/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/

/QTDDTOT/ - Questions that don't deserve their own thread Anonymous 09/01/2020 (Tue) 11:03:34 No. 829118
Previous thread: >>765417
>>829118 Is there really no literature that explores mental health/ loneliness from a leftist perspective?
>>829220 Mark Fisher
>>829220 Lacan
I often hear this bullshit cope that anti-communists often say about the ussr. They paint it as a dreary gray depressing world where every thing they buy is same so they ""lost"" their individuality and the outside world is more hip and "exciting" how do you counter this propaganda? data and stats are good but they're not nearly as powerful as selling the 1984 doomerism Also how would a socialist state deal with the internet as it is a very powerful tool for counter revolutionary activities I assume many in china use vpns and view the great wall in an antagonistic sense The way I see it the only solution to all of this is an international transition to communism. But that sounds like a pipe dream. I don't know what can radicalize the entire earth to socialism when leftists are confined to cyberspace posting memes or get jailed when they actually do anything irl
Reasking this from the previous thread, if a hungarian anon or anyone who speaks hungarian could translate this song, I'd really appreciate it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duEZNW1yuNw
>>829504 >I often hear this bullshit cope that anti-communists often say about the ussr. They paint it as a dreary gray depressing world where every thing they buy is same so they ""lost"" their individuality and the outside world is more hip and "exciting" how do you counter this propaganda? data and stats are good but they're not nearly as powerful as selling the 1984 doomerism Show them their "choices" are just empty shells where one can have the semblance of expressing his personality but are really devoid of any meaning. Show them how little agency we really have in our lives because we are constantly constrained by our material conditions, how much private firms really control our actions. >Also how would a socialist state deal with the internet as it is a very powerful tool for counter revolutionary activities Good question, I do think some form of internet control to be necessary, maybe not outright censorship depending on how proficient the population is with english.
>>829504 Tell them their perception of the USSR only reflects western propaganda (largely fucking moooovies) and they should be mortified with shame for believing what is well understood to be cold war propaganda much less repeating those tropes out loud.
(616.68 KB 500x541 pog.png)
>>829118 mmmmmmm monke
Capital Vol 2. I loved Volume 1 but so far(chapter 3) this one is boring as fuck. Does it get better?
>>829963 Have you considered being more intelligent?
>>830096 I get it, it's just boring to read. I'm asking if the writing gets any better.
>>830100 No idea, sorry fam. Just wanted to point out what a shit answer >>830096 was. Wasn't the later volumes composed by Engels? The first volume (at least what I've read, CH 1 and 2) is pretty funny, the footnotes are great, and in general I liked the writing (although chapter 1 was unnecessarily complex IMO). Perhaps Engels didn't feel it was appropriate to add his character into the writings and chose to merely present the composed text as close to the source material as possible?
Anyone know the main differences between foco theory and protracted people's war?
Is there any leftist literature, YouTube video or whatever that shits on job interviews? I think it’s one of the worst rituals of our times: two people sitting in a room pretending not to be human for at least an hour or so
>>830258 >foco theory Small, trained group will get the people to fight. >protracted people's war Guerrilla war where the populace is already backing/is the army.
Whats the marxist response to the claim that capitalists deserve their profit because of the risk they take in advancing an investment to get the production going?
Is it better to make your enemies think you are weaker or stronger than you actually are?
>>830528 Both depending on the situation. You don't have to pick one or another permanently.
>>830528 according to sun tzu strong when you're weak, weak when you're strong
>>830558 Yeah, this is what makes the most sense to me
>>830414 It's circular reasoning. Their justification for capitalism is...capitalism. anyway the risk is becoming a wage-labourer.
>>829504 There's that one article that says sex in the DDR was way better during the communist days than after
>>830414 Under bankruptcy law and the way CEOs are compensated and the stock market is going it's actually pretty low risk to be a porky, worst case scenario you fuck over some loans to a bank or something, so it's not like the risk actually deserves much of a reward. Only petty bourg have really high risk from investing, and those are irrelevant and going to be outcompeted by monopolists
How to argue with someone who rotates all the usual accusations against communism, but complains about tl;dr if you address all of them?
>>831157 With a gun
>>829577 Ask here: >>117378
>>831157 Call him dumb for not being capable of listening to simple arguments and therefore his position must also be dumb, given that people who stand by them are dumb
Did same sex marriage exist in pre-biblical times?
(86.67 KB 339x425 1489243118278.jpg)
how do i read theory. can't even completely read the commie manifesto pamphlet it all feels so rigid and abstract to me the only things i understand is when it is being wrote in historical sense like a biographical manner i don't have the slightest grasp on communism or socialism and i am reading on my phone should i make notes?? i dropped out of college years ago and my brian has been rotted because of no pracice. i feel sleepy within the first paragraph
>>831354 Define marriage
>>831657 That's understandable. The language is old and outdated and no one has updated. Watch some videos on Paul Cockshott's channel, they're pretty easy to understand.
>>830414 According to the LTV, what they invested was probably other people's labor anyway.
(145.78 KB 464x576 1599012059926.jpg)
Is he the ugliest guy /pol/ has ever produced?
>>831735 Wtf based I used faceapp on that guy just a few days ago And yes
What is the best Eng translation of Capital? I'm looking at the Moore and Aveling translation, but I've heard (and experienced a little) that it's not as good as it could be. Yet I've also heard that the most recommended alternative, the Fowkes version, has numerous errors too. I'm sort of obsessive about these things, so does it really matter which I pick? Is it it worth worrying about the mistranslations? Thanks.
What books should burgers be reading right now?
>>832111 Lenin What is to be done and State and revolution
>>831735 Literally looks like a monkey.
what are bad stuff Lockheed Martin has done?
>>829118 What are some good history books about the Chinese Civil War, Cultural Revolution, and Mao’s Rule of China that aren’t blatant western anti-China propaganda. I’ve read Mabo Gao’s Battle For China’s Past but I’m wondering if there’s anything else like this.
Why is the monkey on a bus?
>>832668 Because he's smart enough to acknowledge the superiority of public transport but not enough to understand that trains are the better option.
>>832582 Producing war vehicles for an imperialist power
>>832582 lobbying for more war so they can sell more military equipment
>>831354 Marriage was mostly a property arrangement thing. Commoners getting married didn't really matter and wasn't a big deal.
>>831157 <Don't make an argument if you're not prepared to have the argument.
>>831657 You could try the Leftypedia article on either the book or the material covered in it. Often the wiki does a better job of explaining things plainly. https://leftypedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Wage_labour https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Communism_(society)
As far as I know communism entails a stateless society. So what's the difference to anarcho-communism?
>>833812 Anarchism seeks to destroy all forms of hierarchy as it views any type of hierarchy to be inherently unjust and oppressive. So a government as we know it wouldn't exist in an anarchist society, it would be replaced by some other form of governance not based around hierarchies. Meanwhile in a communist society shit like government would still exist, because Marxism isn't about abolishing hierarchies but private property (the withering away of the state is an indirect result of this). So when class society is ended by reaching the material conditions of high-stage communism the state would cease to exist by default, as the Marxist definition of the state is a political apparatus one class uses to oppress another. Because of this it's incorrect when socialists talk of "we both want the same goal so why do we fight", since an anarchist stateless society would inherently be different to a communist stateless society due to the theoretical differences of anarchism and communism. I ultimately still believe in lefist unity, but the argument of the same goal should be dropped.
>>833844 The USSR had no private property for decades, did it not have a state?
>>833851 No, because a higher-stage of communism isn't just the abolition of private property; it includes elements such as abolition of wage labor, abolition of currency, no more commodity production, etc.
>>833812 There is no difference in the end goal, the difference is that anarchist belive that you can immediately abolish the state, Marxists says that the state is a tool to be used to build toward communism and it will just fade away as classes disappear.
>>829963 Volume 2 and 3 are published after Marx' death. They aren't as important if you only want a solid grasp on Marxist economics and don't care about all the details. The most important concepts outside of Volume 1 is the tendency of the rate of profit to fall in Volume 3. So maybe you could read these works more selectively.
>>831083 It actually got turned into an entire book.
>>831657 https://www.marxists.org/archive/mandel/1967/intromet/index.htm This is the most simple and concise introduction to Marxism you can find IMO.
>>833812 Difference is communists want a transition period we usually call socialism, while anarcho-communists want to switch as quickly as possible.
>>833851 The USSR did have private property though (sadly).
Is it conceivable that individual capitalists could be morally and socially good people despite their historic role as exploiters and opressors?
>>833844 >>833897 >>833918 Thanks >>833844 >Meanwhile in a communist society shit like government would still exist, because Marxism isn't about abolishing hierarchies Wouldn't that be another source of oppression in a post-socialist world?
Ok guys, if "(social) being determines consciousness" then why people who belong to the working class (and earn small salary) think that neoliberalism is gool think and that communists should leave the rich alone.
>>833970 "The ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas"
>>833942 >Is it conceivable that individual capitalists could be morally and socially good people despite their historic role as exploiters and opressors? Yeah. Marxism doesn't say that bourgeois are bad (even if they might be). We don't even need to use moral arguments (even though we could) because we have more scientific arguments by our side. Our problem with capitalism is not its individual actors, but the system itself. If someone seizes Jeff Bezos' property, while it may be based, some other capitalist might take his place. We are for an overhaul of entire systems, not for removing certain figureheads of that system.
>>833943 >Wouldn't that be another source of oppression in a post-socialist world? Oppression is only possible when another person has power over you. In a truly communist society (moneyless, classless, stateless), how could this be? Where would this power come from? It can neither come from economics nor from politics.
>>834004 Superior biology. Better manipulation skills. Informal hierarchies.
>>834037 That's not oppression. Some bullying you because you are a brainlet is not oppression.
>>830414 Yes, it does take a risk. I don't deny that. However, it takes a risk with other people's labor just as much as it does with the capitalist's money. It also is entirely reliant on other people's labor. The capitalist "self made man" thing is a total myth.
>>831657 Read up on history related to it, and read some explainers like An Introduction to Marxist Economic Theory.
>>834314 If I cum in your mom's vagina, and time is only what we perceive it as, does that mean I'm your father?
>>834323 Uhh we do look up COINTELPRO, Fred Hampton, etc.
>>833943 >Wouldn't that be another source of oppression in a post-socialist world? Essejtially it's what this anon is saying >>834043; opression in the Marxist sense of the word would cease to exist
>>834043 >That's not oppression Some bullying you because you are smaller (height), disabled or whatever is oppresion. By better genes, oppression can arise on these point, and this argument: >Some bullying you because you are a brainlet is just missing a point
>>833844 >Meanwhile in a communist society shit like government would still exist, because Marxism isn't about abolishing hierarchies Full communism is about abolishing a state tho
>>834401 Government and state aren't the same thing
>>834403 I know, I just wanted to point this out, because many "communists" do not know about it.
>>834398 Oppression is something systematic. You getting a wedgie in middle school does not mean your bully oppressed you. lol
>>834412 >Oppression is something systematic That's right! But in the stateless, classeless, moneyless communist society there will still be genetic differences between people - and some people will benefit from it, systematically. For example, larger men will be more valued because they can work more effectively, and just as "more attractive" women will be more valued for any other reason. You will not eliminate such differences just by overthrowing classes. Sorry. It's more complicated.
>>834412 This has taken root in our heads too much, that some people consider the weaker/disabled/genetic inferior people ones to be worse or something. This should be eliminated. Because people will not be treated equally then. But to do this you need a complete change of mentality, which will not come with just the overthrow of classes.
>>834429 I don't think there's anybody here who contradicts what you have said
>>834439 Inferior implies worse famalam, this "anti-ableism" is nothing but idealism. Obviously being a dick to retards is bad but to equalize oneself to them out of empathy is just being condecending. You are better than them, so what? What in being better make the situation better or worse?
>>834461 >What in being better make the situation better or worse? Power relations. And anti-ableism is not idealism like you said, this is a mindset that we must accomplish with the creation of a fully communist system. You must understand that not all things are dependent. We have no influence on some. We have no influence on our intelligence (although it can be exercised, scientifically proven), skin color, height, appearance. With the current mindset taken from the capitalist model of competing for everything, even genes, moving to a new mindset will be difficult and time consuming. But it cannot be forgotten, because it will lead to tragedy and more inequality. This is one of the problems of a fully communist system that must be tackled.
>>834472 Good, bad, or ugly?
Thoughts on people like Snowden or Assange?
Does anyone know a way to read THE ECONOMIST for free?
>>834585 Based
(161.27 KB 1527x601 infinite growth.JPG)
>>831670 cockshott's lectures are great. It really greases the wheels for some more reading later. hate to say it, but I did wish his presentations had a little more showmanship. would like to see how capitalists rationalize it
Ok tell me wtf is this "body without organs" thing. I don't understand it.
>>834610 Ok nevermind, I think I've found a solution: https://magazinelib.com/all/the-economist/
Is resistance to imperialism the same as resistance to globalism?
>>831661 a union between two people.
>>834662 Depends on how you define globalism
>>834662 'globalism' is more about nationalism and separatism in favor of hegemonic powers. Globalists don't think its globalism when you extract super profits from the third world, that's just good capitalism to them. Anti-Imperialism is in many ways the opposite. The resistance to capitalism in the third world accelerates "globalism". Where globalism is defined as an international bourgeoisie dissolving nationalist spooks in favor of the free flow labor and all the rest of it. In a world where Chaing shek won, China looks more like India or Africa, and it takes a longer for the first world to suffer austerity both financially and culturally
>>834706 India has a population almost as large as chinas, but Hollywood doesn't pander to India, only to China. That's what I mean.
Does anyone have any suggestions for writings by what you could call Conservative Leftists and Socialists? Not sure how to explain it, don't know much about it yet. Maybe someone like Georges Sorel. Something to do with nationalism and idealism as related to Marxism and Socialism.
Is there actually anything wrong by judging people based on the morals of their life? Yeah slavery is always immoral but if you were someone well off a few hundreds years ago chances are you would've been trained your whole life to view it as right As a side note I don't care if people hold Nat Turner as a hero even if he killed a few younglings, that was the world he knew.
>>834684 Thanks. I will give it a try.
>>835115 No, it's good that you understand and judge people in context, I'd argue it's the only way of judgement or analysis that makes sense
>>834856 >Conservative >Leftists
>>834712 India doesn't need to be pandered to in the same way because they have a far fewer restrictions on the import of media.
>>836118 Imagine leftism but darkies live among their own kind, gender roles are enforced and the homos are kept down.
>>836283 but why
>>836283 >darkies live among their own kind Spooked >gender roles are enforced Read Engels, also just generally fuck off as gender equality has always been important to leftism. >homos are kept down I'd rather just leave them alone, though a lot of faggotry is bourgeois in nature so wouldn't really be a problem under socialism. Seriously you're retarded as fuck.
>>836303 >a lot of faggotry is bourgeois in nature how exactly?
>>834043 It's not oppression if you get shot by a school shooter.
>>836371 Read Engels
>>836429 I have
>>836294 Comfort.
>>836441 Why is it confortable? Because you don't have to question your preconceived notions?
Is the implementation of labor vouchers in a socialist country impossible without ending trade with all countries (capitalist or not) you're trading with?
>>837223 Just because you have vouchers for your citizens doesn't mean you can't have currency like silver bullions specifically for international trade.
>>837268 Could you have "socialist exploitation" then, where the high productivity labour voucher society just has enterprises which buy using money like silver from the capitalist 3rd world, the latter of which exploits its workers. The socialist society then has a monopsony on the products of the now capitalist external world, the external world never quite developing socialism in a rational planned direction but the socialist "first world" has developed a rationally planned socialism but benefits from the exploitation elsewhere.
>>837279 Of course you could. And social imperialism is based, actually.
>>837268 Where would you get the bullions from though? What if your country doesn't have silver as a resource ready to extract? And if you say "buy them from people who export silver", how? With what money? Where could a country using a labor voucher system gain monetary profit from?
>>837292 >social imperialism is based, actually why
>>837223 Read Cockshott's TANS.
>>837295 You are aware that most of the international trade currently happens in dollars regardless of the currencies used by the countries partaking in the trade, right? Why would the fact that you are using labor vauchers for your internal exchanges change your ability to trade internationally?
>>837223 This is an entire chapter in Towards A New Socialism (Chapter: Trade With Capitalist Countries). You will get a thorough answer there. Basically, the labor vouchers are treated as a currency in international trade but as vouchers in the domestic economy.
Why do you hate small business owners again?
>>838334 Their businesses are inefficient compared to large-scale enterprises, and on top of this they're usually some snotty, greedy, "I made myself"-type of person.
>>838186 This makes a hell of a lot more sense than the other replies I got, thank you for the answer
>>838186 Also another thing I just thought about which could potentially work is that when a voucher system is initiated in a country, all the old currency would be seized of course, but instead of destroying it, it could be used specifically for these international affairs situations with capitalist (or socialist countries which still use currency), shit like imports, investing in some place, etc. Investing and exporting national resources would ensure this currency designated solely for this situation never runs out.
Why would indigenous peoples ally with communists if communists (at least the type here) proudly insist that their extermination and conquest by European colonial powers was progressive and necessary?
>>839150 Because the end result is a better deal than what we have today.
>>839150 >begging the question nigga.
>>839240 I dont know what begging the question is
>>839242 Seems I had the wrong definition. Tl;dr begging the question is circular reasoning. You are implying that communists think genocide of indigenous people is progressive because they think a moment in history were indigenous people were genocided was progressive. This isn't the case. No communist thinks genocide itself has ever been progressive. What the communist is saying here is that colonialism was an inevitable step in the historic process of that time, and it developed the colony's productive power immensely. Probably, given enough time, the society that was colonized would have developed similarly, so in a sense, colonialists fast forwarded a lot of that development. I wouldn't say it was socially progressive though, I'm not sure if anyone has made the case, except perhaps in the slave societies of the new world, but I am unaware of such cases. Anyways, you are also somewhat implying that they shouldn't ally with communists because communists actively support indigenous genocide, which is not the case. And you are implying that indigenous people cannot be communists, by questioning whether an indigenous communist can ally himself with himself. (Which is frankly either racist, essentialist, some type of bigotry, or colonialist). Indigenous people can be communist just as much as mayoskins. So basically, the question doesn't make sense. Barring false-consciousness (ie, being a liberal/right winger/useful idiot), why wouldn't an indigenous person ally with a leftist? There is no reason. In fact, barring false-consciousness, an indigenous person is already a leftist, just as much as any other person :)
>>839330 I guess I just personally get bothered when people call it “progressive” what happened, my maternal grandfather actually descended from one of the first peoples to be contacted in the Caribbean, it’s always uncomfortable to see something so awful be given a sort of positive spin by leftists when the bourgeois imperialist state itself already justifies these acts
>>839365 You're right to be bothered. Colonialism is inexcusable. Sure it's what those kinds of societies do, but that's one more reason they're bad. All the time spent arguing that the crimes of these countries were unavoidable or even "necessary" is time that could instead be spent questioning how things could have happened differently, how to recognize the potential for crimes against humanity, and how to avoid them in the future.
>>839365 >>839410 And also it tends to blithely ignore that a lot of colonialism is ongoing in the periphery of western states, even with examples as obvious as Puerto Rico getting shafted for disaster relief.
>>839365 I get it. Marxists have a different vocabulary and tend to forget that other people don't share it, nor understand the underlying framework. I'd point out, if you allow the unsolicited criticism, that you might be attaching yourself to an identity that in a way "doesn't belong to you", nor your grandfather. The people who committed genocide no longer exist. The society that was victim of genocide no longer exists. Kind of like the ship of theseus. I have noticed many times some ambiguous grudge against european colonizers among friends and family. Depending on their idiocy and racism, they either identify with the colonizers or with the colonized, not realizing that they "are" both. My point is that your relation to the people who suffered is tenuous at best. There is no such thing as genetic memory of suffering (inb4 someone links some scientism bullshit). If you live in the city, you are not separated from society. If you have white ancestry, your ancestry was part of the problem. Don't descend into victimhood nor white guilt. Analyze what is happening now, figuratively forget the past. The same thing that happened to the colonized is happening now, basically (except the genocide and slavery). We are being coerced to work. I don't know if I put my point across. My point is basically that you are not indigenous and shouldn't think yourself as such. I know the US prizes identity above all else, and acts as if anyone who isn't the stereotypical white family is "different", "cultural", "exotic" and somehow apart from society (despite that stereotypical white family being an extreme minority). I think it is crucial to drop these fantasies. There is no such thing as the "standard citizen" we are all "peripherals", we are all "indigenous", we are all oppressed in some way or another. This is what binds us, but it is also what separates us. Anyways, I hope you take my criticism in good faith.
>>839508 >marxists tend to forget other people are stupid and need to be talked down to like babies, you see genocide was actually based nigga shut up fr
>>839528 >exploitation >democracy >value >liberal >property >ideology >rights >commodities all of these things mean different things to a marxist than to a non-marxist. Marxist use them as if everyone knew their meaning. This is just jargon of a knowledge sector. Same thing happens when you speak to doctors or engineers. If you go further, the way you interpret everything also changes, like the role of ideology in science and viceversa. In general, seeing how everything the relation of everything to everything is what gives rise to those things themselves, as we experience them. It is a profoundly different way than normal and leads to conclusions that are hard to grasp without the underlying line of reasoning. >you see genocide was actually based When did I say this? I didn't even imply it, I actually said the opposite. Nigga you shut the fuck up.
(822.59 KB 1920x1331 chad-leatherdom-bolsheviks.jpg)
Did bolshevik divisions with the dress of the bikers in this painting actually exist? <Filename related
>>839635 When is the painting from
>>839528 t. child
>>839624 >In general, seeing how everything the relation of everything to everything is what gives rise to those things themselves, as we experience them. What does this mean?
>>839365 >positive spin From where do you get this impression?
(37.52 KB 574x516 Download.jpg)
Is there a tangiable difference between these books?
someone just said that socialism is stateless acourding to Marx, does anyone have a quote disproving this?
>>843185 He is mistaking communism for socialism. Marx sometimes uses these words synonymously, but he also differs between lower stage communism ans higher stage communism. What we call socialism nowadays is, thanks to Lenin, what Marx called lower stage communism. What we call communism outright would be what Marx calls higher stage communism. The endgoal of communism is a moneyless, classless society where the state has withered away. This does not mean that the journey to this endgoal will be stateless in Marx's theory. In fact, it is pronounced that the state must be seized and now function on behalf of the workers first. Therefore your friend is wrong. Here is something talking about this withering away. >Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific "When, at last, it becomes the real representative of the whole of society, it renders itself unnecessary. As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon our present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from these, are removed, nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary. The first act by virtue of which the State really constitutes itself the representative of the whole of society — the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society — this is, at the same time, its last independent act as a State. State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The State is not "abolished". It dies out."* and "*Socialized production upon a predetermined plan becomes henceforth possible. The development of production makes the existence of different classes of society thenceforth an anachronism. In proportion as anarchy in social production vanishes, the political authority of the State dies out."
>>843185 Get them to read Section IV of Chapter I of Lenin's State and Revolution if they aren't convinced. He goes through M&E's ideas on the proletarian state. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch01.htm#s4
Was there a time on the internet before lifeless, power tripping jannies ruined every fucking website?
Honestly if the working class is so fucking retarded that even now they defend their porky bosses and the system why not just abandon them to their fate? If workers want to sacrifice themselves so porkies make a dime why not just say fuck it and let them? The whole world is dying and Amerisharts can’t even conceive of planned economies as a solution, pretty much no one can, why not just write humans off as a retarded failed experiment and just do drugs until the proles’ complacency and brainwashing finally causes the world to end?
>>830579 But, the wast super majority of capitalists were wage labourers and remain wage labourers for a significant duration of the establishing of their company. They are not risking their current situation, but the loss of the accumulated labour in the form of the investment.
>>844015 If that trend is true it's still irrelevant to the validity of the argument. It's circular reasoning.
>>843956 Not really, theres always been a few places that have resisted jannie excess but theres never been a time when it wasn't majority jannie rule. Some of the early things like usenet had less of a problem though thanks to no eternal september.
How do I reconcile my love of shitty fast food with my resentment towards capitalist excesse and inefficiency?
>>844087 In communism the fast food will be even better
Was it ever proven that Coca Cola ever hired mercenaries to kill union members? What proven atrocities has Coca Cola been involved in?
Has anyone read An introduction to the logic of Marxism by George Novack? Is it any good?
>>844087 Socialism would mean more incentive to automate fast food production than in capitalism so that you could receive a burger for the fraction of the labor vouchers you would otherwise have to pay.
>>843980 History will absolve us, but not the capitalists (if humanity still exists).
(1.15 MB 1817x660 nazi capitalist (4).png)
(674.93 KB 792x650 nazi capitalist (5).png)
(428.28 KB 617x650 nazi capitalist (6).png)
Someone sauce me who these 2 idiots are, I can't remember their names and google gives me jack shit.
>>846107 Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises
>>846131 which is which?
>>846140 Left to right. Just looking up the first few words of their quotes in quotation marks in a search engine brings this up.
>>846174 Thanks, Like I said, google, gave ME jack shit. As I've learned different computers give different results.
>>846188 I don't think it's about different computers. I did use Startpage in particular, though.
if someone has a Jacobin subscription can you copy and print screen this article for me and post it here. Many thanks https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/12/red-diaper-babies
Theorylet question here: when Marx says value here, as opposed to use-value, does he simply means exchange-value? From Chapter I of Capital Vol I: >While, therefore, with reference to use-value, the labour contained in a commodity counts only qualitatively, with reference to value it counts only quantitatively, once it has been reduced to human labour pure and simple.
What is Mandel referring to in this aside about French Communist Party theorists in his Introduction to Marxist Economic Theory? Was it some recent controversy? >The concept of a minimum living wage or of an average wage is not a physiologically rigid one but incorporates wants which change with advances in the productivity of labor. These wants tend to increase parallel with the progress in technique and they are consequently not comparable with any degree of accuracy, for different periods. The minimum living wage of 1830 cannot be compared quantitatively with that of 1960, as the theoreticians of the French Communist party have learned to their sorrow. There is no valid way of comparing the price of a motorcycle in 1960 with the price of a certain number of kilograms of meat in 1830 in order to come up with a conclusion that the first “is worth” less than the second.
Anyone have that document where China calls NATO a defensive alliance against "Soviet social-imperialism"?
>>832582 Minor point compared to warmongering but them and boeing did quite a number on the US space program with cost-plus contracts (basically every NASA commissioned manned space vehicle since Saturn V / Apollo has been crap)
I have questions about Lysenko. Basically, of all the things said about him in shit like Wikipedia or similar bourgeois sources, what is true and what is a complete fabrication? And lastly, of the things he actually said/believed, what was correct and what wasn't?
How do you talk to postmodern conservatives? IE: social consensus determines reality, ideas and willpower determine outcomes, there are no undeniable facts but just different narratives, capitalism is factually the best, races and sexes have natural roles, humans wouldn't care about each other if not for religion, etc
What happened at the moscow trials?
>>849085 Deconstruct their entire world view with materialism, of all the things you mentioned some stick out as being incredible spooked and idealist, such as the races' and sexes' supposed "natural" roles. Also, might only work if these people are self-proclaimed postmodernists, but point out how ridiculous essentialism is if you view it through postmodern lenses.
>>849137 The main opposition of Stalin in the CPSU were tried and executed. I don't remember too well for which of them their crimes were complete fabrications, if it was all of them, none of them, etc. A lot of different communists have different views on this event depending on their particular tendencies.
What are some good history books?
When France invaded essentially of Europe, what was Napoleon planning to do if they succeeded? Annex all? Turn the losers into puppets?
>>849718 Meant to say all of Europe*
How did the USSR make their first nuke?
>>849085 it's not worth your time. the only way to become a postmodern conservative is to give up the very notion of objective reality specifically so you can construct a world view around the things you are committed to believing. they are literal nihilists. there is no way to reach them, nothing you can say or demonstrate will ever convince them to give up the beliefs they are committed to on a deep emotional level. the only solution to these people existing is to wait for them to die and try not to let future generations be corrupted.
>>843980 it's a very bourgeois and evil notion that not understanding something means you deserve to suffer. some people are oblivious, dishonest, intellectually lazy or just obstinate, sure, and that can be infuriating when you know you're right. but even if that meant they deserve their fate, most proles are just trying to survive and keep their head down. you can't expect more of people than their circumstances dictate. all you can do is try to help change their circumstances so they can rise above the old ones.
People say that one of the definations of fascism is that the enemy is both weak and strong but is it really so? wasn't the point that "the enemy will crush us if we do nothing but if we do something we will crush them?" Not a contradiction but a call to action
>>849718 think he wanted to break up his main rivals and buff up his allies. Bavaria was given what's the western half of modern Austria
Who the fuck is Sam Hyde?
>>852551 >Samuel Whitcomb Hyde (born April 16, 1985) is an American comedian, writer, performance artist and actor. He co-created the sketch comedy group Million Dollar Extreme (MDE) with Charls Carroll and Nick Rochefort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Hyde
>>852569 Is he actually a white nationalist though?
Is it normal to coom to living under different ideologies?
>>852573 Probably. He just does 4chan humour so it's ironic but I guess he's alt right at heart. World Peace was funny as hell though
>>852757 Wtf? As in you wack off thinking about how your life would be under communism/fascism/etc? What's arousing about that?
>>849468 A People's History of the United States A People's History of the World They are pretty lib but for entry level they will cover shit that's usually ignored. Then go read Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti as a point of contrast.
whats post leftism?
>>852775 dude you can't call people you disagree with funny, they are all boring and unfunny
>>853017 Wrong.
>>851915 That idea comes from Umberto Eco, specifically this essay: https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/ >8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy. The last sentence is key. Think of all the times the Axis underestimated the abilities of their enemies, like Italy's invasion of Greece, Hitler thinking they could beat the Soviets in a couple of months, bringing the isolationist US into the war, etc.
How much do you believe genetics factor into antisocial behavior and what would it change if they did play a major role?
>>853184 To be fair almost everybody thought Germany could beat the USSR in months, especially after their surprisingly fast victory against France. The point still holds tho.
>>853184 I believe there was more to Greece than just Fascist delusions. Mussolini had in his brightness been changing and reorganizing the invasion force stationed in Albania so the Italians had far less badly organized men during the time of the invasion than they intended to. >>853201 And wasn't the invasion a necessity from nazi perspective? The USSR was growing stronger every year, two such states couldn't coexist for long. So if the Germans ever wanted a chance to defeat the USSR, especially before the increasingly belligerent USA entered the war, they needed to strike as soon as possible,
>>853187 It's about 36.7% >what would it change nothing
>>848913 Reasking this
Apparently Fidel and Franco had a pretty good relationship with each other, which carriend on to Cuba-Nationalist Spain relations. Is this true? And why was this so?
>>851520 Very carefully.
>>849718 Annex some and puppet the rest. We would still have had a capitalist world order just with a slightly earlier transition of most European nations to Republics and French as the lingua franca. Ultimately not of particular note for socialists.
Should I just end it all? I have nothing left to live for.
>>854263 Stream it
>>854263 Go out with a bang and kill some porkies before you kys
>>854263 Yes, please go ahead and end all of capitalism.
What's the materialist analysis of the tits vs ass question?
>>854263 Are there people who love you? If yes, then you shouldn't kill yourself. (This is also the rule which I adhere to)
>>854263 seek help the hotlines are all manned 24/7
someone redpill me on bakunin please. wasn't he just basically a conspiracy theorist who hated marx because jew? i tried to read his stuff but i couldn't get past much because it felt like one big heated gamer moment.
>>854380 Seriously, don't call 911. Here is what they do with suicidal people: First, they beat you up and put you in shackles. Then they deploy you in a mental hospital, lock you up and feed you with sedatives. My advice: Don't call 911, stay at home and drink some good whisky. Go to bed and look how you feel the next day.
>>854464 Depends on the country too, if he's not American ringing the emergency services may actually help. Of course hotlines are generally better at dealing with it anyway.
Which nations are likely to develop/acquire nuclear weapons in the near future?
>>854526 Obvious one would be Iran.
>>854530 Which would trigger an arms race with Saudi Arabia, least of all.
(13.92 KB 258x258 huh.png)
Why was/is the USSR considered by some as an economic powerhouse when there was a lot of starvation/genocides happening within it and the iron curtain didn't let anything go in? Is it in some way similar to China where the state props up companies which then are used to leverage and meddle on corporations/nations all over the world? No joke I'm disgusted by the idea, but some asstwat may say something like that and I'll only get cheap answers on /pol/ derivatives
>>854622 Coming to think of it, China also has a lot of bullshit in it and is still considered an economic powerhouse. My questions still stand
>>854526 Sweden
>>851520 Espionage desu And physics THe CIA got the prediction for the development of the bomb wrong by a few years >It is probable that the capability of the USSR to develop weapons based on atomic energy will be limited to the possible development of an atomic bomb to the stage of production at some time between 1950 and 1953. On this assumption, a quantity of such bombs could be produced and stockpiled by 1956
>>854622 I'll start by saying that capitalist nations are habitual liars when it comes to all things communist, so you're probably gonna wanna forget at least half of what you've been told about the USSR, China, and every other commie nation. There's some long-ass rabbitholes to jump down, there. Anyways, the USSR jumped from being a serfdom to being a global industrial powerhouse in a fraction of the time it took everybody else at that point, which is hella impressive by any metric. Were it not for the west literally spending them to death, the USSR would've probably continued to prosper as such.
>>854686 >Anyways, the USSR jumped from being a serfdom to being a global industrial powerhouse in a fraction of the time it took everybody else at that point Yes but how?
>>854686 >the USSR jumped from being a serfdom to being a global industrial powerhouse Not impressive. Japan, Singapore, the UAE, and South Korea are examples of capitalist countries that developed quickly as well, only with a lot less killing.
How do I stop a toothache?
>>854850 Overthrow capitalism so you can afford proper healthcare.
Which country(ies) will become the next superpower(s)?
>>854923 China, but socdem will be their final form.
>>848913 Rereasking this
>>852826 yeah but can you guys just give me a summary?
>>855114 This thread is actually not very good for getting answers if you hadn't noticed
Just as a devil's advocate argument, couldn't you say cryptocurrencies are closer to having labour embodied in them like gold than fiat money, because of the effort in mining them?
>>855114 When people talk about post anything, it means a rejection of that concept. It's not like anti-leftism, but more something like, moving past this concept/ideology. Postmodernism for example doesn't mean antimodernism, but a rejection of modernism, moving past that belief. So postleftism is essentially moving past leftism, rejecting it, or to be more precise, rejecting what we currently understand of leftism. For example, I've read some things from postleftists and in the case of Marxism, they reject it as a grand narrative type shit, so they attempt to come up with new theories or interpretations of what leftism should be. Hopefully this clears it up a bit.
>>856311 >they reject it as a grand narrative type shit Didn't they read what they were criticising?
>>856396 They must've misunderstood it big time, postleftists are retarded.
>>856396 The grand narrative of Marxism is historical materialism, in case you were wondering.
>>856399 I have a post leftist anarchist friend he is against democracy or any organization. he jokes about killing whites, cis-genders, and straights and seems to think we can just never do labor again and believes in a gift economy. basically he's one hell of a radlib. this is why I was asking about post leftism to get a idea about what it is. why well my friend is very vague as to what it is as one and in general. me:if your reject democracy how do you make decisions him: idk why do we even need to make decisions me:if were not gonna work how do we make basic items everyone needs him: we just do our hobby and give to others me:how do we ensure everyone is gifting what everyone needs him:we just do. why does it matter anyways.
>>856691 Is your friend 16? He sounds very edgy, most radlibs are milque toast liberals that like cool sounding slogans and hanging around the hipster kids in the evening and going to their nice managerial job during the day, not whatever that is
>>854763 >Japan Started industrializing rapidly early on in the 1860s before even many European countries. Also was starting imperialist wars of aggression by 1910 when their domestic markets were slowing in growth >Singapore A tiny city state so hardly comparable, and got tons of material support from the west in exchange for purging of communist party >UAE Lol. >South Korea Literally killed proportionally more people through state backed violence in the early years than USSR/China
What the fuck happened with pic related? I was looking for the source of a quote Lenin references in Karl Marx: A Brief Biographical Sketch With an Exposition of Marxism: >Motion, in its turn, is regarded from the standpoint, not only of the past, but also of the future, and that not in the vulgar sense it is understood in by the “evolutionists”, who see only slow changes, but dialectically: “...in developments of such magnitude 20 years are no more than a day,“ Marx wrote to Engels, “thought later on there may come days in which 20 years are embodied” (Briefwechsel, Vol. 3, p. 127). Anyone have sauce? Searching Marx Engels Briefwechsel turns up pages in German, which I can't really read.
>>856814 >Japan I'm talking about the modern age after it got ruined after WWII. It recovered like Western Europe but faster and more impressively, becoming the 3rd largest economy on Earth and pioneering all sorts of technology along with South Korea. >Singapore Yes it's small, but a wonder of capitalism nonetheless. This one rock off the Malay peninsula has a GDP greater than most American states, and most countries for that matter. Thanks to the entrepreneurial leadership of Lee Kwan Yew first and foremost this was able to happen, where this tiny bit of land, without any natural resources, managed to develop and establish so much wealth on itself. The aid they got was minimal in terms of the big picture; the money that they got was mostly an investment because of how much Singapore had going for it. >UAE (You didn't address this so moving on). >South Korea Blatantly false, plus you have no qualms about North Korea doing the same so whatever. South Korea amassed its wealth like Japan did; through a strong, central government that attracted investments in various industries, particularly ones it led like electronics and other technology. North Korea stagnated after a while because their system is only good for building basic architecture but South Korea continues to thrive to this day. Yes it has problems, and yes it's not a utopia, but it's remarkably wealthy and advanced for such a small country; truly a wonder of capitalism and a testament to human ingenuity and hard work. Not to mention, socialist countries aren't that cool for developing quickly. They just took on previously-established technologies and methodologies, then made their people work like hell, and eventually did indeed end up with a part of their country industrialized… though not even to the same level of the West, and of course they had other problems too like frequent shortages of common things.
>>856937 I have this torrent: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:5968b3cddcf90311f752a482f49db61b0d92087c&dn=Marx-Engels%20Collected%20Works&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2F9.rarbg.to%3A2920%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.opentrackr.org%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.internetwarriors.net%3A1337%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.leechers-paradise.org%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.pirateparty.gr%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.cyberia.is%3A6969%2Fannounce and use a tool called 'pdfgrep' to search for things in all the works.
What are the main explanations as to why there weren't any successful revolutions in Europe outside of Russia?
>>857094 I searched for 20 years and found this fragment, no idea who wrote it: >America, whose business for 20 years past has been to slander me lol, to this day. I got a lot of matches, these seemed like likely candidates: >Marx & Engels Collected Works Volume 34_ Ka - Karl Marx.pdf:54:that now 8 or 10 HANDS can supply the necessaries of 100 where 20 years ago, it... >Marx & Engels Collected Works Volume 32_ Ka - Karl Marx.pdf:450:his labour capacity calculated over 20 years. Assuming that he ... >Marx & Engels Collected Works Volume 32_ Ka - Karl Marx.pdf:441: We have seen that over 20 years, capital increased sevenfold, >Marx & Engels Collected Works Volume 32_ Ka - Karl Marx.pdf:441:let us assume that it doubles itself in 20 years, and therefore the
>>857045 USA could pump more money into ROK than USSR could do for DPRK. Discrepancy isn't because of capitalist magic.
>>856937 >🤤🤤🤤What the fuck happened with pic related?🤤🤤🤤 🧐 Go read what's in your pic for the answer. >Anyone have sauce? Letter from Marx to Engels April 9, 1863. In the German MEW, that's volume 30, page 342. <obgleich nachher wieder Tage kommen können, worin sich 20 Jahre zusammenfassen The word I highlighted got translated with "embodied" in the text you got. I'd rather use "summarized" or "concentrated" instead. Anyway, you are not missing anything. Lenin is just stating that there are dumb "evolutionists" who see historic changes as something that happens in a smooth way, whereas in reality there are long streaks with barely any change and it can also happen that you get drastic changes in a short time, as Marx said.
>>857045 At the end of the day those countries were developed with the full backing of the most advanced and powerful countries in the world while those same countries did everything in their power to destroy any socialist state that did the same
>>857146 How did you find it?
>>857045 >Singapore >wonder of capitalism 25% of the GDP comes from state owned industries, government owns 90% of the land and gets its revenue from land tax combined with the aforementioned state owned industry, which is why income tax is so slow. 80% of the people live in social housing, and they actually use 5 year plans. Singapore is more fucking "socialist" than Venezuela.
>>857165 Government intervention is not socialist lol. I thought you commies knew that we buddy up with the guv a lot? We quite literally depend on them.
>>857175 Following this logic there basically never has been a socialist state besides North Korea so what's there to even worry about?
>>857192 Not true. First of all, there's helpful government intervention (Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher) and then there's harmful (FDR, Bernie Sanders). Plus, lots of other countries have had socialism, where they seized people's businesses and put them in the hands of the masses (which failed, so the government had to step in to prevent this system from completely falling apart, because what do you know, it actually takes things like ingenuity and gusto to run a business properly).
>>857154 I have the German MEW on my computer (except volume 44). The letters by Marx and Engels are in volume 27 to 39. Since it is a letter from Marx to Engels it can't be volume 36 or later (RIP Karl). I translated a part and looked for that.
>>857218 Massive liberalization, privitization and deregulation a la Reagan/Thatcher is the complete opposite of government intervention
>>848913 Rerereasking this
>>857146 >Letter from Marx to Engels April 9, 1863 Awesome, thanks! Looked it up and found the full sentence translated as "Only your small-minded German philistine who measures world history by the ell and by what he happens to think are ‘interesting news items’, could regard 20 years as more than a day where major developments of this kind are concerned, though these may be again succeeded by days into which 20 years are compressed." How's the translation here?
How did the CMEA work?
>>857278 Loser
>>856709 22 and he is from a middle/upish class family compared to me being from the lower class. both working class his fam just more people of college and bourgeois. I'm talking income in this case thou I understand thats not the marxist definition of class. just helpes explain our standard of living as kids Dude literally prides himself on edgyness and things as some from of praxis. he did introduce me to socialism when 16 but seems to be in the same state of mind.it
(102.32 KB 956x960 1596501866609.jpg)
can someone exsplain to me what "planned econimy" means?
>>857432 Production for use not profits
>>857432 economy but planning with committee's
>>857483 >committee's whats this?
>>857539 when you, like your toothbrush, belong to the committee
>>857432 Instead of having the market and the profit motive dictate the economy you plan it rationally: we have X amount of people and expect the growth for this year to be Y, so we need Z number of houses being built and α tons of food being produced etc.
>>857269 Pretty good translation, "compressed" fits even better than what I came up with.
Is it true that the FBI exaggerated the strength and stability of the USSR in order to justify further spending against it, meaning that some of the good things we hear about the USSR are untrue?
Should I defend every leftist idealogy just in case one of them picks up in popularity?
>>859305 No you should just defend Bidenism
(142.51 KB 323x720 starvation.png)
>>859305 Imo, do so if you think the normies you're talking to aren't going to lose their minds over what you're saying. When talking to people only I would suggest only doing so if the people shitting on whatever ideology are willing to at least listen to counterarguments (so almost never tbh).
>>859299 Well it probably will end up depending on where you get the information from. For something like CIA declassified documents (so not propaganda the government told to the American population) I can say it's most likely all very accurate and true, and of course even here they would show how the Soviets consumed more calories per day than Americans, so if it's from the CIA it's most likely true.
>>859299 Which "good things" do you refer to? I'm fairly confident that the CIA or FBI had way overestimated the industrial capacity and the nuclear capacity of the USSR throughout the Cold War, and certainly throughout the Reagan era in particular. I can't find the documents from the 1960s that show this, but I think Noam Chomsky talks about it (despite him being a infantile anti-communist). Kennedy's "missile gap" was a clear example of this overestimation though, but clearly he knew that it was false, whereas the CIA/FBI might not have known in certain estimations.
Is Canada's healthcare a bad example of socialism?
>>863758 Wow you may be too dumb to be a user of this site
>>863758 Socialism is not when the government does things. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production.
>>863758 Literally yes, because Canada is not socialist lol
>>864497 Why didn't he push for the study of Marxism in schools then?
In which work does Marx destroy Anarchism le epic style?
>>864692 Supposedly he did that in "Poverty of Philosophy" (a reply to Proudhon's "Philosophy of Poverty").
>>864698 Thanks man
What kind of mode of production did Ancient Egypt have? Most people were peasants, so… feudalism? But that was before the age of feudalism, but it couldn't have been a slave society since slaves were a minority in the economy, right?
How does socialism deal with fraudulent labor vouchers or the fraudulent production of labor vouchers?
>>865069 electronic payments. I really see no point in keeping paper money around tbh.
>>865221 How is it verified that work actually got done, and some gang of workers didn't just get an inside guy to print them free money?
>>865244 every worker has an account, every registered business keeps track of the hours of each worker and sends the data to the central system who adds credits to the account. If there is any suspect of irregularity you would be able to audit each and every hour worked.
>>865069 Labor vouchers aren't made of paper. It's more like a credit card and your budget is numbers in a database linked to your name. So how does one fake labor vouchers? The idea is that you get labor vouchers for working, so you have to fake the work. How does one fake the work? Could I as an individual fake the work at where I'm currently employed? Not really. Could a few conspiring people at the company I work at do such a thing? It doesn't look so easy. You clock in with your badge, you clock out with your badge. You log in at various terminals while working. You could lend a person you trust your badge, but there are cameras… Let's ignore the camera issue for a moment. You can fake out the clocks and the terminals once inside the building, but a single person entering the building can only use a single badge when entering. So to fake work, you have to at least show up and leave like you normally would. In between these two moments, you have to play hide and seek or something? Furthermore, some manager interacts with you throughout the day, so that person needs to be part of the conspiracy. Who your manager is for the day isn't fixed. Turns out it's a lot of work to avoid work. One problem with fake work is in services. That's also where money laundering happens in capitalism. When the type of service is just what one individual does for another, it's really easy to achieve the necessary group size for your conspiracy. So, suppose we have a system with labor vouchers in place and also assume that some drugs are illegal or that prostitution is illegal. You could still do the illegal activity and get paid for that in labor vouchers by cloaking it as a legal type of service. So the guy you give drugs or have sex with officially pays you for guitar lessons or whatever. Aside from that avenue, you can also ask them to obtain things for you with their vouchers as a "gift". Kinda shitty, but I don't think it's a big problem. I say that because I don't see the cancerous capitalist feedback loop forming, since consumer goods aren't means of production. So, your little crime on the side can't grow into a big business. Another problem is with activities that only a few people do, so we lack a good understanding of how much productivity to expect and what slacking looks like. That's also an issue in capitalism however.
>>836419 You're right, it's not. Someone shooting you with a rifle isn't "oppression", it's murder.
Why aren't co-ops socialist? If the whole economy were made of co-ops, would it be, considering that people would be in control of the MoP?
>>839528 If that's your takeway from that post, then you're an illiterate mongoloid and need to go back to fucking elementary school.
>>863845 Thank you.
Does arguing against fascists help anyone?
>>866061 I mean arguing with retards isn't good, but those in the middle are swayed by good arguments.
What was the Weimar republic and why was Germany's descend into fascism inevitable even if baby hitler got killed?
Can the economic system in Democratic Kampuchea under Pol Pot's rule be called the Asiatic mode of production or is this not a very precise term? (Inb4. Anarcho-primitivism - please don't)
Do you think you and a crew could singlehandedly defeat the Chinese and US militaries with a single T-34 Tank that is indestructible and can move on any surface, even water, at incredibly high speeds?
>>867042 The Great Depression made it inevitable
>>867042 Because the military wanted fascism all along.
Is there any proof that capitalist lobbying caused a decrease in standards for people seeking mortgages, which lead to the subprime mortgage crisis?
>>869954 You would eventually need to stop for petroleum.
>>865714 Socialism is a bit more than just controlling the means of production. 1. It means to produce for usefulness, not for profits. Capitalist firms must follow the profit motive, or otherwise they will go bankrupt. A socialist enterprise is not bound by this and can instead pursue things solely based upon how useful they are. 2. Socialism means slowly phasing out commodity production. A commodity is a good that is specifically made for exchange in mind. A co-operative will therefore produce for the markets, not for the direct consumption of people, which ties in together with the profit mechanism. > If the whole economy were made of co-ops While this wouldn't happen under capitalism, you are essentially describing market socialism, which existed in Yugoslavia.
>>866061 It might help you hone argumentation skills, see common arguments and convince people reading along. However, you shouldn't do it all they unless you get paid by Cuba to do it.
>>871821 all day* oops
>>867042 The Weimar Republic was Germany's first real attempt at muh liberal democracy. It descended into fascism because there was a massive leftist movement that had to be put down by the Succdems. In order to do this, they instigated massacres using the right-wing monarchists and proto-fascists, using them to kill communists and striking workers, including Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. This continued from the late 10s until the early 20s. Fascism was ultimately an attempt by the national bourgeoisie to salvage capitalism and counter the threat of a communist revolution. It uses radical leftist aesthetics and combines it with chauvinist societal policies and crude economic welfare populism. The Great Depression and the economic issues Germany faced because of the Treaty of Versailles after WW1 caused the economy to spiral, so fascism was a hail mary attempt at saving it from the reds.
>>871818 Why do pretty much all definitions of socialism require it only to have collective ownership of the means of production? What source includes the two points you made?
>>871831 >Why do pretty much all definitions of socialism require it only to have collective ownership of the means of production? Because the other points I have mentioned are only possible when at least a majority of the economy is publicly owned. Collective ownership is the pre-requisite of socialism. Socialism is however more complex than that. The definition you give is the starting point, the points I make are the things that are to be implemented under socialism over time. The lines of where state capitalism ends and market socialism begins is blurry, by the way. >What source includes the two points you made? Production for use is hard to pin-point to a single quote, it is rather the negation of production for profit, which arises from capital accumulation and commodity production. It's essentially what the entirety of Das Kapital is about. Same applies for phasing out commodity production. Socialism is, in a Marxist-Leninist sense, seen as a transition period where commodity production, i.e. production for exchange, slowly ends and gets replaced by production for use-values.. Here is a Marx quote: >Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. The phrase "proceeds of labor", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm
(83.10 KB 926x529 earlysettlercolonialism.jpg)
What makes the settler colonialism of the USA so much worse than settler colonialism everywhere else in the world?
(134.10 KB 500x607 1573734355458.png)
My older brother is a /pol/yp and I live with him, how the fuck do I negotiate this? I used to be a /pol/ retard too but over time my views have changed (mostly because ironically, he always emphasized that I should think for myself). It's really fucking obnoxious to constantly listen to a guy whose room is filled with Nazi memorabilia and anime posters who LARPS as a Spanish American (we're straight up Mexican) talk about jews and shit and listening to his delusional fantasies where somehow all the uighurs get killed but we don't I consider kicking his stupid ass mostly because he steals my food and is an annoying jackass in general but I don't think it's a good idea because he has more guns than me
How to answer and disprove to the lib argument of "Economic calculation problem"??
>>872650 Hold your nose and convert him.
>>872650 >We're Mexican Every time. I remember seeing a /pol/ meetup where a third of them weren't even white.
>>872650 >>873002 Here's some material that you'll find useful; debunks a lot of common right-wing myths: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
Why are communists frequently dour, humorless cunts? >t. Commie trying to figure out why I despise most other commies
>>830414 Capitalist investors risk nothing. Investments are made following a model of expected returns and diversified so that statistical rules keep overall returns predictable. If, on the other hand, you are talking about some petit-bourgeois entrepreneuer stupidly opening a mom-and-pop entirely with his own personal savings, well, he is just chum in the water for the big capitalists who come along later and recognize a potential avenue of profit, isn't he?
>>873000 Kantrovich's Method with modern computers.
>>872618 Both are just bad framing. Fuck Sakai.
>>873512 Most online are mentally ill
>>871805 When talking about mortgages, wherein the personal property of an individual who lives on the land in question becomes the private property of the financial institution that grants the mortgage, you can only ever be talking about capitalism, as that is the only mode of production wherein such an arrangement makes any sense. As for whether or not there is proof that lobbyists encouraged the enactment of that particular piece of legislation, I would imagine that one only needs to trace the document back to its original authors. It's not like congressmen personally write the bills that they introduce.
>>829963 It does seem to be a lot of going back over the stuff from Volumn 1. Also, it was put together from materials that were never intended to be read together as a book. That does not make for fun reading.
I have questions about Lysenko. Basically, of all the things said about him in shit like Wikipedia or similar bourgeois sources, what is true and what is a complete fabrication? And lastly, of the things he actually said/believed, what was correct and what wasn't?
>>867042 >why was Germany's descend into fascism inevitable even if baby hitler got killed? Because of the Treaty of Versailles. If the main Entente countries which made the treaty would've drafted something that actually made sense, the Nazis would have never become as popular as they did. But because the treaty was so punitive against Germany the rise of the Nazis was inevitable. Had the treaty been rational, the germans would've laughed off anyone who came to them with revanchist rhetoric.
>>873613 not a specialist but afaik: he was basically into permaculture at the time where industrial agriculture went into full swing, and got a lot of bad rep for it (given the urgency of the food situation), he correctly observed that some traits could be acquired in only few generations in certain condition (which we now know is true to some degree with arn and shit), like for example resistance to drought or temperature, and he dismissed some of the new science of genetics as "bourgeois bs" which was the big mistake (although there was prolly some bs said in the field when it was in its infancy).
>>873574 Honestly I wish 90% of online commies would die, I hate them so much
>>873617 The nazis coming to power had more to do with the great depression and the decline of democracy in the Weimar republic. The treaty made a lot of sense, the allies simply stopped enforcing it and begun appeasing Germany. You don't believe in the "Versailles was too harsh!" meme do you?
>>873649 It's not a meme, it's reality. It literally made no sense at all >inb4 I get called a nazi No, I'm not a nazi, and just because the nazis used the treaty of versailles as propaganda doesn't discredit this position. As a matter of fact, it shows how true this was, and how it convinced pretty much every german of following nazism. If the treaty had been smart, there would've been a very real chance of the KPD coming to power in Germany after the Great Depression, instead of the nazis. But of course, retarded imperialsists were retarded and made the worst treaty possible. How can you say the treaty made sense when Germany wasn't even occupied? German soldiers were still in France when they called for negotiations. FFS germany didn't even start the war, and they didn't commit any genocidal massacres against anyone which would justify a harsher punishment. It's ironic how Germany got relatively a soft punishment after WW2 and an insanely harsh punishment after WW1. Obviously if you contextualize it it makes more sense, it's still ironic though. So yeah, if the treaty wasn't as punitive, revanchist rhetoric wouldn't have convinced anyone, and the communists would've had much greater chances of winning. Discrediting this position is dumb as shit.
>>873667 What do you think would've been a proper treaty then? It looked good to me, it's just that after 1933 the allies simply let Hitler get away with anything. I don't think Versailles was too punitive, because Germany still existed after the treaty, whereas Austria-Hungary was dismembered. Reparations have been blown out of proportions, by Nazis specially, but Germany only paid 20 billion marks before Nazism and by the time Hitler got to power reparations had been cancelled
>>873749 A proper treaty imo would've been one that attempted to incorporate Germany back into the world, while mantaining their sovereignty (this was semi-done after WW2 but both Germanies saw their sovereignty limited for the first couple of years by their respective bloc powers, though it eased up later on). Basically what they did to Germany was what the US, NATO, and Gorbachev did to the USSR, left it destroyed and in absolute poverty. They wanted to knock down an imperialist rival instead of rehabilitating said country (coming back to my earlier bit on WW2, essentially what the USSR and US did for the DDR and the FRG respectively).
>>873839 Based
>>873649 The only reason they didn't enforce it is because of the conditions it forced into the world.
"Muh Versailles was too harsh )::" Germany shouldn't either lost the all of the Rhine and East Prussia or only lost Alsace Lorraine. Either destroy Germany or keep them happy enough that they won't sperg out again.
>>873914 Should've been rebalkanised.
>>873914 That would've made things even worse. WW2 probably would've started in the early 30s if they did that. The reason for this is exactly the same reason why Germany unified in the first place (and why it was a successful unification). There's literally no reason for so many german regions to be separated into different countries when they all have the same language, same culture, same religion, etc, etc. This was also why the balkanization of Austria-Hungary didn't cause any backlass; all the countries that became independent after had legitimate reasons (and reasons that made sense) for their separation from one single empire. Extremely different cultures, several different languages, different religions, all that shit. A Germany forced into balkanization would've pissed off all germans. They would've followed a Hitler figure immediately had that happened, and they would be even more resentful against their former enemies. Everything would've been worse for everyone, it would've been the worst possible outcome.
>>873914 Retard bait
>>873948 Independent Bavaria?
Split Germany in half and get France and Poland to absorb them.
You don't need an iq above 80 to understand that the same france and UK who gave up on Turkey wouldn't extend the war another year just for a more severe peace
>>874210 Invading to the Rhine would take like another month and the German army was already fleeing en masse.
How would a Zizekian state look like?
(197.46 KB 762x604 Zizekian platform.png)
>>874328 like so
>>874328 End of Evangelion but real.
(52.26 KB 1024x686 1594295922660.jpg)
Why do women of different races that denounce white men still end up dating or strive to date white men
>>874347 Because they're catty bitches
>>874347 Because those that complain about white guys fetishize white men (the abstract form of white men that they actually notice, i.e. hot ones) and when they fail to live up their abstract expectations of what white men are they screech and reeee. Same reason why incels screech and reee about women, there's an abstraction about what a woman is supposed to be and when their imperfections are made apparent there's a sense of betrayal about the whole realization.
Why did the human body evolve to have its asshole tucked inside a crack where it can easily get dirty?
(141.65 KB 1280x720 bt.jpg)
does Bat'ko post here?
>>874347 Cause they're liberals and liberals are covert white supremacists
>>874347 Same reason why sime guys fetichize Nazis or Demons, or some Nazis fetichize Jewish women. The idea of "Evil" is hot.
If the stock market isn't the economy, why do market crashes fuck it up? Is it literally the feels > reals of investors taking control?
>>874409 What is to be done about the Schizo question?
>>874364 Lurks here, certainly.
>>874378 There's a correlation up to a point. When it crashes, there's guaranteed to be layoffs and small business closures unless the government steps in. If it goes up, it doesn't guarantee it'll "trickle down" to the average worker in the form of reduced unemployment, increased wages or increased buying power if there are little to no restrictions in things like stock buybacks or speculative markets like real estate.
So I got a school assignment where I have to talk about "3 leaders who I think are positive" and I want to talk about leftists figures but obviously if I mention Stalin or Mao I'd get weird looks, any suggestions?
>>874467 Pol Pot
>>874467 Mandela, Che, Eugene V Debs,you might also throw in deng ziaping if you want to. I dont know if any of these qualify for leader but they are leading socialist that havent been succumbed to Western propaganda.
>>874499 >deng
>>874341 Based
>>874467 -Kim Il-sung and/or Ho Chi Minh for resisting Japanese(and American, but you don't have to say this) imperialism. -Mention some non politician communist like a Union leader or general. ->>874499 Eugene V Debs was based
Whats the ML response to the failure of Lysenkoism? An actual mistake by the USSR or is it something to actually defend?
>>875360 >Managing to shift fruit production to the north and increasing crop yields with vernalization is failure Ok
>>875364 So the ML position is that Lysenkoism was actually scientifically sound?
how will socialism deal with the problem of incels
>>875411 State mandated gfs
>>875369 It's something like "lysenko doesn't represent us but he totally did nothing wrong"
>>875411 By dealing with the material causes that makes young men turn themselves into Incels. Existing incels can be used as cannon fodder in the revolution.
What does Tankies think about stuff such as people like Sergei Korolev being sent to work in mines under horrible conditions?
>>875369 Lysenko is just like any other communist figure ever; a lot of info you'll read on him is a blatant bourgeois fabrication, and just like also every other communist, of the things he did actually say/propose, some of it was correct and did a lot of good to the country and some of it was wrong. Discrediting completely doesn't make much sense.
>>875720 What kind of good would you say he did?
where can I learn more about feudal guilds from a marxist perspective?
>>876037 He correctly observed that some traits could be acquired in only a few generations in certain conditions, traits such as resistance to droughts for example, which naturally helped in developing more efficient techniques on growing crops.
>>875369 can you even say what "lysenkoism" mean ?
(19.38 KB 284x320 hiroshima_nagasaki.jpg)
Communists will only think this was a war crime because it was America that got the bomb first, right?
(126.97 KB 1075x1200 chadito.jpg)
>>879363 If you won't ask things in good faith, might as well not ask at all.
>>876770 Alongisde completely denying genetics which set back soviet agriculture and is a flat out retarded thing to say on par with the nazis claiming half of physics was jewish.
>>879363 Yeah uh counter question, were you born a humongous faggot or did you develop that later?
(1.30 MB 640x1136 FuckAnime.png)
>>879363 Two nukes were not enough.
>>871894 >Production for use is hard to pin-point to a single quote, it is rather the negation of production for profit, which arises from capital accumulation and commodity production. It's essentially what the entirety of Das Kapital is about. Same applies for phasing out commodity production. Socialism is, in a Marxist-Leninist sense, seen as a transition period where commodity production, i.e. production for exchange, slowly ends and gets replaced by production for use-values.. What you call "socialism" is what Marx called the "dictatorship of the proletariat" - a political transition period. By the time that socialist/communist society exists there is no longer commodity production, private property, wage labour, etc. The DOTP is when the transition happens. The confusion of these terms is partly due to Lenin, who asserted without evidence that the lower phase of communist society described by Marx was called "socialism", and partly due to Stalin who redefined socialism as the form of state ownership achieved by the USSR after the First Five Year Plan. So today, many "Marxists" think that socialism or lower-phase communism is compatible with commodity production and wage-labor, which it isn't if we're using Marx's own concepts.
How do you think the times of lenin and everything would be if smartphones existed during then I'm reading footnotes about his biography and he constantly visits various places to talk with leaders and groups
>>879528 You are wrong. You are overestimating the level of communism Marx envisioned in lower-stage communism. Read Kritik des Gothaer Programms. Him advocating for labor vouchers in this stage is proof that wage labor hasn't been abandoned yet. The DOTP is not an additional transition stage in between capitalism and lower-stage communism, this makes no sense since the DOTP is not a mode of production. And stfu about writing Marxists in quotation marks. You think you're smart for pointing out that socialism under Lenin is called lower-stage communism under Marx? We commonly use the ML words these days since that's how history happened.
Probably has been asked already but is there a contemporary equivalent to The Origins of Family, Private Property and the State by Friedrich Engels? Something that is updated with new findings in understanding of the development of the history from materialistic point of view.
>>882415 Read Cockshott.
>>882415 How the World Works by Paul Cockshott. Released last year. You can find a PDF easily. Describes the different economies throughout history, starting with hunters and gatherers.
>>882480 >>882418 Thanks comrades
>>829504 >Also how would a socialist state deal with the internet as it is a very powerful tool for counter revolutionary activities By winning over mass support?
I want to read more about Tiananmen Square. Anything good?
>>882595 A source that's not a CIA honeypot please
Thoughts on Hezbollah and Hamas?
>>883453 A source that goes against the US narrative is a CIA honeypot? OK.
>>883453 wow youre fcking retarded
>According to historical materialism, each main epoch in the development of human society constitutes a specific mode of production, or socio-economic formation, of which five are now known; they are: Primitive Communism, Slavery, Feudalism, Capitalism and Socialism (that is, the lower stage of Communism). Is slavery really a stage of history? If anything it's primitive communism to feudalism, isn't it?
>>885235 >Is slavery really a stage of history? If anything it's primitive communism to feudalism, isn't it? You're skipping tens of thousands of years there.
>>885259 How so? In ancient history it seems very, very few states actually had an economy dominated by slavery, as opposed to peasant labor. Most economies seem to go from primitive communalism to kingdoms, then feudal states, correct?
>>885235 This early conception of historical materialism was developed with insufficient data. Anthropology and archaeology have since developed a more complete picture of the manifestation of various modes of production. Think of Marx's historical materialism like Darwin's theory of evolution: it most definitely works but not quite like the original author with his limited resources imagined it.
>>885280 I would say that feudalism is less like its own mode of production than it is a particular aspect of the agrarian ancien regime. Agrarianism had a lot of different faces.
>>885280 The kingdom stage you mention goes "palace economy to slavery". Only after that does feudalism appear. Also the theory is not deterministic and the transitions are not smooth. Semi-feudal societies have switched straight to socialism, then back to capitalism...and so on. Take it as an idea that capitalism is not the end all be all, and that it is a new development and can be replaced with newer ones. Some retards believe capitalism has been around forever because people bought and sold things.
>>885146 Who's to say WikiLeaks isn't infiltrated?
>>831657 its okay anon, we all have that :( maybe try getting checked for ADHD? drink a coffee a while before u read? i take ritalin and it changes the way i retain things so drastically its insane Dont give up hope anon, i love you and i believe in u!! try audiobooks also! Or yt vids! Take notes whenever you can
>>882333 >You are wrong. No. >You are overestimating the level of communism Marx envisioned in lower-stage communism. Read Kritik des Gothaer Programms. I have. >Him advocating for labor vouchers in this stage is proof that wage labor hasn't been abandoned yet. Wage labor and labor vouchers are two entirely different things. First, because the vouchers aren't money and can't be exchanged. Second, because vouchers correspond to a definite share of production tied to an individuals contribution measured in terms of labor-time. These factors eliminate exploitation from the process of production. >The DOTP is not an additional transition stage in between capitalism and lower-stage communism, this makes no sense since the DOTP is not a mode of production. This is a non sequitur. The transition between these two stages is by definition just a period of change from one to the other. Why does a "transition stage" have to exist as a distinct mode of production? It doesn't even make sense. You said that lower-phase communism is a transition period but that's not how Marx conceived of it. The fundamental transformation of society, away from capitalism, is completed when the lower-phase of communism comes into existence. >>885280 >In ancient history it seems very, very few states actually had an economy dominated by slavery, as opposed to peasant labor. The Marxist reference to slave-societies refers to the manner in which the ruling class extracted their economic surplus. The bulk of the population in these societies was usually some form of peasantry or small owner. But the ruling class supported itself mainly by exploiting slave labor, so the societies are called "slave societies." Some social hierarchies in the ancient world (like ancient Sparta) developed their class system following the conquest and subjugation of foreign peoples. The winners became the ruling class, the losers became slaves or serfs.
How did Lenin know who to assign to what post once the Bolsheviks took power? For instance, how did he find a guy to appoint as minister of telecommunications? Was there some guy who specialized in knowing how telecommunications worked who joined the Bolsheviks, and then Lenin found out about this and basically said "When we take power, you'll be the minister of telecommunications"? Or did Lenin just take some random guy who wanted the post and gave it to him?
>>887118 Lenin didn't do that, All-Russian congress of worker's soviets did elected them.
Should I read Settlers?
>>887227 Read it twice.
Does anybody have a quote from Lenin/the Bolsheviks or from historians/commentators on the Bolsheviks being surprised that the October Revolution came "so early"? I remember reading something similar to this and that Lenin thought he would die before the revolution took place.
>>887231 First as tragedy, second as farce.
>>885588 Check their verification processes.
I don't know much about determinism, although I hear people talk about it a lot. Something about rules meaning everything in society is predetermined. Is this view incompatible with marxism?
>>888256 Determinism claims that events are predetermined. It's not compatible with Marxism, that's a common strawman "muhrxists don't believe in free will"
>>888353 >Determinism claims that events are predetermined. No it doesn't. It claims that events are determined. Not predetermined.
>>886595 >Wage labor and labor vouchers are two entirely different things. They are not different things. Labor vouchers still necessitate the extraction of surplus value via taxes. They just eliminate the rentier possibilities that arise via the circulation of money as a commodity. Once again: Read Kritik des Gothaer Programms... The dictatorship of the proletariat is not an economic mode of production, simple as. You are inventing your own theory here. It is a political system and has nothing to say about how far the economic transition process is.
>>888256 It's incompatible with Marxism, even Dengoids claim otherwise to justify them having a shit ton of capitalism.
>>888457 If the events are external of human action it's the same as saying they're pre determined
Is the movie "How Yukong Moved the Mountains" a good source of info for the Cultural Revolution?
Why do orthodox jews dislike Israel?
Why are they called neo-nazis but we don't get called neo-communists?
>>890007 We never lost
>>888494 >They are not different things. Wage labor is when you pay someone MONEY WAGES in exchange for their labor-power. The wages correspond, basically, to what the wage-laborer requires to continue working, through a combination of the value needed to replace his daily physical necessities and his ability to negotiate within the market. These wages are by definition less than the total surplus produced in the act of production. The wage-laborer gets his part, the wages, and the capitalist receives the remaining surplus to do with as he wishes. The labor vouchers described by Marx are neither money nor wages and he even explains why. The labor vouchers also give each worker an equal share of the total social product minus certain funds earmarked for public goods. This is NOT how wage labor functions. >Labor vouchers still necessitate the extraction of surplus value via taxes. I think a lot of people are confused by Cockshott's erroneous idea that value continues to exist in socialist society, but he's wrong, just as he's wrong on many things. There is no surplus value in socialist society and not even value as such. What Marx describes is that a portion of the total social product - which we can call surplus product - is earmarked for public goods. There is no surplus value being extracted from anyone, since "extraction" implies an exploitative relationship. >They just eliminate the rentier possibilities that arise via the circulation of money as a commodity. Once again: Read Kritik des Gothaer Programms... Again, I've read this a million times plus Capital plus Anti-Duhring. >The dictatorship of the proletariat is not an economic mode of production, simple as. I never said it was. It's the TRANSITION PERIOD. A transition period is by definition the changes which form a bridge between two definite categories. >You are inventing your own theory here. I'm telling you what Marx and Engels wrote. >It is a political system and has nothing to say about how far the economic transition process is. The whole point of the DOTP is for the workers to seize political power and put the means of production under common ownership. This can only be achieved by means of a political struggle. Once this struggle has been won, and the means of production are now brought under common ownership (not just de jure but in terms of real effective control) then the lower phase of communism begins.
Wage-labor is when a worker receives money wages. Marx makes it clear that labor vouchers are not to be considered a form of money: >On this point I will only say further, that Owen’s “labour-money,” for instance, is no more “money” than a ticket for the theatre. Owen pre-supposes directly associated labour, a form of production that is entirely inconsistent with the production of commodities. The certificate of labour is merely evidence of the part taken by the individual in the common labour, and of his right to a certain portion of the common produce destined for consumption. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch03.htm >In the case of socialised production the money-capital is eliminated. Society distributes labour-power and means of production to the different branches of production. The producers may, for all it matters, receive paper vouchers entitling them to withdraw from the social supplies of consumer goods a quantity corresponding to their labour-time. These vouchers are not money. They do not circulate. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch18.htm#2
>>891436 >These wages are by definition less than the total surplus produced in the act of production. It's also true of labor vouchers that what people can get by them is not equal to the entire surplus. >The labor vouchers also give each worker an equal share Marx didn't say that CotGP, he pointed out people are neither equal by their abilities nor by their needs. >There is no surplus value in socialist society and not even value as such. Cockshott uses value a transhistorical category of analysis. This is a matter of defining a concept and it is absurd to try to prove or disprove a definition. If you have a surplus product, you also have surplus value (unless all your surplus happens as an unavoidable outcome in joint production pursued for necessities). >What Marx describes is that a portion of the total social product - which we can call surplus product - is earmarked for public goods. There is no surplus value being extracted from anyone, since "extraction" implies an exploitative relationship. Surplus product implies surplus value. People will have to work longer than necessary to make what they themselves consume to also produce for kids and cripples etc. The majority will be happy with that, but a stubborn minority will be forced to go along with that. You might think that concreteness in planning makes abstract planning in value terms superfluous, but you are wrong about that.
Why is it that the solution to the "Great Replacement" isn't just encouraging people to fuck even more than the immigrants
>>891760 Because then we wont kill any non whites
(8.10 KB 300x168 download (4).jpg)
>>891764 True,when the mass shooter in new zealand last year was asked that question he pretty much said " we gotta kill the sons of muslims before we start a family so that they live in a world with out shiteskins"
(86.75 KB 358x496 VirginCard.jpg)
>>891760 Lel, if they could do that they would not be rightists.
>>891760 well they do. its actually really funny considering they idolize the nuclear family (2-4 children) while they complain about muslims who have 8 children
How do I find out how marxist terminology is translated into my own language? Getting hold of a translation of Das Kapital isn't workable.
>>892251 Use the german words to sound like a real intellectual
>>892251 Which language? Deutsch?
Why did the USSR go through with the NEP instead of just having a fully socialist economy? What benefits did the NEP give that couldn't be afforded otherwise?
>>892288 >Why did the USSR go through with the NEP instead of just having a fully socialist economy? World War 1 + Civil War meant much of the country was destroyed. It was a desperate attempt. Markets are more primitive and easier to organize than planning. >What benefits did the NEP give that couldn't be afforded otherwise? The NEP wasn't a huge success and caused more problems than it solved IMO. Stalin was right to end it rather quickly. Meanwhile, Dengoids want a 70 year NEP (1980 - 2050).
>>892299 What problems did it cause?
>>892301 Collectivization of farms was a pain in the ass. The NEPmen and kulaks gained lots of power. Stalin basically allowed his enemies to gain strength, so he had to strike down even harder which caused a lot of hardships and hunger. The problem could have been avoided altogether, but Stalin got the curve and was able to industrialize his country in time for WW2 so they could BTFO the Nazis. Meanwhile, Dengoids allow their NEPmen to become billionaires, join their party and their national parliament....but I digress.
>>892301 Petit bourg classes getting power like kulaks, also collectivization wasn't implemented due to NEP which caused famines.
>>892311 You're saying that collectivization would have been easier if there was no NEP, correct?
>>892288 Besides what this anon already said >>892299 the NEP, or at least something similar to it was necessary in the USSR because it wasn't industrialized enough to develop socialism. It's a lesser evil which is necessary, because the Russian bourgeoisie prior to the Bolsheviks failed their historical role of industrializing the country, so the CPSU had to take this role into their own hands. An already industrialized Russia would've been ideal, but alas, when that wasn't a possibility, the Bolsheviks had to improvise.
>>892320 Presumably, since the kulaks and NEPmen wouldn't have gained power via market mechanisms. Instead, the NEP gave them some room to breathe and recover from the two wars. He should have gotten them while they were down. That being sad, the NEP was a desperate attemtpt and I can't blame them for trying. They went through two horrible wars in succession. They had an excuse (current-day China doesn't).
>>892334 I still think the main industrialization happened after the NEP. I don't see the NEP as a particularly effective policy. It wasn't horrible either but risky and had some pretty bad after-effects in the early 30s.
How do I become educated/well read esp with regards to Burger Politics) enough to successfully debate/combat rightoids? I honestly don't know where to start. I'm a historically (and just in general) illiterate dumb dumb.
>>892273 That sort of defeats the purpose of the whole "talking to my fellow countrymen about Marx" thing. Might still do it, sounds better than using english at least >>892287 Es wäre ein Traum Das Kapital in der originalen Sprache zu lesen können. Leider verstehe ich nur Finnisch und Englisch.
>>892360 are you good at debating? if not, it's not worth it to try to become informed on the substance, you don't win debates by being right. get better at debating and it doesn't matter if you know your shit or not.
>>892375 Sorry for you to be living in Finland. I don't think there is much socialist literature in your language. The most important Marxist terms you would need are: >Proletarian, bourgeois, petite-bourgeois. Instead, you can just say worker, capitalist, small-business owner. >Value, exchange value, use value, surplus value >tendency of the rate of profit to fall >dialectical materialism >historical materialism I assume these are not difficult to translate. Your only problem would be highly technical terms, like labor voucher, or alienation...I don't see the huge issue though, if you can just describe these concepts.
>>892360 Are you an American?
In People’s History of the World, Chris Harman claims the USSR executed Russian advisors to the Spanish Republicans as “fascist agents”. Is this true, or is it Trotskyist slander?
>>892408 No need to ask twice my friend. I am sure someone will respond sooner or later. Lots of things happened in that war, so be patient. It might well be true, because there was infighting between the communists and anarchists, or it might be a fabrication.
>>892391 >I don't think there is much socialist literature in your language. You'd be wrong on that, it's just all in physical form and not that easy to find unless you have old pro-soviet relatives. Russians have an eternal hardon for us I love them back and the soviets translated tons of marxist writings into finnish for propaganda purposes. Which kind of makes it worse, that means correct translations for all the technical terms exist. >you can just describe these concepts I guess. tbh I'd prefer to just meme at people while sounding quaint and vaguely soviet. It's more effective than going around explaining marxist concepts without being asked to.
Was part of the NEP acquiring foreign goods and technologies? Dengists sometimes say that that's why "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is justified, because it enables China to acquire ready-made technologies through world trade. Was it the same kind of thing with the NEP?
>>892440 What kinds of terms do you think would need in Finnish? If anything you could go to the English-language article and then go to the Finnish version to see the corresponding term.
>>892443 You have to understand this was before the Cold War. There weren't massive sanctions on the USSR yet, so the idea that you needed a different mode of production so you can access foreign markets was non-existent. Nonetheless, it allowed for a facilitation of international trade. However, this wasn't the main purpose. The main reason is simply that planning is harder to implement than markets, and that the economy needed to recover from the wars first before the USSR can move on to collectivization. As an ideological justification, they used a certain interpretation of historical materialism, which is what Dengoids abuse ad infinitum to defend their billionaire communists.
>>892446 Well, for example, the other day I wanted to say "abolish the commodity form" and realised I couldn't. Same thing happened with TRPF a while ago. I could probably think of something for 'commodity' given time but even that's not easy, the usual direct translation doesn't work in the context of Marx. So 'commodity fetishism' would be a problem too. >If anything you could go to the English-language article and then go to the Finnish version to see the corresponding term. You mean on Wikipedia or what? I do that a lot with technical terms in general, but there aren't too many finnish articles on there on these topics.
>>892464 So long as you are relaying the intended message I don't think it really matters whether you use the "official" message or not. If you want to get an understanding of terms generally translate to, you can look up Marxist texts in your language and look for what word is used for the English term you're looking for. For example, this is the Finnish version of "Commodity fetishism": https://www.wikiwand.com/fi/Tavarafetisismi Otherwise like I said you could just try to translate it as accurately as possible. "Abolish the commodity form" would thus become something like "Poistaa tavaramuoton", and for TRPF I looked up some keywords and found someone using the phrase "lisävoitoilla on taipumus laskea", so TPRF would likely translate to "Lisävoiton taipumus laskemaan". Look at what terminology others are using and if anything, explain what you mean.
>>892511 Thanks for trying to help comrade, but it seems you're not grasping what I want to do here. It does matter to me how succinct and elegant the terms I use are. Finnish is my native language, I can express whatever I like in it. If I was happy with just getting the meaning across, quick and dirty, a tourist's survival marxist vocab, style and theoretically recognizable references be damned, I'd just do it. Are you learning finnish?
>>892667 Marxism's terminology needs explaining in any language, with the particular wording of phrases like "commodity production" being basically a name to help remember a concept that isn't all that accurately expressed in just those two words. Even in English many people get tripped up over words like "commodity" and "labor value" because they aren't self-evident, and normally might even have different meanings than what Marxism refers to. So, when introducing a new concept you would, like in English, explain in plain language what it is that the concept is. You can go over some common terms beforehand and think up of how you would explain them to avoid trying to come up with that mid-conversation. Look up Marxists texts in Finnish online and see how they phrase certain terms, and then just use that. Otherwise you could translate it yourself like in the examples I gave. I do know Finnish, and I think that the points I made make sense. Try to reinforce the definitions that you give to concepts so that they'll stick in the minds of the audience better, repeatedly doing that should help if it's a particularly difficult notion.
>>892384 No >>892393 Yes I am Burgerclapistani
>>892736 Ok man I'm going to assume you're trying to be helpful. But you're being kinda gauche and actually rude. I understand if makes you feel like you succeeded if you can get someone to take your advice, it happens to everyone, but now you're just trying to pressure me into doing something that has, from my perspective, nothing to do with why I ever even posted ITT, that I already told you I have no interest in. That's not helping, at best you're getting really carried away. If you really want to help someone, the very first thing is to really listen to and understand what their goals are and accept them as given and not try to renegotiate them. I know my situation and what makes sense for me and you really don't, especially if you won't listen. If you force your own goals on people you help, you're not really helping anyone but being domineering and self-centered at their expense. Or maybe it's not that you're getting carried away with trying to be helpful but that you can't back off because that would feel like acknowledging a mistake and you have issues with ever admitting being even slightly wrong. Whatever it is, it's a bad thought habit and you'll be a happier, nicer human being if you check it.
whats a good amount to even care/invest in politics? I mean, i'm not gonna change anything realistically. why care? it's for the best to know where things at and understand the world you live in sure, but considering there's nothing i can do it seems like there's a limit to how much i should devote to getting deep into theory and everything. the only realistic way i can impact people is things outside of the political system, direct action
>>893014 Focus on local organizing. That does change things and has impact on the lives of people.
>>893014 Convince friends by slowly redpilling them in a non-annoying way. Maybe volunteer to help the local poor and workers. Get involved in an union. Many things you can do besides vooote.
>>893014 you'll be surprise of what you can accomplish with a small group of other dedicated comrades
>>892891 I am honestly trying to respond to the points you made in earlier points, though I don't know whether I misinterpreted them or if you didn't tell something. Your first question was about Marxist terminology being available in your own language, and later made a point about trying to talk to your fellow countrymen about Marx, then stating that much socialist literature in Finnish is rather inaccessible. Then I began responding to you starting at >>892446, thinking that if you needed to see Marxist terminology in Finnish, you could use online sources instead of trying to hunt down a book. You made a point about how succinctness and elegance in language matters, so I offered a few ways of doing that. Since there was some misunderstanding along the way, across multiple posts, you can respond if you want with an exact description of what it is that you're seeking, so that there won't be any confusion.
>>829118 I've heard several times now from socialists that "the middle class doesn't actually exist." What does this mean? Isn't "middle class" just a sanitized term for "petit bourgeoise"? Saying "the petit bourgeoise doesn't actually exist" doesn't sound right to me.
>>895774 The colloquial term middle class refers to both small small business owners (petit bourgeoisie) or high income workers. These two groups might experience similar standards of living but they have different relations to the means of production. However, in present day the distinction between these two groups might become blurred. The small business owner probably does not legally own the real estate or even the machinery of his business. More likely the real estate is rented form a landlord and the machinery is purchased in part through a bank loan making the actual owners the landlord and bank respectively. The business owner while having power over his employees, is nothing more than a manager for larger capitalists, tasked with valorizing the bank's loan. Similarly a high income worker such as a computer programmer might have partial legal ownership of businesses through direct stock purchase or through programs like the US's 401K.
>>895803 thnx m8 :)
>>895774 The problem is that many people who would be considered/can be considered middle class don't own any private business (small businesses included ofc), so calling them petit bourgeoisie is innacurate. Most people define who is middle class by income, so a definition which can work at least imo is the middle class as proles which are a bit more well off than most of the lower class proles. Now, obviously that definition isn't Marxist at all, because the middle class as a concept can't be defined by Marxist terms. People who would consider themselves to be middle class can be proles, labor aristocrats, or petit bourgeois. Also should be noted how on many ocassions the government of a country will broaden the spectrum of what income people need to have to qualify as middle class. Idk if this is done for all countries, but in mine at least, what they often end up doing is that every couple years they lower the income necessary to qualify as middle class (the official government requirements for middle class). This is done to make people feel as if they are richer than they actually are, or to boost their belief being of a higher social status, such as the "temporarily frustrated millionaire" shit which is very common in the US.
>>895774 The term middle class is used to obscure actual class relations. Suddenly, the secretary will believe she is not a worker, since worker apparently only means poor as fuck construction workers in the eyes of money. It is another example of capitalists obscuring their power through language.
Should I keep saying the same refutations to the same people who keep repeating the same lies about what marxism/socialism/communism/etc even is whenever it comes up in conversation? How long until I should write them off as unable to learn?
>>896508 I can understand your situation exactly, and I would say that there is no point in debating somebody like that unless somebody is watching. Are they a relation?
Does anyone have any information that China is supposedly having a larger private sector than Sweden? I saw here (in some thread) a graph comparing the two countries, but I don't remember what it was about.
I am a right winger, this question will be biased. Does the left really believe culture and personal values doesn't affect criminality and other antisocial behavior? because I swear I have tried and look into my own country's left wingers views on handling crimes (sweden) and it all seems to be just investing more money, the idea that there might be a need to crack down on gang crimminals or to change cultural views among certain groups seems completely alien to them
>>898633 >Does the left really believe culture and personal values doesn't affect criminality and other antisocial behavior? No that's ridiculous, where did you hear that? What we do claim though, is that your personal and cultural values are affected by the material conditions and society around you, which is obvious but rightoids don't seem to realize this.
I remember hearing somewhere that the US had a plan to nuke the USSR before the latter gained their own nuclear bomb and that they were just waiting to get enogh nukes to do it in one strike. Is this true? Are there any sources for this?
>>898633 Burger here, this response will be biased. It absolutely blows my mind that anyone other than myopic burgers can look at the expanse/expense of the american criminal justice system and think "yeah, that's a better option than subsidized housing and education.
>>898633 >Does the left really believe culture and personal values doesn't affect criminality and other antisocial behavior? I don't deny, that culture or personal values affect the behaviour of a person. But it is in the end a question of integration. Check out how China is dealing with this issue, this seems to be the correct way to deal with it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiAxAwF3h5w
>>896910 They're friends with more reasonable people I also know who are far less spooked but also know jackshit about left politics.
>>899052 Anyone on the lefts seeming to denounce any kind of harder penalties against the trouble makers, painting it as an either or thing. >>898746 I believe you can do both things at once. Give people a chance for growth and prospering but keep clearly antisocial individuals away from society as long as possible
So I make communist propaganda for my work and I need to ask, what is the simplest, normie friendly way of explaining socialism vs capitalism in a work environment setting?
>>900447 Are you worried about losing your job
>>900447 Don't go full mask off and just point out flaws of capitalism at first.
Why do orthodox jews dislike Israel?
>>900531 Ii depend on the audience, with most normies I play it sort of like a conspiracy theorist talking about financial elites and banks while dropping subtle redpills. >>901526 most people with a brain should dislike israel.
>>901553 Yeah but I mean why do they in particularly dislike it, I would think they would love Israel and defend it but haredis really dislike Israel for some reason. Why?
>>900429 >As long as possible *As necessary for rehabilitation, anon
Why do rightoids dislike the IRA?
When will they bury Lenin's body?
So I just read someone accuse Mao of being a "khruschevist". Was this person being retarded or is there some truth to it?
>>901676 I don't know how interested someone who imagines themselves to make a lot of money and status from crime is interested in being rehabilitated.
How would Italians react if I walked down the streets of Milan or something waving my arms around shouting “CAESAR, MUSSOLINI, FERRARI, PIZZA” over and over again?
>>902045 When we achieve world communism
>>903219 Ayayayaya
>>883453 Is WikiLeaks seriously not reliable?
>>901562 because it's god himself who told them to fuck off from there and be hobos, having a jewish nation before some prophet come and say its ok is basically ignoring/reverting god orders
>>903006 >imagines themselves to make a lot of money and status from crime anyone having started doing crimes will know its easier being honest if you want lot of money/status
>>903888 (well by honest I mean legal, not honest)
Don't the material interests that chracterize the classes and explain their contradictions utterly debunk reformism as a strategy? Why would the bourgeoisie ever allow their power and wealth to be taken away through electoralism, when they have a tight grip on democratic institutions, unlike the proles? Maybe I'm preaching to the choir but that alone makes reformism a pipe dream, correct?
>>897707 >Does anyone have any information that China is supposedly having a larger private sector than Sweden? I saw here (in some thread) a graph comparing the two countries, but I don't remember what it was about. I don't remember a specific graph, but just from memory I can say that 80% of urban employment in China is in the private sector, and until recent years the private sector accounted for 90% or more of employment growth. The difficulty is that China's statistics don't always match up with statistics published in other countries, so disentangling the numbers can be tricky. Going by official statistics, however, shows that the operating income of state-owned enterprises in China is about 27% of total operating income for all industrial enterprises (which I think may not include smaller enterprises). So yeah, it's likely that China's public sector is overall slightly smaller than Sweden's. https://www.oecd.org/gov/Sweden.pdf http://www.stats.gov.cn/enGliSH/PressRelease/202008/t20200828_1786513.html
>>903906 Isn't that a bit of a strawman of reformism? For one, reformism isn't the same as electoralism, reformism has a role for unions and most unions are reformist rather than radical. If the history wasn't there, and we had the power to realistically attempt revolution but not enough to be almost certain of success, I can see how reformism would be appealing. Delay the conflict, get stronger, bit by bit make your enemy weaker, until you have such overwhelming power that the conflict is just going to be them surrendering to you. If you've only grown stronger until then, and your enemy hasn't been able to stop you or keep up with you, of course you're going to think time is on your side and maybe even hope that you can get to the finish line without the horror and butchery of a revolution. Avoiding or postponing having to take the leap of faith and put everyone around you through at least a decade of pain is a pretty good motivator for some motivated reasoning.
>>903906 >Don't the material interests that chracterize the classes and explain their contradictions utterly debunk reformism as a strategy? The problem with your analysis is that you seem to make the unwritten assumption that the bourgeoisie possess total control of institutions and political organizations in capitalist society when this isn't anywhere near true. The ruling class maintains it's position only because it has the power to remain the dominant class, but this dominance is never total. There are always challenges and obstacles facing the ruling class from within. These challenges arise both within society as a whole and within the ruling class itself, when one faction attempts to gain dominance over another faction. Another problem with your analysis is that it simply isn't empirically correct. The entire history of capitalism is filled with reformist victories. Sometimes the ruling class embraces these reforms precisely because it will allow them to control and shape how such reforms develop - enabling them to subordinate groups who otherwise might embrace revolutionary action. It was only with the current era of globalization that the capitalist class was able to completely rout the traditional labor movement by using the global proletariat as a weapon against the workers in countries where significant reforms had been won. The reality is that reformist tactics are not only useful in a direct sense, but can provide the precursor to revolutionary organization when the situation arises. When the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia they were supported by a broad base which included millions of workers organized in trade unions. Lenin himself viewed these trade unions as a "school of communism", acting as a kind of "transmission belt" from the vanguard party to the working masses: >The proletariat’s conquest of political power is a gigantic step forward for the proletariat as a class, and the Party must more than ever and in a new way, not only in the old, educate and guide the trade unions, at the same time bearing in mind that they are and will long remain an indispensable “school of communism” and a preparatory school that trains proletarians to exercise their dictatorship, an indispensable organisation of the workers for the gradual transfer of the management of the whole economic life of the country to the working class (and not to the separate trades), and later to all the working people. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/ch06.htm
>>903906 Reformism only works when the capitalists see it as an alternative to violent revolution. Once the threat of revolution and general strike disappears, reformism stops working, because there is no reason for the bourgeoisie to accept concessions. See european social democracy after the fall of the Soviet Union.
>>848913 Not OP but rererereasking this.


no cookies?