fundamental substance of the universe in the first half of the 20th century?
>>189030 Just because atoms are made of waves in some universe-spanning fields instead of being rigid billiard balls, does not invalidate materialism or give idealism and woowoo breathing space, rather science has just elaborated on what matter really is.
>>185428 >Cuba and DPRK But don't they also claim that China is socialist
>Supply and demand determine the price <No, it is the labour contents of a good >Yea, thats one of the parts of how supply works How do I respond?
>>189259 But son, naturalism has nothing to do with idealism. Materialism and naturalism are practically synonyms, the difference is that naturalism holds that the universe is made up by the laws of nature (i.e. with no super-natural characteristics) while materialism goes a step further and tried to establish a fundamental substance. That fundamental substance defined was a mistake in reasoning and now we look like fools. Yes we should replace materialism with naturalism.
>>189267 To be on their good side and get trade benefits
>>185428 >Are there any actual policies that hint on China still being committed to socialism, or do we just have to take the CCP's word for it? The real measure of a society moving towards socialism is whether or not they are abolishing private property and wage-labor. (This depends more on material conditions rather than political desire.) China isn't doing that according to the statistics I can find. The most recent stats available show that 90% of China's employment growth is in the private sector. They're actually increasing private property and wage-labor. My own take on China is that they are correct to develop their society in whatever way works but that we shouldn't consider it an example of "socialism." >>189457 Supply and demand is pseudo-scientific. It's an explanation that doesn't actually explain anything. https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2016/07/23/not-even-wrong/
If imperialism is supposed to be so good for the countries who perpetrated it, then why are Spain, Portugal and the UK and USA to some extent so shit? Meanwhile other countries with no imperialism story like Switzerland, Luxembourg, Sweden, etc, are way better places
>>190335 Empires that are at the end of their cycle tend to drain the homeland before they go out, and what remains is countries operating below their potential.
>>190335 >Switzerland, Luxembourg, Sweden Those are just parasite countries.
What are decentralized planned economies and can someone give me examples in action?
Did the eastern bloc really prevent people from emigrating? Isn't that kinda fucked up?
Does anyone have the memes from the Barbara Trash Pit thread saved? I had them on my phone, but it was recently damaged beyond salvage. I would appreciate it if I could get those again.
>>191193 US was only paying the skilled workers to leave, pushing essentially braindrain.
>>192251 There's a bunch at the oc thread
>>192251 Saved a few.
(40.02 KB 652x3483 sotospeak.png)
(1.27 MB 1071x710 cuckpit.png)
(418.04 KB 800x600 holeinone.png)
>>192251 >>194112 Here's more of them
>>194176 Didn't know this was the thread where you ask shit, so I'll repeat what I asked in another one: >China: dictate who can run businesses and who can't, you're still a commie even if you do it really well and efficiently. >Nazi Germany: They privatized industries in name only. The state controlled all production and the means at which is was distributed and at what prices it would be distributed at. They were fundamentally against capitalism. Still commies. Is this true?
>>194112 Anyone have that post about hank hill and totalitarianism?
>>152801 >63.2% Scientific score cuck
Is the goal of Marxism-Leninism still to develop a stateless and classless society? How long will it take to get from a socialist state to a communist society?
>>152786 Read The Art of War by Sun Tzu https://suntzusaid.com/book/1
Were there actual legitimate documents declassified by the Russians after the fall of the USSR involving the Soviet government with actually wanting to genocide the Ukranians? if it was false how has no one questioned it? what other false evidence have the Russians made up about the former USSR?
>>194274 >if it was false how has no one questioned it it has by most mainstream historians
>>194223 >Is the goal of Marxism-Leninism still to develop a stateless and classless society Yes. It's going to take a long time, I don't think anybody can really guess, but it won't be quick. Even if the whole world went socialist, it would still take some time before we reached Communism, and it's going to take a long time for the whole world to go socialist.
What’s the current deal with Russia? Is it as corrupt an oligarchy as people say it is? What’s Putin’s deal and is the existing communist party of any value or just a meme?
>>195166 Oligarchy, Putun's deal is to keep it that way. Kprf is a meme but communism is coming back.
>>195256 >Communism is coming back. >>194223 That is certainly the goal, but most ML revolutions have kept the state, and as a result had revisionists infiltrate its structure, maintain class system, implement state capitalism and fuck up the DOTP with a form of centralised governance that at times would fuck over workers councils etc. However, the 21st century does wield more prospects, and you could argue we have more resources at our hands to achieve post scarcity than we have before. MLs though you can argue this is debatable are communists, and communists do believe in developing a stateless, classless, moneyless society, much like any other Marxist, Anarchist etc.
Ok so how does capital profit from war? Where does the money the government spends on it come from? Does war somehow fit into the American federal budget? Do they just borrow more to fund it? I've heard that profits come from labour power but its not like a war gets you more labour power, and it's not like there is any real value created from war.
>>195256 Is there any hope of communism returning in Russia? What do the young people think about it, or are they all libshits
>>195166 >>195256 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btIGYe28jWw >Some Russians Think The USSR Still Exists
How does one not get consumed by hopelessness at the state of the world?
Shouldn't we refrain from using "Great men" as our identifiers for our political opinions? It doesn't feel like you'll get anywhere by identifying with being on Team Stalin or Team Trotsky. Isn't it anti collectivists to believe in the great man theory to start with? Wouldn't it be easier to unite the left if we simply identified as Socialists to start with and then discussed how to carry out planning societies afterwards based on theory rather than great men who have fallen many years ago?
>>195632 Don't take anything you read here seriously. I don't talk about Stalin IRL if at all possible. What I'm saying is, you are quite right but it's funny to do the opposite. >>195501 A certain group of capitalists profits, namely arms manufacturers (among others). They and oil/energy porky are the most powerful of the Bourgeoisie. Probably because what they deal in is the most essential tools for domination (this may be a bit of a tautology). It is not about "value creation" but about opening a country up for exploitation. If you look at investment opportunities there's no reason for any part of the Bourgeoisie to object to a war because it creates opportunities. >Where does the money the government spends on it come from The money comes from the taxpayer. I think the federal budget is inconsequential even to the federal government. The american state is trying to do away with itself (at least the useful parts that aren't purely tools for domination). This answer is a bit of a mess but the gist is: I think you are looking at this wrongly, the american state is not trying to be efficient. It is to a large extent nothing but a tool of class warfare.
is "leftist" infighting the biggest obstacle to a communist revolution? can shit-flinging among "leftists" be considered part of the reason on the rise of fascism?
>>196115 Not by a long shot. Police is a much bigger problem.
>>196115 this is a very naive take. you don't have to be a retard to believe it, but it helps. "leftist infighting" is an uncharitable way of saying "ideological struggle", which is not only good for revolution but actually necessary.
anyone seen this movie? is it any good?
>>196572 Not when people perpetually rehash the same arguments for 250 fucking years, though.
>>197057 >anyone seen this movie? is it any good? Seen it, decent movie, it's not very political though, it's manly about characters.
So how do you read old 8chan archives? Are they dead forever? I really need the archive of the military technology threads, some nice source to btfo burgers and weahraboos.
>>195747 > It is to a large extent nothing but a tool of class warfare. So it's nation wide class warfare? Because Iran is a lower class?
What is the leftcom take on economic crises? Do they think they happen because of overproduction?
Who's THE porky? Think of the biggest one you can imagine.
>>197214 That's a nonsensical question. Specify it further.
>>197225 If porkies had an hierchy as angels do, who would be at the top?
>>197239 A 13 year old r/libertarian user who calls himself a capitalist in his webcam youtube rants with 4 views
(695.99 KB 763x990 pyramid_of_capitalist_system.jpg)
>>197239 >If porkies had an hierchy as angels do, who would be at the top? If my grandmother had wheels would she be a bike? The real answer the rich people don't care to rule over each other and if they do it's in the way of competition which usually is in favor of both competing capitalist. The porkies are already on top of the hierarchy in place, the only thing dividing them is how much Capital each one has, you could call that plutocracy, like Jeff Bezos maybe have more potential on world politics if he wanted since he is the riches, one could argue, but then again you could argue Darren Woods from Exxon has more power, because he directly controls the Oil in America, and therefor has great geopolitical say in what business America deals with. I think you need to define on what parameters your angelical hierarchy is based, because the rich elite doesn't have one between them, there isn't one Monopolistic CEO ruling over the other per say, rather than internally making agreements helping them both by exploiting the lower classes.
>>197201 No, that point was about conflict inside the state not between different states. >>197261 Even though they are much better organized than the proletariat, there is considerable conflict between different groups of porkies.
What are some books that can let me understand why the world right now is the way it is? Stuff like: how the Middle East turned the way it did, the escalations towards Brexit and the economic messes in the EU (i.e. Greece)... I'm a zoomer (but 18) so I never really got to digest or understand stuff that happened before Gaddafi's death, so I lack a bit of context.
(25.28 KB 221x221 1407515768904.jpg)
>>197422 Wrong thread anime qt: >>189149
what is the theory that nationalism oppresses workers?
>>197330 As far as books, I'm not sure. The Middle East is a complicated subject because many of the existing states came into existence after the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire. The Middle East in the post-WW2 era was split into different groups, many of whom wanted to modernize their countries based on semi-socialist ideas. Certain groups took power such as the Ba'athists in Iraq and Syria, and also Pan-Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt. These groups frequently fought among themselves. The creation of Israel made things even more complicated, resulting in several conflicts between Israel and the Arab states. Israel received backing from the US and some other Western countries while the Arabs often received support, or at least arms sales, from the USSR - but these were more like a convergence of interests rather than real alliances. Later, the Muslim fundamentalists became more active in politics leading to the rise of the Ayatollah in Iran but also religion-based groups across the Middle East. People have argued that the destabilization or destruction of "secular" governments in the Middle East, especially since 2001, has led directly to the rise of Islam-based political movements. >the escalations towards Brexit I really don't know much about that. >the economic messes in the EU (i.e. Greece) I don't know of a good book on the topic, but I'm sure you can find out a lot by listening to talks by Yanis Varoufakis on youtube. He can tell you what happened from an inside perspective. >Gaddafi's death Gaddafi was an independent leader but was basically brought to heel by G.W. Bush in 2001-2002. Bush made it clear the U.S. would invade any country harboring or aiding terrorists and Gaddafi immediately became very conciliatory. Unfortunately, he probably only weakened himself during this time which made it easy for the rebels and foreign governments to topple him.
>>205822 >what is the theory that nationalism oppresses workers? Nationalism doesn't really oppress workers but it diverts them away from the class struggle. They focus on fighting wars between national states, "cultural" issues, and so on.
>>197330 Watch Hypernormalisation by Adam Curtis
Someone explain to a communist noob why Stalin did the purges beyond concentrating power
>>207311 I'm not the guy to ask about this, but you would do well to understand that Stalin didn't "do" the purges. It was a complex time with many competing interests, not a one-man show.
>>197213 It happens for one simple reason There is no such thing as infinte growth But people like to make money so when things start to slow down the exacerbate it to try and keep things continuing Then eventually you run out of tricks to pull and everything comes falling down
Does someone still have that image of that Evola quote where he said that we should ignore economics and only focuse in idpol?
(565.55 KB 1280x720 evola idpol.jpg)
>>207320 thanks.
>>207330 No problemo, though if you need to find images in the future it can be faster to use the leftybooru https://lefty.booru.org/index.php?page=post&s=list&tags=evola
>>207313 Why did he kick trotsky out?
Is magic real? What about occult rituals that the elite/bourgeois do?
>>208279 1. no 2. at best, they exist as mutual guilt rituals that force the bourg to stay in line or else be exposed by their compatriots (much like Epstein etc child sex rings). However mostly they are just made up by crazies to distract from the real issues with capitalism
What flags are available on the board and how do I use them?
>>208361 Click "More" in the area where you type your post. The option to select your flag is in that section.
Why are the magazine links dead? I think I've been here before and there used to be a magazine with some actual stuff I could read, now there's none
>>208365 Because the magazine websites are dead and abandoned
>>208364 Cheers
>>208367 Why did that happen?
>>208370 Nobody read them I guess and the host stopped paying. Sad but there we go.
MLs have seriously missed an opportunity to a great meme here Watch this: Decisive historical victory over (Axis) Uranus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Uranus
/pol/ would cry so hard as this effectively sissifies their fragile masculinity
>>208384 Does hosting really cost that much? I think I used to have a website somewhere and it costed 10$ an year for the domain, and maybe 10 for a linode that can harbour a site. Its dirt cheap.
How the fuck do you even find archives of threads here? Wayback machine doesn’t work since we’re too obscure to do so. Really want to find more about a book that was recommended in the Japan thread. https://bunkerchan.xyz/leftypol/res/136233.html
Why do people on this board support North Korea so much? It’s operates large amounts of re education camps, has a massive cult of personality around the ruler, and has abandoned communism in favour of juche.
>>209375 it's only a handful of autists that actually support it However, it isn't anywhere near as bad as many reports say
(90.64 KB 1733x507 1520312010287.png)
Found this image on /tg/ ages ago. The archive.moe link doesn't seem to work, anyone know more about this?
>>209383 The closest we had was the Thunder Well during Operation Plumbbob. >During the Pascal-B nuclear test, a 900-kilogram (2,000 lb) steel plate cap (a piece of armor plate) was blasted off the top of a test shaft at a speed of more than 66 kilometres per second (41 mi/s). Before the test, experimental designer Dr. Brownlee had estimated that the nuclear explosion, combined with the specific design of the shaft, would accelerate the plate to approximately six times escape velocity.[9] The plate was never found, but Dr. Brownlee believes that the plate never left the atmosphere, as it may even have been vaporized by compression heating of the atmosphere due to its high speed. The calculated velocity was sufficiently interesting that the crew trained a high-speed camera on the plate, which unfortunately only appeared in one frame, but this nevertheless gave a very high lower bound for the speed. After the event, Dr. Robert R. Brownlee described the best estimate of the cover's speed from the photographic evidence as "going like a bat out of hell!"[9][10] The use of a subterranean shaft and nuclear device to propel an object to escape velocity has since been termed a "thunder well".
>>209388 I know about Operation Plumbbob, and I'd really like to know more about this hypothetical scaled-up Russian one that would smash copper projectiles at relativistic speeds into hostile alien craft.
>>209394 I'm pretty sure it doesn't exist cause I looked and can't find any sources for it either. The anon probably just thought them being Soviets made a better story.
isn't dialectics just a glorified continuum fallacy?
>>209549 No. That's the best answer one can give until you explain why you think that
>>151832 what exactly is mutualism?what the difference between it and socialism?
>>209823 Mutualism is a form of Socialism. Proudhon himself originally coined the word Scientific Socialism. He envisioned mutualism as a alternative to Capitalism, differentiating himself from other Socialist at the time who were utopian and only had a vague idea of what Socialism will be. Mutualism is basically where Private Property has been abolished and instead there mutual ownership of property in communes and coops and such. It differentiates from Marxism is that A. It doesn't plan to abolish Wage Labor ( something Marx made fun of Proudhon for in his 1844 Manuscripts). B. It support of Markets in the exchange of goods and C. It seeks to abolish the state since its an early Anarchist ideology.
>>209823 >>209903 It's also "evolutionary/gradualist" instead of revolutionary (which means mutualists think we'll transition out of capitalism by workers increasingly choosing to engage in socialist economics, not via a period of violent revolution). Both Marx and Bakunin (and later anarcho-communists) disagree with this.
>>209375 Re-education of counter revolutionaries is good. They really don't have that many camps, do not believe western media reports about them. They have not abandoned communism for Juche, Juche is an outgrowth of marxism-leninism, they still believe in proletarian internationalism and socialism. The cult of personality thing is probably a lingering remnant of Confucianism, and while it's a little off putting, that isn't going to stop me from supporting a socialist state.
>>209823 Capitalism without money
>>209375 Juche is an extension of Marxism-Leninism that believes that some of marx’s theories are outdated and that countries should be self reliant in their revolutions ie: not excepting aid from other countries. That’s why the DPRK is so prosperous even with the us and other imperialist power’s sanctions
What is the best translation/edition of Capital in English? Looking to finally getting around to reading it
(16.56 MB Capital MECW.pdf)
>>210812 The Marx & Engels Collected Works one, Vol 35
Does anyone have the screencap of an anon talking about direct democracy with an anime chick with confetti on her as the attached image? I meant to save it but I forgot. Thanks!
Was Katyn justifiable?
>>212258 Who knows, most of the actual deaths didn’t even happened there while the mass graves found in Katyn were made by Nazis to blame it on the Soviets. Recently there has been a new liberal conspiracy to try and dismissed the fact that almost every pows killed in Katyn was by German pistols by saying that Soviets were fan of “le german engineering” to the point of using their weapons for execution. Unless you’re this type of nutcase, as a leftist you shouldn’t care about autistic screeching of Polish fascists at all.
Anyone have the meme / cartoon of the reformist carousel and the parked revolution in waiting (a bus)?
>>212841 Nvm just got it from a /GET/ ask.
How do you view self made billionaires like Zuckerberg and Jack Ma? Haven't they *earned* what they have?
>>213791 >How do you view self made billionaires like Zuckerberg and Jack Ma? Some of them have admirable qualities and work very hard. That's good, I guess. >Haven't they *earned* what they have? No. If you earned $5,000 a day from 1492 until today, you still wouldn't have as much wealth as Jeff Bezos. I even admit that Jeff Bezos is a hard-working guy and probably deserves to be successful, but even he didn't "earn" all that wealth. Zuckerberg in particular just stole the idea from someone else and used his Ivy League connections to cash in on it. Look up the Winklevoss twins. Bezos, in spite of his work ethic, only had a chance to succeed because he was given $300,000 in seed capital by his step-father and had the privilege of attending an Ivy League university.
>>213791 Depends really. I know there are some sports stars in 21st century parody have billions from just being fucking insane at their sport, which I guess is better than the “entrepreneurs” who become billionaires. Every “entrepreneur” is just some hack who found a smart person to do the hard work before fucking their smart friend over and stealing a bunch of money or selling out to get rich. Steve jobs, Mark Zuckerberg and the rest of them are all psychopaths who leech off the actual talent of others and use it to propel themselves to the top, they’re just opportunists
>>213806 College is for the rich bourgeoisie
There's a reason Pol Pot did what he did.
What exactly was Korenizatsiya supposed to work? How can it be reconciled with Stalin's messing up of Central Asian borders, since they seem to achieve opposite goals?
>>215281 *How exactly
Is MMT (modern monetary theory) legit and worth learning? I don't wanna study something that'll end up being a waste of time
Can the the term dialectical materialist be used as an umbrella term with communism falling under it? Because I'm basically a mixed economist socc-dem, rosa killer, and I'd like to refer to myself as dialectical materialist. Namely, because it would be fun to a have dog whistle term to trigger righties with, whether or not your an actual commie.
>>215774 Many of their central claims are true and acknowledged by Marxists. But they still deny labor theory of value and think they can fix capitalism
why even live if the *best* future you could hope for is a 9-5 job
Bump test
Are female incels even a thing? Why don't we ever hear anything about them?
Is social security a Ponzi scheme?
>>219081 A group of people living in the jungle = Ponzi scheme? Adults care for kids and these kids later will take care of the old. That's how it is. The way I understand a Ponzi scheme is that it requires constant growth. Social security works without a growing population. It doesn't work with a rapidly shrinking population, but that doesn't make it fraudulent or corrupt or whatever.
Anybody have good recommendations for books about Soviet nationality policies and the growth of different cultures in the various soviet nations etc?
>>215823 ngl soc dems should an hero
Brainlet need a soild defense of the lavor therory of value that normies and me can get
>>223536 Theory*
What would be recommended resources for the average layman to understand how Marxism affects their immediate, physical lives whilst not talking down to them or scaring them into inaction?
>>218850 Not an expert, but I think the whole incel phenomenon being male dominated is more to do with the unique sexual relationship with men towards women (women give sex to men and your self worth as a man is tied to whether you can or cannot gain said permission). That said, i'm sure you could find an equivalent movement among women either currently or historically.
why do communists reject the Great Man Theory and fetishizes direct democracy but in reality when one of their major figure and leaders dies their movement fall into pieces?
>>212863 Here it is if anyone wants it (It's a goodie!):
>>225069 Not all communists want direct democracy, but it tends to be the most in line with the end-goal which is a stateless and classless society. The Great Man Theory is generally rejected because for it to be valid would require (I guess) non-materialist factors. It basically goes against the underlying assumptions made by Marx about history - namely that what happens is more or less the result of necessity forcing society to choose the leaders willing to do what needs to be done.
>>225069 >in reality when one of their major figure and leaders dies their movement fall into pieces? IMO the Great Man Theory doesn't fit with the reality of communist leaders. Marx was arguably the most original and influential communist in history but the First International fell apart during his lifetime. Lenin was as close to a Great Man as any communist could be, but even his success depended upon the right combination of historical chance. The Comintern, which was created unexpectedly (not by Lenin), continued to exist until 20 years after Lenin was dead - only being disbanded by Stalin in 1943. The USSR, which of any individual was probably most influenced by Stalin, outlived him by nearly 40 years.
>>225069 >Great Man Theory My dad loved me and I reject a pseudo father figure. Its different than a great Prime Minister and President. Stronkmehn tend to be for the bourgeois fainting ladies and huwhite knights to feel safe from gluten or something. >direct democracy Yes. >when one of their major leaders dies their movement fall into pieces? The movement holds and after the mourning period elections commence.

Delete
Report

no cookies?