/lit/ - Literature

>>11758520
Yes. It's debunked epic style.

>>11758520
Only 40% of it. People like the words, but the practice of communist government is violent and paranoid.

ok this is epic

>>11758520
Communism is. Marx's conception of history is actually still useful

what part of it?
historical materialism? the base and superstructure dynamic? the labour theory of value? marxism is not a single theory y'know

>>11758541
>Communism is.
How so

>>11758541
Marx's theory of history was literally one of its biggest flaws retard.

>>11758520
now of course for Marxist historians this has meant that the archaic period can be viewed as a period of class struggle, now I am not going to be pushing a Marxist line in these lectures and I certainly don't want to defend Marxism as a current political believe which has been proven to be quite bankrupt but I do want to draw to your attention that as a line of interpretation of understanding ancient societies it cannot be ignored that is to say we have to address the fundamental question what impact do the basic economic relations of society have on the history of that society Marxs would say where a man and woman stand economically is really the prime relationship that that person will have with the rest of their community and so for many marxist historians the archaic period is a period in which wealthy Athenians and wealthy Greeks are virtually at war with the poor with the domos with the people.... Well it is an attractive approach in some aspects and yet as more historians have looked at specific incidents recorded in poetry or better in the work of ancient historians like herodotus that the more it appears the real conflict was not between the rich and poor but between various competing aristocratic groups.

>>11758520
There's no universal framework large and waterproof enough that we can safely evaluate something as wide as "Marxism" and return with a Boolean value of true/false.

Marx was an interesting thinker. He had a valuable view of a lot of things, he dared saying things and being rigorous and intellectually honest about them to a degree that most people are incapable of. Maybe it's because he was working together with Engels most of the time, but that doesn't change anything.

I think continuing the dialictical march through history with Marx being one of many milestones along the way will be necessary. Communism won't come the way he said it would, but he still gave us a great deal of rich analysis of our modern world and how we got to where we are. Use Marx where he's applicable, don't think in terms of him being right or wrong about everything or nothing. What other thinkers do we hold to such a standard?

>>11758544
Communism lapsed into either totalitarian governments reliant on civil oppression and heavily restricted state capitalism or are a literal hellscape combination of Feudalism and big brother tier government. That or it ended up completely abandoning and progressed like China.

>>11758548
Modern historians use multiple historiographies, and materialism is one of them. It's only "flawed" depending on how it's applied

>>11758558
Would you say a theory is wrong if some scientists made experiments trying to prove it but failed spectacularly? Is Haiti proof that capitalism doesn't work?

>>11758558
Maybe because it was tried by absolute fucking shitholes that have always been totalitarian and unstable, genius. Make the whole world communist and see how it fares. I wish we could simulate shit like this.

>>11758558
communism has never been reached, f*rstie

>>11758566
Communism is not the end goal of history, there is no natural force inclining it towards such, all communist revolutions failed and it no longer exists. Society is not only economics, economics does not create everything of a society in a vacuum

>>11758576
>>11758578
>>11758582
Ahhhh of course, "not real communism" argument. These were ideas attempted to be implemented and we can its ideas in theory would logically result in the outcome of communism.

Communism as a political system isn't, but all of the Hegelian nonsense is.

Marxism completely derailed socialism and ruined the reputation of any kind of prosocial government policy. I bet if you even advocated for voluntary charity for your own nation at this point some boomer in a business suit would come along and call you a leftist twat. Marxism wasn't just shitty, it was so shitty that it ensured the continuation of capitalism and the necessity of cryptosocialism to get anything like "paying the teachers" done.

>>11758595
Well communism generally isn't a political theory but more of an alternative to society; abolition of private property, different social structure etc. And communism can only work in a stateless society. So yeah, a bunch of socialist states and satellites with dictatorships actually weren't communist.

Using the whole "iT wAsNt ReAl CoMmUnIsM hUh? dEbUnKeD lOl xddd" argument doesn't make it not true by the way, fucking brainlet. It could be the actual truth; ever thought of that?

>>11758595
Communism is a stateless classless moneyless society
Revolutionary China and the USSR were socialist. Why do you think they were socialist republics, f*rstoid

https://pastebin.com/Zwuejk4A

>>11758604
this is an interesting perspective

>>11758607
I don't think you're understanding me, the very theories of Marxism were attempted, as you just rattled off, (abolition of private property, anarchism, socialism etc) and they failed, and their failures align with what one could point out in theory is wrong with it.

>>11758614
Again, the attempt at creating a stateless, classless, currency-less society failed.

>>11758624
Isn't communism supposed in a post-scarcity society? Don't think any of the countries where communism was attempted were close to being post-scarcity.

Economy-wise it has been destroyed since early 20th century. Sociologically speaking, he is a very respected name.

>>11758624
>Anarchism and socialism are the same thing
don’t associate the CHAD M-Ls with CRINGE ANARKIDDIES, please

>>11758624
I don't think you're understanding Marxism since you need a stateless society and superpowers like the USA interfering in your business to actually fucking work.

>>11758637
not interfering*

>>11758520
Up until 2014 it wasn't, but then two right wing intellectuals, Ben Shapiro and Milo debunked it.

>>11758633
Yes, communism is supposed to be the logical end goal of history and, with socialism as its previous stage and it failed at attempting to create this.

>>11758632
Communism was the last step of the process and was never reached due to hyper reactionaries in the USSR changing it back from socialist to capitalist collapsing the system. You truly are a brainlet. How could China and the USSR be communist if they didn’t attempt to abolish anything listed above

>>11758651
>and it failed at attempting to create this.
Could be due to the fact that only historically unstable and absolutely poor shitholes tried it and were constantly fucked by the West?

>>11758637
Saying that it was the end goal of communist history is exactly what is wrong with it, it failed at implementing this.

>>11758655
It was never reached because it was an utter failure and the only result left for the countrys was to resort to capitalists systems. Every country that attempted it went to absolute garbage and either collapsed or completely abandoned it. Saying that communism wasn't reached because Marxists states backed out of it and weren't forced out of it is just childish.

>>11758673
>Every country that attempted it went to absolute garbage and either collapsed or completely abandoned it
Every country that attempted it WAS an absolute garbage shithole.

>>11758661
The USSR turned russia from the poorest dumpiest swampiest european country into a world superpower even the yanks feared. It’s only downfall was due to reactionaries who wanted to revert the system of feudalism -> capitalism -> socialism -> communism from socialism back into capitalism, and this attempt ended up causing political distress to where the USSR collapsed politically, not economically, therefor you can’t attribute the USSR falling to communism, sorry bud

>>11758673
>Utter garbage
tell that to the doubled life expectancy and the CIA themselves admitting the USSR eats more food than the US lol

>>11758675
I wonder why that is? Because they were the only people desperate enough to implement such a silly idea in desperation. Not to mention, China has been revolutionized under capitalism, the Soviet Union industrialized under Stalin and yet still fell apart.

>>11758684
b-b-but gommunism bad because hungry xdddd

>>11758615
It's the Hitlerist perspective.
"Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic. [...] We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfillment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. "

>>11758696
>I wonder why that is? Because they were the only people desperate enough to implement such a silly idea in desperation.
That's not an argument against it, by the way.

>the Soviet Union industrialized under Stalin and yet still fell apart.
See the post above yours.

>>11758684
It industrialized due to a massively centralized effort that allowed the massacre and starvation of millions, and still it collapsed after reverting to some perverted form of state capitalism. The Soviet Union collapsed due to its own Marxist basis and capital trade was the only thing that allowed it to last so long after the great leveling.

>>11758696
>Soviet union goes from swamp to world super power and industrializes
>Literally on par and at times above the US in many fields
>Collapses due to libs and reactionaries
>See!! Gommunism doesn’t work XD +1

>>11758703
>Muh man made famine
lol
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mltheory.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/facts-about-the-holodomor-and-why-its-fake/amp/
Also, let’s pretend the system didn’t collapse when tanks turned towards moscow over political reasons and Gorbacuck, shall we?

>>11758684
>>11758699
CIA themselves admitting the USSR eats more food than the US lol

lmao people actually believe the soviet union was a good place? You commies present yourself as "true" Communists and than jump on any shred to defend the failed regimes that say you reject.

>>11758723
oh no no no
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP84B00274R000300150009-5.pdf
PFTTTTTAHAHAHAHAHAA

>tankies literally citing wordpress blogs

>>11758723
>people actually believe the soviet union was a good place?
Some do, some don't. Same with America. What's your point? You're consistently dodging the facts. Man up to your own delusions and accept reality. The USSR was far from unsuccessful.

>>11758723
Did you know the USSR had the 2nd fastest growing economy of the 20th century the USSR is 2nd after Japan Source: https://artir.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/captura-de-pantalla-de-2016-05-26-10-15-23.png

The USSR:

>had the 2nd fastest growing economy of the 20th century the USSR is 2nd after Japan
https://artir.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/captura-de-pantalla-de-2016-05-26-10-15-23.png

>had zero unemployment and continuous positive economic growth for 70 straight years. see: Robert C. Allen's, From Farm To Factory Source:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.507.8966&rep=rep1&type=pdf (review of book here https://homepages.warwick.ac.uk/~syrbe/pubs/FarmtoFactory.pdf ).

>had zero homelessness. Houses were often shared by two families throughout the 20s and 30s – so unlike capitalism, there were no empty houses, but the houses were very full. In the 40s there was the war, and in the 50s there were a number of orphans from the war. The mass housing projects began in the 60s, they were completed in the 70s.

>ends famine and has higher calorie consumption than USA Source:
https://artir.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/compar1.png?w=640

You can read more about the post-1941 famine history in Nove's An Economic History of the USSR 1917-1991. There were food insecurity issues, especially when Khrushchev et al. majorly fucked up with trade and resource dependence on the west, but no famines after the collectivisation of agriculture in the early 1930s (except for in the Siege of Leningrad).

>ended sex inequality
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Soviet_Union_(1977,_Unamended) Equal wages for men and women were mandated by law, but sex inequality, although not as pronounced as under capitalism, was perpetuated in social roles.

>ended racial inequality, welcomed black intellectuals
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2016/jan/24/racial-harmony-in-a-marxist-utopia-how-the-soviet-union-capitalised-on-us-discrimination-in-pictures

>makes all education free
http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/archive/PubEdUSSR.htm http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0000/000013/001300eo.pdf

Oh and you know… defeated the Nazis and sent the first man into space. No biggie. Muh 100 gorillion, muh red scare and McCarthy though, right guys?

>>11758718
>Soviet union goes from swamp to world super power and industrializes

Well actually, the general economic development under the Tsardom was increasing at a better rate under Stalin, it would if it stayed on this course bet at a higher level today than current Russia. Not to mention the industrialization was due to ruthless programs sacrificing millions, which can hardly go on forever.

>Literally on par and at times above the US in many fields

This is wrong and you know it, the Soviet Union could barely have survived without the US in WW2.


>Collapses due to libs and reactionaries

Stop calling capitalists, reactionaries fool. You attempt to lecture me on the definition of socialism and communism while not being correct yourself. The capitalists however keept the country afloat, much like modern China.

>https://www.google.com/amp/s/mltheory.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/facts-about-the-holodomor-and-why-its-fake/amp/

Did you really just give me a Marxist propaganda article that would take longer for me to read than this thread would ask that denies events as real as the holocaust as fact? Gish Gallop is not a valid argument my friend.

>>11758746
>>11758747
Damn bro we used the same copy pasta...

>>11758748
>Not to mention the industrialization was due to ruthless programs sacrificing millions
Pretty much like the industrial revolution in general then?

>>11758726
>>11758746
>>11758747
My friend, spamming articles that would take hours to read is called gish gallop.

>>11758698
>muhhhh the only kinds of socialism are Marxism and Nazism!

read a damn book pls

>>11758757
How dare I give you sources to back up arguments and potentially change your mind and make you accept reality once you've read all of them if you wish, right?

>>11758757
>>11758765
Oh and by the way you were replying to at least 2 people, possibly 3.

>>11758757
>I can’t read, zorry :((
keystone lit right here

>>11758755
Except the industrial revolution has sustained itself, while Marxism could not. Not to mention the industrial revolution was simply people being put out of work due to technological developments, compared to the forceful institutional changes under communism.

>>11758765
>>11758772
>>11758779
Gish gallop is a fallacy, spamming hundreds of micro arguments that one couldn't possibly answer in the time given is not fair in honest debate. This isn't an intellectual spat in a paper where you have hours to respond.

>>11758792
weeks* months* years*

>>11758558
>That or it ended up completely abandoning and progressed like China.

21st century Capitalism will be totalitarian as more countries look towards China and Singapore as the ideal states in efficient political and economic management. It maybe true that Communism so far in its attempts have lapsed into totalitarianism, but for capitalism, it's implementation will also be inevitably totalitarian, but with more bread and circuses I suppose.

>>11758792
I'm not posting sources that back up my arguments for you to refute them in this moment but for you to go through them if you wish to. This isn't a fallacy, it's for you to not be a lazy fuck and actually learn something and accept reality. I'm not here to moralise whether the USSR was good or bad because that's fucking retarded and you definitely don't hold the same standard for other (capitalist) countries (most likely), so I don't give a shit.

>>11758780
You too, retard.

>>11758759
I didn't say that or believe that. You're very overeager to try to dunk on someone.

>>11758797
>21st century Capitalism will be totalitarian as more countries look towards China and Singapore as the ideal states in efficient political and economic management.

I wouldn't say totalitarian, all though with the rise of nationalism I would say it is increasing the chances, especially considering that markets are becoming more centralized. But I would agree that state capitalism is by the most efficient economic system today.

>>11758806
If you were honestly wanting to change my mind you may be a bit more polite, but we were obviously debating and you resorted to gish gallop and shitposting, don't worry I'm used to it at this point now, morrissey.

>>11758830
I have zero patience and politeness to retards who constantly shout the same shitty argument with zero weight or context (gommunism no work cuz uhmmm hungrey llol xddd) despite me giving valid counter-arguments. I have no time for people who don't even try to understand, simply put. It's tiresome.

>>11758830
Logically fallacies don’t make an argument wrong. I’ll just leave the link here. Read up friend, porkies certainly leave out this info for “reasons”
https://pastebin.com/Zwuejk4A

>>11758843
So in conclusion: go over the sources and rethink your stance or don't and call it a fallacy because you're lazy and feel the need to stick to your narrative. I don't care, really.

>>11758843
But you had no argument, you resorted to gish gallop exactly out of losing the debate.

>>11758845
They do when you are attempting to debate somebody and than when backed to a corner you spam microarguments.

>>11758830
I hope you see the light anon. Workers of the World, unite!

>>11758857
I made claims and posted sources. Now shut the fuck up, I'm done.

>>11758848
Again, I could spam you 100 hundred links to why Nazism wasn't so bad, and respond with the same arrogant statement "rethink your stance or don't and call it a fallacy because you're lazy". You are in fact the one who will not rethink his stance, as you reject every argument as already debunked by >insert bias 10 pdfs and 12 articles

>>11758864
You made half truth claims and spammed articles I have no hope of reading in that spam of time.

>>11758865
I'm not even the anon you were arguing with in the first place by the way. Also go ahead and post those links, I'm genuinely interested why Nazism wasn't so bad. I'll gladly read through it, unlike you lazy brainlets.

>>11758872
I don't care when you read them or if you even do in the first place. I'm not the anon you were originally arguing with so I'm not trying to "win le epic debate" here.

>>11758874
Thats not my point, my point is that being a rude idiot in argument, insulting, belittling and simplifying everything and then when you can no longer argue in this way, spamming 10s of links, claiming that you are retarded and thus I win is not an argument. The problem is not that in itself posting information (as bias as it is) is bad, but in the way it is done.

>>11758823
>>I wouldn't say totalitarian, all though with the rise of nationalism I would say it is increasing the chances
I believe the rise of this recent form of nationalism is directly related to the rise of Chinese totalitarian Capitalism. Ironically, the Chinese are much more better and able to suppress the kind of working class movements that demand better working conditions, higher pay, and cleaner environment. All of these demands in the US had made them uncompetitive relative to China. One of the many grievances underlying China is trade imbalance and loss of manufacturing jobs to the Chinese and Trump was brought in an attempt to fix this.

>>11758884
>everybody i talk to isn't the anon you were arguing with
>was arguing with multiple different people

hmmmm

>>11758901
Listen buddy I don't give a shit about winning le epic debate and argument, Ben. I'm just posting some links to back up some half-baked claims. Whoever reads it, fine, and if you don't, whatever.

>>11758913
Acting like a spastic retard and employing gish gallop in the heat of the argument, and than when exposed for this, claiming you were simply try to give me information and weren't interested in the debate is a very sad COPE!

what a fucking shitshow, sage

>>11758520
>Is Marxism totally debunked as a theory?
So you're asking if it's debunked as a theory, and not as something else? If you can't debunk Marxism as a theory, then what can you debunk it as? Is it possible that marxism can be debunked as a theory but remain valid as something else? Do you think about the shit you write or do you just throw words around to make the things you say sound more intelligent?

>Post a Marx thread
>Someone drops the "Not real communism™"
>Sperging ensues
>Sit back and enjoy Tankies absolutely lose their shit

>>11758520
Yes, quantum physics conclusively disproves it.

>>11758520
More or less.

Since 1884.

>>11759392
which features of the USSR economy distinguished it from other capitalist economies?

>>11758528
based