/lit/ - Literature

>>23745681

>>23113073
>Seminary
>>23113086
>?

Priest school, where Stalin got an education, unlike 90+% of Russians back in the day.

Revolutionaries arise almost exclusively from the better educated middle class, as lower class mud-farming peasants aren't smart enough to carry off a revolution (they're used as cannon fodder) while upper class elites obviously don't want to disrupt the status quo.

>>22368171
He was quoting something else that made an observation on the Nationalsozialistische Faggot Arbeiterpartei (NSFAP, sometimes erroneously called NSDAP or the Nazi Party).
He repeated it sarcastically.

>>18231625
>Marx and Engels
Cringe
>Stalin
Based

Is he communist or not?

People blame the West being ruined by communism when liberalism is the real culprit of their complaints. Communism died 30 years ago and even when it was alive it wasn’t communist countries that promoted mass immigration or approved of homosexuality. Additionally, the decline of trad values began before communism existed, the first decriminalisation of homosexuality in the modern period was during the French Revolution (a liberal revolution) rather than a later communist one. Cultural Marxism is a term used by conservative liberals who wish to pretend that liberalism and capitalism have nothing to do with what’s happening.

/pol/tards think this is all some Marxist plot. Go read Guy Debord's Society of the Spectacle, written more than 50 years ago, and stop being such NPCs in the narrative. Most of these societal changes came from Commodity Fetishism and Capitalist marketing to maximize profits. They got everybody hooked on apps and products. Marxists hate corporations and you dumbasses with your idiotic Cultural Marxism narrative don't realize all the identity politics they push, and the degeneracy is just part of their Capitalist Marketing virtue signaling, you idiots vote to give the corporations more power and defend Capitalism because your boomer father told you to it was honorable to be a good wagie slave worker drone for Murica

>>15927279
It ain't real kiddo

>these are the "people" I share the left with

>>15400974
>going towards socialism, in a free market style? With no violent revolutions?
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1934/07/23.htm

>In speaking of the impossibility of realising the principles of planned economy while preserving the economic basis of capitalism, I do not in the least desire to belittle the outstanding personal qualities of Roosevelt, his initiative, courage and determination. Undoubtedly, Roosevelt stands out as one of the strongest figures among all the captains of the contemporary capitalist world. That is why I would like, once again, to emphasize the point that my conviction that planned economy is impossible under the conditions of capitalism, does not mean that I have any doubts about the personal abilities, talent and courage of President Roosevelt. But if the circumstances are unfavourable, the most talented captain cannot reach the goal you refer to. .

>Theoretically, of course, the possibility of marching gradually, step by step, under the conditions of capitalism, towards the goal which you call socialism in the Anglo-Saxon meaning of the word, is not precluded. .

>But what will this "socialism" be? At best, bridling to some extent, the most unbridled of individual representatives of capitalist profit, some increase in the application of the principle of regulation in national economy. That is all very well. But as soon as Roosevelt, or any other captain in the contemporary bourgeois world, proceeds to undertake something serious against the foundation of capitalism, he will inevitably suffer utter defeat. The banks, the industries, the large enterprises, the large farms are not in Roosevelt's hands. All these are private property. The railroads, the mercantile fleet, all these belong to private owners. And, finally, the army of skilled workers, the engineers, the technicians, these too are not at Roosevelt's command, they are at the command of the private owners; they all work for the private owners. We must not forget the functions of the State in the bourgeois world.

>>15088138
You're not intelligent and you don't exist. Agreed.

>>15073427
>Can you explain where I contradict myself here?
You are saying it can't be a democracy because it is a republic. That is akin to stating those are mutually exclusive, which they are not.

>>15073427
>Neither of those parties are sentient and mature.
And you are going to define this? Aren't horses sentient? What about a really smart chimp? Or a very stupid nigger? The mentally ill and handicapped?

I hate rich people
I hate Americans
I hate Africans
I hate some Jews
I hate India

There is no political view that suits this nonsense, but Marxism-Leninism at least allows me to coherently hate the RICH and THE AMERICANS, not to mention the RICH AMERICANS.

>>13882687
Post 'em.

>>12669018
>>12674117
>>12674151
>>12669367
>>12669764
>>12672746
>>12672900
Imagine it is fall or spring. It is somewhere between -1C and +5C outside. It is too hot to wear a sweater, and it is too cold to wear just a shirt. So you put a non-descript t-shirt under your shirt. Suddenly you have two layers and are the perfect temperature.

Does there really exist people who wear clothes for form instead of function and comfort? Vomit inducing all of you.

>>11828702
>tfw i can't tell if a trot, anarchist, fascist or liberal made this meme

>>10932383

>>10906774
Whoa dude you're right. I was actually wrong just because you said so.

>>10838152
>reverts to "you mad? xD" like it's 2011 and he's on /b/
You do not belong here

>>10804002
What? He's saying that economic freedom comes before civil freedom. It's totally in line with what he did and what he could do.

>The Trail
>doesn't have a single trail

>>9638811
Damn, Midwestern countryside posters are best posters.

>>8822362
>The feminist struggle is indistinguishable from the class struggle.
I seriously hope this is a jokepost.

>>8654762
looool

>>8494550
Have you seen all of the 49 Bergman directed fictitious films?
How many papers have you written on Niskanen's work and themes?
Can you recite the radio transmissions in Cocteau's Orpheus?
Have you walked in the rain and wind of the Hungarian plains while listening to Vig's soundtracks of Tarr's films?
Can you estimate the amount of vodka Pellonpää drinks in Kaurismäki's Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatjana?
Do you even see Tarkovsky films when you sleep?

If you answered even one of these questions negatively, you can hardly say that you have a "cursory knowledge of film" and in the future not overestimate yourself, while giving weight on exposition instead of scrapping it all because you spot Bergman (since everybody knows enough of him already lol xP)