/lit/ - Literature

>>20520715
how do the Greeks manage to retroactively BTFO everyone thousands of years in the future? Is it even possible to get mogged any harder?

>>20520761
They were almost the peak of civilization. No one else has come close. Almost everything afterwards can be summed up as an reaction to the Greeks

>>20520761
Imagine going to this amphitheater. Your city is so small you know almost everyone's names when you all take your seats. You watch dramas written by the greatest playwrights who will ever live, writing about YOU and your family and your Gods. This is an act of sacred worship and you all experience catharsis. Your nation surrounds you: a union of philosophy and history and flesh and earth breathing next to you on the marble carved by your hands and those of your forefathers, and the slaves you all won in great victories carved out of the world by bronze and blood.

You go home and fuck your wife like she was your your hoplite brother, for the tenth time this week. She will bear your children until she splits like a rotten pomegranate. Then you will wed another.

The Greeks were the last human beings. We are just some weird alien hominids cargo-culting their legacy.

>>20520715
Aristofan is top tier, I can only imagine how blesses we would have been if more of his work would have been preserved

>>20520715
>the slaves
This doesn’t BTFO Communism. In communism, the owners and the workers are the same class,

>>20521415
The joke.
Your head.

>>20521415
>In communism, the owners and the workers are the same class.

>>20520715
I consider Communism an ignis fatuus, but the text does not actually say this in this order.
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0030%3Acard%3D635

>>20521415
>In fairyland everyone gets to be fairies!

>>20521744
well yeah it's a collection of quotes

>>20520715
I think we can all see that capitalism has run it’s course. USA is now an oligarchy

>>20521704
>But no really the USSR wazzzzz doing communism and YOU'RE wrong!
Slam your head in doorframe

>>20522708
Good point. The USSR was doing actual Judaism.

>>20520715
I read the Assemblywomen and it wasn’t the “epic anti communist btfo” /pol/ told me it was. If anything it was more of a parody of incels

>>20522797
Have sex.

>>20522797
it's not about gender shit. it's a satire of the government at the time.

So true!!!!11!1!!11!

>>20521415
>In communism the owners and the workers are the same class

>>20522708
>every form of Marxism on earth that has ever been tried ended with an elite ruling class and the use of slave labor
>dude
>listen
>each and everyone
>they didn't READ read the books
>like *I* have the answers and how to do it
OK anon

in capitalism, we still have slaves tilling the soil, but no property in common, so its even worse

>>20521704
>>20521761
>>20523029
>retards who can’t imagine a farm where everyone owns the land together and works the fields together and shares the profits together

>>20523152
>retard who thinks running a country is the same as running a small farm

>>20523152
You are talking about a family.

>>20521415
>This doesn’t BTFO Communism. In communism, the owners and the workers are the same class,
I don't think you actually understand what communism is: Communism is when the state controls the populace.

>>20520715
Slaves = AI and robots
we are almost there, almost to utopia

>>20523152
I can imagine a farm like that. Communism in it's ideal form will never happen and you know it too.

>>20520715
When your master is rich, your kinda rich yourself. You know those golden collars

>>20520895
I think about it every day and I realize something, we have a lot of benefits, and life was incredibly hard, but the people died not knowing any better and feeling fulfilled. There were probably terrible things, no treatments for certain diseases, infections may have meant certain death but the feeling of being in a community like that is going to be one single snap shot moment in time and now its gone. What we have is splendid and they would want it, but I dream about something like it sometimes and there is this feeling of longing, like there really is something missing out of life, and we no longer have reference or context.

>>20522797
>Assemblywomen
>parody of incels
>Women tell men they must fuck every woman before they can fuck the best ones, starting with the fat chicks
>Making fun of incels
you have really shit reading comprehension.

>>20523289
What if he is gay? Then he's just going to fuck your booty hole, I mean you get to fuck the other slaves too but yeah still a little gay.

>>20523325
Who gives two shits about all this modern tech.
Life was easy back then.
Serve the community - get a wife, land, slaves and a bag of gold. Simple and great.

>>20523152
Dude, we all saw the photos of CHOP/CHAZ

>>20523332
you think about that a lot, don't you anon? show me that hole

>>20523176
No, I’m talking about communism
>>20523161
>>20523258
For sure. But whether or not it works, that’s what communism means.

>>20523398
This kills the ancom

>>20523451
Not really. Collective farms and voluntary communities exist in every country and they seem to get by just fine.

>>20523455
There are no voluntary communities which are self-sufficient. Even the Amish have social hierarchies and internal property structures.

>>20523459
Self sufficient in what way? Do they not grow their own food?
>the amish
No

>>20523469
Because they require resources from other self-interested agents which are not themselves.
>No
Yes. The Amish are typically the best examples you can point to.

>>20521797
All forms of governance are oligarchies, retard. USA was always an oligarchy, so was every other country. This is not the own you think it is.
Unless you have an anarchist society (which is an oxymoron since society presupposes some form of order and organization), you will always have an oligarchy of elites ruling the ruled.

>>20523475
>Because they require resources from other self-interested agents which are not themselves.
Oh, I see. In my eyes, as long as they own the property itself together it is communism. Just because they buy the seeds from somewhere else or they sell their surplus at a local market doesn’t make their method of organization non-socialist. They live within a capitalist society. Do you think every co-operatively owned business is capitalist too?
>The Amish are typically the best examples you can point to.
There are thousands of communes in the USA alone, do the Amish hold all property in common?

>>20523345
Yeah unless you’re the slave then you have to get raped since boyhood by some aristocratic faggot and live life doing mundane chores for the faggot that molested you.

>>20523152
Okay, what happens if someone works harder than everyone else? What happens when someone works less?
Communism is an ideal based on humans not being human.

>>20523486
>Do you think every co-operatively owned business is capitalist too?
If they engage in capitalist enterprise, then they are capitalist. There will never be a total society-wide commune, which is why we only ever see communes of a particular type, like farms, which is the same functional basis for why castes were originally formed in human societies. If there is a choice between one profession and another, people will naturally incline towards the one which is easier, but who gets to arbitrate between who works where? Someone has to do the drudgework, and everyone wants the easier jobs. Not only do distinctions in luxury arise, but also an arbitrating authority appear. "Technological advancement" is the most naive and childish answer to this problem.
>There are thousands of communes in the USA alone
And none of them are self-sufficient. The Amish are the practical realization of what actual community self-sufficiency looks like, at least to the extent that it's possible for the Amish, considering they still reap many benefits from the mere existence in a relatively safe first world state. There is the special complication that only people who are already attracted to the idea of "communal ownership" go to live in communes. In reality, a society also has to deal with people who don't want to work tedious, dirty jobs. In the history of mankind, if has been these exact people who ended up ruling the people who were content to work the land for a lower degree of risk. If you don't want these people not working and "mooching resources", you either have to starve them or forcefully defend yourself against them if they become indignant. There is nothing "voluntary" about either of these concepts though, so the idea of anything being voluntary goes out the window and law and order is reestablished in its original form. This is what Aristophanes was satirizing, or it's at least one layer of the joke. "The slaves" is basically the practical answer to any dilemma here.

>>20523501
>Okay, what happens if someone works harder than everyone else?
He would've eased the burden of his fellows
>What happens when someone works less?
He don't get to eat

>>20523459
Why are you confusing intentional communities with communes? History is replete with many examples of intentional communities, usually monasteries, which were self-sufficient. I don’t get how Amish having property and hierarchy means they’re not self-sufficient. All it means is they’re not a Marxist commune.

https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1844/10/15.htm

>>20523510
>If they engage in capitalist enterprise, then they are capitalist.
Are you defining capitalist enterprise as trade? Capitalism is when one person owns property and employs other people to work on that property via wage/labor. There are in fact non capitalist market economies. Although in case you think socialism is when the government does stuff and capitalism is trade, why did the USSR trade with capitalist countries?
>There will never be a total society-wide commune, which is why we only ever see communes of a particular type, like farms, which is the same functional basis for why castes were originally formed in human societies.
I agree with you there will never be a “society side commune” in the sense that everyone owns everything, but the ownership of property would instead be delegated into smaller voluntary organizations which naturally form via freedom of association including communes and co-operatively owner businesses which are loosely connected to each other and do in fact trade with each other. That on the one hand is a society which I could clearly imagine existing. A clearly less hierarchical world with no real capitalist class and a small state if any at all.
>If there is a choice between one profession and another, people will naturally incline towards the one which is easier, but who gets to arbitrate between who works where?
The same thing that decides that now.

>>20521415

>>20523545
>the ownership of property would instead be delegated blah bla
So the workers of any individual property or business would own said property together democratically, but they would not own the property of another business or commune.

>>20523545
>Capitalism is when one person owns property
it doesn't have to be one person. it can also be a collective capitalist such as a state or a group of joint owners. as long as it's based on capital and wage labour, it's capitalist. it's immaterial which persons happen to fulfill the functions of capital.
>There are in fact non capitalist market economies.
there aren't. there's basically just one world economy now, and it's dominated by capitalist production. and before capitalism there weren't any "market economies" either. there were economies and there were markets that played a supplementary role in those economies. but they weren't "market economies", since markets didn't play a primary role, as most of the produce never passed through markets. the capitalist economy is a market one because production for the market becomes the fundamental form of production. Marx:
>At earlier stages of production a part of what was produced took the form of commodities. Capital, however, necessarily produces its product as a commodity.

>why did the USSR trade with capitalist countries?
because it was a part of the capitalist world economy

>>20523525
>which were self-sufficient
They weren't. You don't seem to understand what self-sufficiency actually is, as though simply growing food means one is "self-sufficient." Self-sufficiency relates to one's environment just as much as it does to food production, which is just one part of the environment. The point being for anything to be actually self-sufficient, not just relatively sufficient as a unit, structure and privilege are necessary "evils", if you're really intent on considering them to be evil to begin with. To be blunt self-sufficiency is not even a worthy goal to anything except a vegetable, it is only a prerequisite to increasing power and absorption and adaptation of smaller and weaker units.
>>20523545
>Capitalism is when one person owns property and employs other people to work on that property via wage/labor.
Capitalism is also when multiple people own the same property. The quantity of people who own property is not very relevant. Likewise, who exactly performs the labor does not seem relevant to me when there are still different functional groups performing qualitatively different labor and exchanging with each other in capitalist commerce. It's the same difference between stock brokers who technically work in the sense that they spend hours doing something for money, and farmers who do the same thing, it's labor but qualitatively different, even if you consider that quality to be "productivity", something hard to pin down in the first place.
>The same thing that decides that now.
The deciding factor today is market forces and intelligence/cunning. Whoever is mathematically gifted and able to predict trends, along with a degree of chance, is who moves up. There is no conscious authority, which is exactly what causes so much confusion and chaos, resentment even. How can you possibly respect people who appear to have simply "taken advantage of an impersonal force" (a force with no intrinsic moral value) in order to get above you? There doesn't appear to be any reason or authoritative decision, which is exactly where resentment stems from. So long as there is a figure of authority, with a sword in one hand and a scales in the other, there will generally be justice (ie so long as there is a "sufficient reason" palatable to the human mind). The way things are, there is simply an impersonal mechanism which does not have either a sword nor scales. Well, the only sense in which the scales are maintained is that even the rich don't tend to last long in this environment compared to the old world, but people tend to only notice their own deprivation compared to the successes of others.

>>20520715
"the slaves" is more a joke on decadence of the distanced 'elites' than anything else; esp. the notion that this type also doesn't want to work at anything themselves.

>>20523525
this is a good point; many medieval and renaissance eras would strike the modern person as being completely communistic; especially in the centuries prior to taxation in coin, where the taxes were paid in goods and military/police duties.

>>20523545
>>20523556
eh.. you know the big difference with a production focused economy producing massive actual surplus of goods is that you actually can afford to let useless 'easy job' people lay around idle. So long as they have no rights to influence the society it doesn't matter very much.

Capitalism rather refers to the debt-based stock market thing, which is a relatively recent idea - being considered criminal, for obvious reasons, prior.

>Capitalism is when one person owns property and employs other people to work on that property via wage/labor.
that's the case with every form of exchange,lol it's not a genius innovation from the 1930's.


The root of this stuff probably goes back to humans being inclined to leave their land in the first place, then they enter into the temporary employment wage scumming and find themselves stuck in it, or having grown up generations stuck in it, whichever the case may be.

The solution, then, isn't for everybody to own everything, but for everybody to own something.

>>20523325
This is the argument of anti-industrial or primitivist people. Of course you had no anesthesia and you could die from horrible illnesses but modernity is safe like a prison is safe.

>>20523152
You can't imagine that. You are imagining a bunch of people abstractly working in a field and then eating their groceries together. You are not accounting for the 10000 problem situations that will arise from the fact that human beings are human beings. Nobody wants to give up good shit. You had to literally mind break a wwhole generation of man to make them not disgusted at marrying a woman who's slept around. Human beings want to own shit. You want to own shit. You would never give your bed and food and commodities to a random nigger who walked into.your house just because he says he needs it.

>>20523663
>You can't imagine that.
You can't imagine being a shareholder or having stake in an investment or paying taxes? Hm.

>>20523663
>You had to literally mind break a wwhole generation of man to make them not disgusted at marrying a woman who's slept around.
least deranged il/lit/erate

>>20520895
I can't handle this feel

>>20523663
>Nobody wants to give up good shit.
that's precisely why the communist revolution will happen. productive forces keep developing, and at some point the existing social form becomes an obstacle to their functioning at the higher level, prompting the alternative of either giving up good shit or preserving the good shit by ascending to a superior social form.

>>20523738
>that's precisely why the communist revolution will happen.
the reason why we'll enter a communist dystopian technototalitarianism is that we finally have technology powerful enough to enact total, global surveillance. you will never have good shit, you stupid soicuck consumer retard. you will have marvel movies with CCP niggers buggering in it while swinging party flags and a camera scans your retina for microbullshit facecrime

>>20523734
does this picture btfo the stoics?

>>20520715
>Who are the slaves
>We all are slaves except for the glorious party leader, but that's just for now, the leader will step down when he thinks we are ready :)

>>20523197
No, we're not. Because of uneven distribution of wealth, degeneracy of chronically bored, and other issues, utopia is still a faraway dream and will forever be one.

>>20523749
>dystopian technototalitarianism is that we finally have technology powerful enough
i secretly wouldn't mind if this did happen,

Imagine having cyber-implants or soldiers relying on uber glossy tech, it'd be so fucking easy to knock out entire battalions with a simple hand-held electromagnetic pulse emitter using basic tech from the fucking 60's.

Some pockets of western society are already like Demolition Man in how easy it is to steamroller through these people. You could even consider the half-retarded 'terrorist' or the high school shooters in this category as well; basically babies who nobody knows how to disarm and a police/military force in the habit of firing people who could.

>>20523738
>that's precisely why the communist revolution will happen. productive forces keep developing,
>productive
they really don't, and this is more the reason why economic poverty (lack of income, lack of housing) necessitates going further towards pseudo-social policies.

It's actually amazing to me how the people reliant on consumerism never managed to figure out that trashing their own economies would mean nobody could afford to buy the various opiates that would keep them passive and amused. It kind of reminds me of the homeless people you see with a local national flag, slurring about communism, who ought by all rights have long since sacrificed themselves to kill politicians responsible for everyones misery, on behalf of those who can't.

>>20523860
>they really don't
they really do. the "third industrial revolution" or the "digital revolution" took place in recent decades, and the fourth one is already starting to take off

>>20523892
>and the fourth one is already starting to take off
Nuclear war?

>>20523179
so we live in communism...

>>20523956
smart manufacturing, internet of things, 3d printing, AI, and so on

>>20523892
>"digital revolution"
psft it's a debt bubble which has crushed the job-economy and produced most of the problems people suffer from, in terms of loss of work as well as loss of brain cells and civil liberties.

>third industrial revolution
industry is the wrong word, you know as it implies some form of actual production occurring (industria) - this was more like a controlled demolition 'of' national industry with the effect only to "increase profits" (in hyper-inflated currency) by imposing scarcity on commodities that would be cheap and plentiful and providing employment if they were being produced.

> the fourth one is already starting to take off
do you mean the ummm... 'NFT' thing whatever it's called ... yeah that's not milking any cows or pressing any wine either.

Wait a minute, I don't understand where you're coming from -

You're saying a revolution 'will' happen 'because of' "productive forces (such as this)", but if you believe in (those) as positive things then why would you think people would be toppling the government? They would be happy and wealthy from NFTs, right?

I don't get it; surely the reality of these things being completely crap and widespread economic mismanagement causing current poverty would be the thing that would cause a revolution; out of sheer necessity on the part of people.

>>20523983
oh geez, these things already existed in 2010. The internet of things actually existed back then, and it was no more than a diversion on a rainy day.

way overhyped,

>>20523152
>Communism
>profits
Lmao, you fucking retard. There's no profits under communism... have you not read Marx? Profit is the rate of exploitation under capitalism, under Marx, you dumb fuck.

revolution, baby.

GRAPE SHOT TIME

>>20523996
>Marx
You may have a copy of marx to read while you wait to be tied to a post in a field and sot with artillery cannons.

>>20523999
> Muh gunz will fix it! Take that you snooty Europeans! FREEDUMB!!!!
And this is why America is a joke of nation with school-shootings daily.

>>20523996
Profit is total production - total consumption under communal socialism, you dumb fuck. That profit is used to pay other communes for their collective wage labor.

>>20523986
>psft it's a debt bubble which has crushed the job-economy and produced most of the problems people suffer from
I was talking about the progress in the development of productive forces related to the digital revolution. the things you describe, on the other hand, are not the property of the productive forces, but of the specific relations of production that those productive forces are currently constrained within. and I'm saying that they'll inevitably overcome that obstacle
>industry is the wrong word, you know as it implies some form of actual production occurring
the digital revolution has led to great improvements in actually productive technology. that's not even up for discussion
>do you mean the ummm... 'NFT' thing whatever it's called
no
>You're saying a revolution 'will' happen 'because of' "productive forces (such as this)", but if you believe in (those) as positive things then why would you think people would be toppling the government? They would be happy and wealthy from NFTs, right?
because the fact that the productive forces are developing doesn't entail that the relations of production are such that people can just harmoniously enjoy the fruits of this development and live happily ever after
>>20523991
>oh geez, these things already existed in 2010.
and computers existed in the 1940s. so what

>>20521415
Under communism, there are no owners because private property no longer exists. The person who enforces common property, the state, is the owner while everyone is slave who works for him.
>>20523532
I can't believe people missed this text. Marx and Engels got a lot of their utopian ideas from the Christian communes that existed well before they were alive. Many of communes failed because common property led to people often failed because of were lazy, and the only ones that could survive were religious cults that had unnatural amounts of indoctrination and coercion to get people to work.
>>20523084
>Slavery when you can choose where you work and how much you make as you work
Are commies really this retarded?

>>20524029
No, you retard. Profit is surplus value under capitalism according to Marx... its the rate of exploitation. You've never read Marx. Profits don't exist under communism, according to Marx, because there's no exchange-value from commodity circulation. You literally are a fucking retard, and don't even know basics of communism lmao.

>>20524043
We're talking about reality, not Marx. That's where you seem to be confused.

>>20524045
>Marx's theories of communism don't align with reality
Then communism is utopian, and a waste of time, retard. Thank you for acknowledging it. Fuck off with your non-sense.

>>20524080
Not at all. We were discussing practical communism, not an imaginary post-scarcity one where commodities have no exchange value.

>>20524090
There's no such thing as "practical communism." That's an oxymoron. Feel free to go work on a utopian commune of free loaders. No one gives a fuck loser. Everyone else will be too busy living their lives and making money.

>>20520715
>imagine thinking this does anything
Yeah, fuck the slaves, they are like the blacks. Communism would still work, just for the ones that are citizens

>>20523892
yeah the white extermination and destruction of the west revolution

>>20524090
What happens is that overtime people stop giving a fuck about communism, and either leave the commune, or don't work as much, so the commune collapses financially. Its literally what happened to all the other stupid communes that existed since Owen's time. We've already seen "practical communism" fail, and it has no benefits over capitalism. Nobody wants to be stuck on a commune forever, retard. Some people will always want more than what the community can offer, and that will always leave to people being greedy, or selfish enough to put their needs first and leave.

>>20520761
Genetics and a historical fortune of being at the right place at the right time so close to perfection you'd almost think the gods were real to make it happen

>>20524119
if whites are so weak, then they deserve to be wiped out

>>20520715
Women weren’t BTFO’d. They moved on from communism to Nietzsche. Now they don’t even care about equality. The young Stacy and the handsome Chad will continue mate (with birth control) for their own hedonistic ends while leaving the rest of society to suffer.

>>20524015
Actually, lad, I'm English and partially descended from the french aristos who fled la revolucion.

It was more a comment on how tying anti-revolutionaries to sticks and blowing them up with grapeshot, LaFayettes answer, is the only rational response to people who reject reformation.

>. and I'm saying that they'll inevitably overcome that obstacle
Oh, I read that completely wrong, my apologies.

>production
I think you'd appreciate reading Stalins discussion with H.G. Wells on "capitalism 'as' anarchism"- it wasn't immediately obvious to me before I read this, and before seeing what the 'digital' did to the retail and production economy, but it's certianly a thesis of his that proven true; in the sense of 'facebook/twitter policy' trumping actual state and international law (e.g. freedom of speech, etc.) which wouldn't be possible if his 'theory' wasn't so. It's an interesting angle, anyway.

>productive technology
well obviously in some regards yes, but from my perspective i've seen no real change in any area since 2010; just a lot of energies displaced into go-nowhere online things whilst nothing in the physical world has improved on any real level, with the opposite being obviously evidenced - just on an economic basis, never mind the other parts ... which are far more horrifying.

>>20524038
>the Christian communes that existed well before they were alive. Many of communes failed because common property led to people often failed because of were lazy,
It was the 100 yrs war that changed it: when the Kings demanded coin from their barons in taxes it destroyed the agricultural and production basis of the economy, which turned the barons into tax-collecters, and then debtors, and then to moneylenders and thus began the long march of the self-sufficient and productive peasant into the city where they became paupers for the sudden need to sell their goods all at once and getting bad prices to make the new coin rent, and losing everything if one harvest failed and they couldn't even sell anything.

>>20524015
Actually, lad, I'm English and partially descended from the french aristos who fled la revolucion.

It was more a comment on how tying anti-revolutionaries to sticks and blowing them up with grapeshot, LaFayettes answer, is the only rational response to people who reject reformation.

>>20524035
>. and I'm saying that they'll inevitably overcome that obstacle
Oh, I read that completely wrong, my apologies.

>production
I think you'd appreciate reading Stalins discussion with H.G. Wells on "capitalism 'as' anarchism"- it wasn't immediately obvious to me before I read this, and before seeing what the 'digital' did to the retail and production economy, but it's certianly a thesis of his that proven true; in the sense of 'facebook/twitter policy' trumping actual state and international law (e.g. freedom of speech, etc.) which wouldn't be possible if his 'theory' wasn't so. It's an interesting angle, anyway.

>productive technology
well obviously in some regards yes, but from my perspective i've seen no real change in any area since 2010; just a lot of energies displaced into go-nowhere online things whilst nothing in the physical world has improved on any real level, with the opposite being obviously evidenced - just on an economic basis, never mind the other parts ... which are far more horrifying.

>>20524038
>the Christian communes that existed well before they were alive. Many of communes failed because common property led to people often failed because of were lazy,
It was the 100 yrs war that changed it: when the Kings demanded coin from their barons in taxes it destroyed the agricultural and production basis of the economy, which turned the barons into tax-collecters, and then debtors, and then to moneylenders and thus began the long march of the self-sufficient and productive peasant into the city where they became paupers for the sudden need to sell their goods all at once and getting bad prices to make the new coin rent, and losing everything if one harvest failed and they couldn't even sell anything.

>>20524222
> The young Stacy and the handsome Chad will continue mate (with birth control)
I thought women were obsessed with giving birth to multiple mutt nigglets and then making the whitey low-test cuck pay for raising them.

>>20523495
slaves are either born to be slaves or peoples who are destined to become conquered

>>20523398
Those are some pathetic looking crops

>>20521415
>it's ok guys! Under communism we ALL get to be slaves!

>>20520895
>The pure form of culture
>Is wholly material
Fuck, we really can't keep up can we

>>20523345
>Life was easy back then.
It wasn't.
>Serve the community - get a wife, land, slaves and a bag of gold. Simple and great.
Yeah I'm sure that's what it was like for the average person...

>>20524963
Are you even Greek or Roman? Christ, you say that but that's only easy to say, try actually being a slave.
> Inb4 I am. I'm a wage slave.
Not the same thing, faggot. But even so, why can't I just come up with the same justification? Tons of people aren't wage slaving and they're not all elite. What's your excuse?
The ancient past sucked cock unless you were very lucky. Yeah, the present sucks cock too but two wrongs don't make a right.

>>20523152
this guy. in Poland and Russia during USSR there were PGR-y and Sovkhozy which were an absolute catastrophy - lack of productivity and rampant alcoholism. but it le wasnt le real communism, innit?

>>20525095
Anyone below this level wasn't a person, ergo...

>>20520715
I dont get it. Who own the slaves then?

>>20524043
Original poster you replied to with the “imagine a farm bit” here
>Profit is surplus value under capitalism according to Marx
That’s clearly not what I was talking about when I said “share the profits” and under what I was describing, exploitation of surplus value wouldn’t exist.

>>20520895
And I'd trade it all for a kind of funny Robert Altman movie and a chilled San Pellegrino.

>>20525558
>And I'd trade it all for a kind of funny Robert Altman movie
based

>>20520778
nevermind that greece/rome collapsed because slavery became inefficient

>>20525191
That's the joke

>>20521415
Anon...

>>20522708
Some people are so retarded that "that wasn't real communism because real communism is utopia" is logical.

>>20527931
No, it literally just wasn’t communism.

The workers did not own the means of production. And the idea of that is not utopian.

>>20520715
This is russphobic bullshit

>>20520715
Aristophanes was based. Especially since he shat on socrates

>>20520715
Yeah, in this case the slaves will be the machines, something Greeks didn't have

>>20528885
yeah OP has no clue how modern agriculture looks because he never leaves his basement

>>20521415
imagine honestly believing this.
communism is exactly like the quote in OP, there are 2 types "equality" under communism.
The communist politicians are all equal: everyone is rich.
The communist populace are all equal: everyone is poor.
It's the same story over and over again, communists once they are in power seize all the means of productions from people and from that moment on the people live like slaves, working their heads off and in return gaining nothing but slightly less than the bare minimum to survive, often not even that.
e.g. Maduro spending a thousand dollars in one meal in a fancy restaurant while the venezuelan are literally making purses out of their currency bills because even if you have money there is FUCK ALL you can buy in markets, there is no food available.

If you believe any different you might as well believe in santa fucking claus.
Capitalism sucks balls as well but it is way less retarded than communism.

>>20528915
there's no "politicians" in a communist society
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1874/04/bakunin-notes.htm
>The character of the election does not depend on this name, but on the economic foundation, the economic situation of the voters, and as soon as the functions have ceased to be political ones, there exists 1) no government function, 2) the distribution of the general functions has become a business matter, that gives no one domination, 3) election has nothing of its present political character.

>>20528925
Yeah, and women poop rainbows in communist society as well.

>>20528925
>there's no "politicians" in a communist society
yeah, just like there are no "communist societies".
grow up, nigger, it's a literal fairy tale.

the humanist propaganda is that people are mean, not inherently, but because they dont have the material condition to coom.
Once they are rich and have the easy life that humans want, all people are happy an hug each other.
of course the same humanist propaganda says that people who become rich are inherently mean, bc ''money corrupts'' and rich people become selfish forever. It's impossible to stop being selfish alone, this is why all atheists want bureaucrats to make rich people poorer.

so you have the atheist dilemma: the atheist want to coom, they need money for this and they say money will make people happy. but once people have money they coom alone instead of making other people coom. Atheists also need a whole intellectual apparatus to feel mentally safe about their way of life.

This is because atheists and women have no morality beyond hedonism, but still have the deep desire to see themselves and being told that they are virtuous. However, hedonists know that they are subhumans, and since nobody tell atheists that they are righteous, they are addicted to self-made stories where they self insert and are righteous, ''because they say so'' lol.

Don't forget that atheists and women are natural born schizophrenic so they dont have any critical thinking in their lizard brain. IE they actually survive by being sex and drug addicts because they see nothing wrong with building a narrative in their little heads were they pass as righteous.

This is why also in atheism, the society is build on commentaries, by editors, journalists and the plebs, and the topics are female centered, ie about sex and crimes (and most against women).

Dont forget that historically in atheism , there is no truth, and no morality , and atheism was a propaganda pushed by revolutionaries merchants to make a society based on international commerce
atheism = hedonism+metanarrative by humanists about how christian monarchies are evil

this is why all the intellectualism in republics are just about ''how much the bureaucrats should control the economy'', which is just the most barren mentality ever. Bourgeois only care about money and keeping their property rights, in order to coom better.

>>20529174
there will be

>>20528915
What makes me laugh the hardest is that people who believe this >>20528925 bash on religious people for having absurd beliefs. I'm not religious but oh, the fucking irony.

>>20529183
Dangerously based and very well put.

>>20529395
there's nothing ironic about it. the study of history reveals communist organization to be the future of humanity, while it reveals religion to be a delusion based on the ignorance that characterized our species in its early phase of development.
many aspects of quantum physics would've been less plausible to ancient peoples than the belief in a sky fairy, but that doesn't mean that the first would not later be found to be true, and the other to be false

>>20529450
>communist organization to be the future of humanity
more like the end of it. you're a braindead insect and so will be everyone else in your "society"

>>20529470
not at all. taking active part in contributing to society's conscious control over its own functioning will develop the brain of an average person much more than brainlessly allowing themselves to be guided around according to the contingencies of capitalist market anarchy

>>20529450
>the study of history reveals communist organization to be the future of humanity
Yeah all those times it failed miserably was actually just proving how great it was.

>>20524129
>What happens is that overtime people stop giving a fuck about communism,
this is pretty much exactly what happened in the USSR. The komsomol was at its germination the institution of the most devoted communists and future revolutionaries until it eventually just became a club you signed up for so you could get a job in the government.

>>20520895
Knowing my luck I'd be the slave

>>20522708
They were though, its called the dictatorship of the proletariat, where the post-revolutionary state absorbs all private property and begins the process of communalizing all production. read theory.

One moment, leftoids will tell you that Marxism is just like the old Christian communities where everyone lived and worked together, and then the next moment, leftoids will say that they fucking hate Christians and traditional values and the family and hierarchy and gender roles.
You cannot trust these people. They are slimy little worms.

>>20520715
>But who will till the soil?
>The robots.
The joke ain't funny in 21th century CE anymore.

>>20530010
lmao the world runs of child slave labour and most people are wageslaves who live paycheck to paycheck

>>20530015
>lmao the world runs of child slave labour
You have all technical tools already to avoid it. Most of the jobs are service-sector "bullshit" jobs. And that's fucking why we ain't working for 2-3 hours a day, despite Keynes' predictions of such.

>>20529888
it never failed
>>20529949
yeah, it's almost as if the USSR turned from a proletarian dictatorship into a bourgeois dictatorship pretending to be communist for reasons of expediency
>>20529997
the dictatorship of the proletariat is not post-revolutionary, it exists for the duration of the revolution. the point of arrival of the revolution is not establishing the political class rule of the proletariat, but the abolition of classes

>>20520715
You guys are aware that this is part of a dialog from his comedy, right?
I mean, you are not actually retarded, right?

>>20530318
>it never failed
Russia, Cambodia, Vietnam, China, Cuba etc.
It fails every time

>>20530539
none of those had a communist social organization though

>>20530515
Yeah and?

I hate commies but I can't help but pity them(the "utopians", classical marxists can continue sucking their own dick for all I care) for thinking humans are even capable of doing anything correctly or something that is worthy on a cosmic scale. They can't even do pure imperialism, it always has to have some economic basis. It has to be because spices are so expensive and, instead of just forgoing this additive that is not essentially important to you and your health, you build ships to sail the sea not for the thrill and wonder or for exploring's sake but so you can get your own supply of this thing that looks like dropping and makes your tongue tingle. conquering not for virtue but for lust. Instead of viewing the act itself as the highest virtue humans can only choose to see it for the spoils and stakes it brings. And it is in this case that humans will always be no better than the animals they claim to transcend, no matter how complex they may seem in a superficial comparison.

>>20530547
because communist social organization is a Utopian pipe-dream. Marx was wrong about society.
>>20530515
are you autistic or do you think Aristophenes is not making fun of this mindset in his comedic play?

>>20530754
>because communist social organization is a Utopian pipe-dream
so did it never exist or did it exist and fail in Vietnam?
>do you think Aristophenes is not making fun of this mindset in his comedic play?
that mindset has nothing to do with communists, because communists are aware that everyone will have to do manual work:
>In a rational state of society every child whatever, from the age of 9 years, ought to become a productive labourer in the same way that no able-bodied adult person ought to be exempted from the general law of nature, viz.: to work in order to be able to eat, and work not only with the brain but with the hands too.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1866/08/instructions.htm

>>20531064
>so did it never exist or did it exist and fail in Vietnam?
I'm sorry do you think that a man who advocates for communism and makes an attempt of building communism is not a communist? Do you think a prole dictatorship is an essential step to building communism? Are you so scientific that when the experiments fail time and time again to achieve their hypothesis you think they weren't "real" experiments? Also, no true scotsman trash, find another dead horse.
that mindset has nothing to do with communists, because communists are aware that everyone will have to do manual work:
Ok, I'm sorry. Is this>>20530515 you? If so, what the actual fuck were you even trying to say and why did you think stating the obvious was a own? Are you autistic?

>>20531102
forgot the arrow at
>that mindset has nothing to do with communists, because communists are aware that everyone will have to do manual work:

>>20521415
Fuck off commie

>>20521415
>the owners and the workers are the same class,
That's like a liberal saying everyone owns the state in a democracy. Also, managers?

>/lit/ is being retarded again
It's a really common joke about Sparta. It's so common that even the Spartans made the same joke about themselves. Anaxandridas II (father of Leonidas I) was famous for a similar quip when asked about why they let the helots tend the fields instead of just getting rid of the helots: It's not by taking care of the fields but ourselves that we have fields.
Notably, the Spartan recommendation for/against installing democracy was just as obvious and to the point: Try starting it in your own household.

If you read anything that wasn't twitter between smelling your own farts you might not be having retarded futile debates on the internet.
t. Going to read Aristophanes on fart listeners

>>20531102
>I'm sorry do you think that a man who advocates for communism and makes an attempt of building communism is not a communist?
I think that a thing, in this case a communist social organization, must've existed to have failed
>Are you so scientific that when the experiments fail time and time again to achieve their hypothesis you think they weren't "real" experiments?
if there was a hypothesis saying that the proletariat getting to power equals an immediate guarantee of the success of the communist revolution, then the two historical defeats would've been a sufficient refutation. but there's no such hypothesis except in the form of a strawman in your very lazy mind
>Is this>>20530515 you?
no

>>20531102
>>20531653
the actual communist thesis is the the proletariat seizing political power is a necessary condition for its emancipation, aka transitioning into communist society, but not that it's a sufficient condition

>>20523632
Congratulations, you're closer to discovering you are living in universe 25

https://www.iflscience.com/universe-25-the-mouse-utopia-experiment-that-turned-into-an-apocalypse-60407

>>20531653
>no true scotsman nonsense
Find another dead horse to beat. Better yet, admit that "communist social organization" is a vague pipe-dream that does not exist outside of human minds. You can say that fascism never truly existed with your pilpul reasoning.
Also, there is no class in modern society which fulfills these criteria:
1. is the overwhelming majority
2. whom society depends upon
3. is in dire need
I know you like to larp as a communist because it's determined and inevitable and all that and so you can feel cool around normies but your "science" is just retardation and anyone with reason can see it.
>no
then why the fuck are responding?

>>20533388
>Better yet, admit that "communist social organization" is a vague pipe-dream that does not exist outside of human minds.
so did it never exist or did it exist and fail in Vietnam?
>You can say that fascism never truly existed with your pilpul reasoning.
no, you can't
>Also, there is no class in modern society which fulfills these criteria
so?
>then why the fuck are responding?
to tell you that your little exchange was pointless, since it was based on a false premise

>>20522708
egalitarianism requires violence for it to be enforced, and that violence must come from a centralised authority who will ensure everyone is equal (whilst they themselves are a bit more equal, as needs be). communism is totalitarianism by necessity. this is without even touching the idea of controlling the market, which also obviously requires vast centralisation and control.

>>20533726
communism isn't egalitarian and it doesn't control the market but abolishes it

>>20527118
huh?

>>20533719
>so did it never exist or did it exist and fail in Vietnam?
communism existed and failed in Vietnam. I've already explained it to you. Just because the revolutionaries failed to bring about the ideal heaven on earth doesn't mean the attempt wasn't real. That attempt can be called communism just as fascist Italy can be called fascist even though it never perfected the social republic.

>>20533763
communism is egalitarian. Just because you classical autists pretend it's a science devoid of ethics doesn't mean it is. You either consciously believe in egalitarianism or subconsciously.

>>20533719
>so?
Marx's predictions and theories hold no water today.
>to tell you that your little exchange was pointless, since it was based on a false premise
what was the false premise? That Aristophenes was making fun of a proto-feminist mindset?

>>20533996
They are, essentially equivalent to christians who say they don't hate the sinner but that it's simply god's will that the sinner suffers for eternity in hell.

All glowies are capitalists. And they're relentlessly out in droves whenever hashtag marx or communism are uttered on the internet. Bootlickers are the scum of history for millennia.

>>20534016
capitalism literally doesn't exist bro.Go outside and buy a coffee or something. Also, everybody thinks classical marxists are just pompous retards with their noses firmly stuck up their own asses.

>>20533985
>communism existed and failed in Vietnam.
don't change the subject. we were talking specifically about communist organization of society. did that ever exist or is it a pipe-dream that can't ever exist?
>doesn't mean the attempt wasn't real
except we weren't talking about any "attempts", but about a functioning communist society existing and then failing. stop being so slippery
>>20533996
it's clearly not egalitarian though. Engels:
>"The elimination of all social and political inequality," rather than "the abolition of all class distinctions," is similarly a most dubious expression. As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen.
>>20534003
>Marx's predictions and theories hold no water today.
which ones?
>what was the false premise?
that the quote applies to communists in the first place

>>20534105
>don't change the subject.
I'm not. We were talking about communism untill you started splitting hairs and bringing forth "communist social organization" as if it meant anything to real-world communism which relies ultimately on the beliefs and expectations of humans.
>Engels
We've already built like 80% of communism as of now according to him. His revolutionary actions have been implemented from imposing progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.) forced loans, nationalization of heavy industry, centralization of money and credit into the state, free education, public housing, inheritance rights for bastards… but private property continues to endure, which was supposed to vanish of its own accord.
>which ones?
all of them, there is no "proletariat"
>that the quote applies to communists in the first place
Was that what the autist was implying? Seems to me that he didn't think Aristophanes was making fun of proto-feminist behavior.

>>20534105
>>"The elimination of all social and political inequality," rather than "the abolition of all class distinctions," is similarly a most dubious expression. As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen.
That doesn't disqualify Engels from being, subconsciously or not, an egalitarian. He's basically just saying "humans live differently in different places" and applying some vague invisible measurement of "living conditions" behind it. Who is living worse? the Alpine dwellers or the Plainsmen? And how?

>>20534152
I'll add: He neglects to talk about "political inequality." as in, will the natural state of master and servant still exist? That doesn't sound communist.

>>20534133
>I'm not.
yes you are. the discussion started with some anon asserting that communist social organization has failed miserably >>20529888
>His revolutionary actions have been implemented from imposing progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes....
those are all measures within the capitalist social organization. they don't constitute communist social organization. and they aren't inherently communist in any other sense. they're only communist if they're taken by a proletarian dictatorship and lead to its strengthening. but if they're taken by the bourgeoisie and lead to the strengthening of the bourgeoisie, then they're anti-communist.
>all of them
name one
>Was that what the autist was implying?
it's what OP has implied the attitude of communists is, which other people in this thread then referred to
>>20534152
>That doesn't disqualify Engels from being, subconsciously or not, an egalitarian
it does, since egalitarianism is "the doctrine that all people are equal", and Engels says that people aren't equal, because you can't simply ignore things such as, for example, the particular place they're born into
>He's basically just saying "humans live differently in different places"
and how a person lives is a part of what and how they are. egalitarianism rests on an abstraction from all the things that actually make people unequal, such as circumstances of birth. but what's left after applying that abstraction is not even a human being, so nothing that can be ascribed to this abstract creature can be automatically ascribed to a human being
>Who is living worse?
worse for what? if you mean worse for being able to experience pretty mountains everyday, then it's the plainsmen. if you mean worse for something else, then it could be the Alpine dwellers
>>20534187
>will the natural state of master and servant still exist?
it never existed and never will

>>20522708
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

>>20534408
>yes you are. the discussion started with some anon asserting that communist social organization has failed miserably
and you are the one pretending that since heaven on earth wasn't perfected the puritans weren't practicing real puritanism. Again, no true scotsman. Find another horse.
>those are all measures within the capitalist social organization
measures which he proposed would bring about the end of capitalism and cause private property and money to vanish in "the principles of communism"
>name one
there is no such thing as a "proletarian" class.
>worse for what?
that's what I was asking you, What are the inequalities between plainsmen and alpine dwellers according to Engels, how do you even measure that?
>it never existed and never will
You are living under it. Stop this liberal fantasy please.

>>20534408
>it does, since egalitarianism is "the doctrine that all people are equal"
It doesn't, since he doesn't believe in nature or acknowledges the social relations of master and servant as preceding material conditions.

>>20524038
If you want to experience this kind of thing in modern times, I live in a housing co-operative. The idea is supposedly that everybody votes on by-laws, is a part owner, and volunteers a set number of hours a month. In reality, nearly everybody is lazy. The board members only take care of themselves and their friends. The by-laws are absurd and sometimes outright illegal. There was one year where they wanted to measure the height of everybody's dogs and ban dogs over a certain height. One year the idiots voted to both increase their rent and also fine themselves for not participating in volunteer work each month. You know, instead of helping their neighbors out, they would rather just go for the double rent increase. Idiots.

>>20524038
>Are commies really this retarded?
This is actually standard commie belief. Engels talks about it in the principles of communism with some wacky historicism as is expected

>The slave is sold once and for all; the proletarian must sell himself daily and hourly.

>The individual slave, property of one master, is assured an existence, however miserable it may be, because of the master’s interest. The individual proletarian, property as it were of the entire bourgeois class which buys his labor only when someone has need of it, has no secure existence. This existence is assured only to the class as a whole.

>The slave is outside competition; the proletarian is in it and experiences all its vagaries.

>The slave counts as a thing, not as a member of society. Thus, the slave can have a better existence than the proletarian, while the proletarian belongs to a higher stage of social development and, himself, stands on a higher social level than the slave.

In other words, the slave has it better because he is a thing/commodity whereas the worker is like a prostitute/free agent or something. Which is bad I think.

>>20534931
To be fair, he does say that the prole has a "higher social level" or something abstract like that because of the steam engine and mechanical loom I guess.

>>20534863
nta, but communists will often respond to this by saying that they are not actually against "hierarchy" since there will still be "managers" do "manage" things and they will definitely not be their own class because you know "the workers" will totally vote responsibly and in their interests because y'know democracy is actually good when it's not "liberal" or whatever.

>>20534828
>and you are the one pretending that since heaven on earth wasn't perfected the puritans weren't practicing real puritanism.
I'm not
>measures which he proposed would bring about the end of capitalism and cause private property and money to vanish in "the principles of communism"
no, they wouldn't cause that of themselves. they would only provide the ruling proletariat with the necessary means to cause it
>there is no such thing as a "proletarian" class
there is. there's plenty of people in the world who have nothing but their labour-power
>that's what I was asking you
did I say one of them were "living worse"?
>What are the inequalities between plainsmen and alpine dwellers according to Engels
he didn't specify
>how do you even measure that?
you learn how they live and see what the differences are
>You are living under it.
I'm not, I live in the real world, not in some overcompensating loser's fantasy
>>20534840
he does believe in nature, he just doesn't believe in your made up shit for which there's zero evidence

>>20522797
How so? Incels typically demand woman attention but in assemblywomen all the guys say fuck the women and start gangraping a femboy

>>20535152
>I'm not
You are, I'm afraid.
>no, they wouldn't cause that of themselves
Ofc not, nothing can cause it except pure faith and expectations. Not "material conditions"
>there's plenty of people in the world who have nothing but their labour-power
And none of them are the overwhelming majority, whom society depends upon, and in dire need.
>I'm not, I live in the real world,
That is the real world. Stop being a silly liberal, there's nothing malignant about the term master or servant. Would you feel less anxious if I said 'free' and servant?

>>20522853
This, he thought the government was exceedingly feminine. Run by men who can't control their women.

>>20523084
>be slave
>decide I don't want to till this soil anymore
>my owner says "okie doke, sorry to hear about that" gives me a severance package and offers to act as a reference for my next owner

Something about this slavery feels different. Can't pinpoint it.

>>20524015
>he's talking about fighting for freedom, must be american
we've won in the end

>>20524038
>>Slavery when you can choose where you work and how much you make as you work
>Are commies really this retarded?
Sweat shop worker sure are given a lot of choice I'm sure
>that's not real capitalism!

>>20536641
>Sweat shop worker sure are given a lot of choice I'm sure
Yeah... its either work in a sweat shop or be a poor subsistence farmer. Just because you don't like the choice doesn't mean doesn't exist.

>>20534105
>it's clearly not egalitarian though. Engels:
Engels is egalitarian. Your quote is literally him saying he wants to go further than liberals by reducing economic inequality - that's why he said "may be reduced to a minimum." The goal is get there as close as possible. You people just read quotes, and don't critically think about what they mean in reality or the implications of the thought. You're just retarded.

>>20534105
Anyone who reads that quote, and isn't retarded, knows Engels was just being pedantic about wanting egalitarianism, not that he doesn't want it. You can't explain how abolishing class distinctions isn't egalitarian. If no one can be a business owner, aristocrat anymore but only a worker - its pretty clear its egalitarian.

>>20524963
You were born as a wage slave. You were destined to become conquered.

>>20536778
and the slave can decide to revolt

>>20536836
What are you revolting though? A shit hole that has to rely on sweatshops is usually filled with the people who lack the creativity to make something better to begin with. You'd end up making things worse IMO

>>20529174
kek

why does communism get /lit/ so riled up?

>>20520761
there is no new knowledge under the sun, and our ancestors in previous civilization cycles already understood the perennial truths of all ages, something that modern civilization has completely forgotten

>>20526476
not even remotely the case

>>20521415
>the owners and the workers are the same class
the owners become the state bureaucracy and Stalin lived in a palace
>>20523152
>imagine a farm where everyone owns the land together and works the fields together and shares the profits together
the historical example of collective farms in the USSR that didn't work at all you mean?

>>20520715
saved

>>20537303
well its a fake religion created by the Rothschilds, Adam Weishaupt (fake name) was the first prophet and then Karl Marx (fake name) was second. Only retards who have no clue about history don't understand this

>>20529977
It has nothing to do with luck, it is the favour of the gods that decides one's lot in life.

>>20521415
>>20523152
This level of delusion is actually kind of scary

>>20537556
sometimes i forget that actual schizos are on this board

>>20536793
egalitarianism is the belief that people are equal and deserve equal rights. Engels literally says that people aren't equal, communists literally reject rights altogether, and in the Critique of the Gotha Programme explains that such thing as an equal right is actually impossible:
>But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right.
it's funny that you're accusing me of "just reading quotes" and not thinking critically, when your whole "argument" is based entirely on ignoring the thrust of what's being said and how it completely contradicts the beliefs of real world egalitarians.
>>20536805
no, you simply don't know what real egalitarianism is, so you instead judge this according to the vague idea of it you have in your head. but your misconceptions don't apply to reality

>>20521761
I'd rather everyone suffer and be slaves in slaveland than have unfairland where dysgenic low IQ and weak people by pure happenstance, have resources and lead a life of ease and high IQ was born with nothing and gets nothing and needs to work all day. When people say
>but in communism everyone is poor
To which, I say good. I voted for Trump and have lived in rural America my life. I see rich biden voters from the city and LGBTQ and rich city slickers and all their kids. I would embrace communism in an instant if it meant my financial and social "betters" were put in literal camps and forced to bust rocks all day.

>>20520715
I might actually stop being interested in socialism because of this play. Downloaded. The edition I got is a bit different to this though; she says he interjects and she doesn't say "the slaves." Is the translation in the OP a bit more liberally translated?

>>20538735
Refute praxagora then.

>>20520715
Reminds me of Shigalovism that is discussed in dostoevsky's Demons between Stavrogin and Pyotr Stepanovich -- Everyone will be equal in slavery :^)

>>20538990
>“He’s written a good thing in that manuscript,” Verkhovensky went on. “He suggests a system of spying. Every member of the society spies on the others, and it’s his duty to inform against them. Every one belongs to all and all to every one. All are slaves and equal in their slavery. In extreme cases he advocates slander and murder, but the great thing about it is equality. To begin with, the level of education, science, and talents is lowered. A high level of education and science is only possible for great intellects, and they are not wanted. The great intellects have always seized the power and been despots. Great intellects cannot help being despots and they’ve always done more harm than good. They will be banished or put to death. Cicero will have his tongue cut out, Copernicus will have his eyes put out, Shakespeare will be stoned—that’s Shigalovism. Slaves are bound to be equal. There has never been either freedom or equality without despotism, but in the herd there is bound to be equality, and that’s Shigalovism! Ha ha ha! Do you think it strange? I am for Shigalovism.”

>>20537543
>there is no new knowledge under the sun, and our ancestors in previous civilization cycles already understood the perennial truths of all ages, something that modern civilization has completely forgotten
The problem is that most of the literature from the Greeks has been lost to time

>>20538735
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0030%3Acard%3D635

>>20524038
communism is stateless, classless, moneyless society as per communist definition. State doesn't own anything as it wouldn't exist

Yes Marx and Engels borrow heavily from Christianity and its mythology. Revolution itself borrows heavily from Christian eschatology, revolution has clear parallels to Final days.

I choose to be payed as Elon Musk, why am I not payed as him? It is my choice isn't it?

>>20541220
Yes communism is a platonic ideal that's not real or realistic, describing it as the societal equivalent of perfect forms is fucking stupid. Communism is poisoned by the people espousing it and the taint of those would-be authoritarians and despots will never allow this definition be exemplified, EVER. When we sprout wings, halos and shed mortal bodies to join the eternal thought-dream, there you will find your "communism" dressed in its perfect definition.

>>20522792
kek this

>>20525117
Being an ancient Greek slave was easier than a being modern NYC/London/Tokyo wageslave

>>20541921
Big city niggercattle waste most of their lives driving to wageslave.

>>20541921
This.

>>20541220
Communism just means kike.

>>20538370
>egalitarianism is the belief that people are equal and deserve equal rights. Engels literally says that people aren't equal, c
No, Engels said we should abolish economic differences to make them equal. You're just a retard playing language games. Everyone knows your intentions; nobody is falling for it, kike.

>>20542364
Trump voters with no money would be the ones in charge after a proletarian revolution. They would put urbanites in camps and take their wealth.

>>20538370
>your misconceptions don't apply to reality
You want to abolish money, the state and class. Your autism is so off the charts you don't realize most people here reject you, and always will. Nobody believes your incredible utopian ideas that have no basis in reality. You're not convincing anyone here of your retarded, childish Manichean beliefs besides your own self. Nobody wants your egalitarianism, kum-bah-yah non-sense. Get the fuck off /lit/, faggot.

>>20538370
Bio-leninist sophistry and non-sense. Engels was explicit in saying he wants to abolish economic distinctions and class. That is egalitarian - you want to rid the world of the rich and poor. No matter how much bullshit, and non-sense, you say otherwise - your intentions are clear. Anyone can see Engels is just a neo-Jacobin larper, like all modern leftists, with decadent beliefs against natural hierarchies. There's no reasoning with people like you either way because you're so sure of your pathetic cult. Its okay - you'll be shot and that will be the end of that.

bump

>>20542416
>Bio-leninist

Please go back and never return.

>>20542416
egalitarians don't want to abolish economic distinctions and class. they support private property. the only purpose of egalitarianism was to oppose feudal privileges by advocating for equal rights, removing legal barriers and creating supply of free wage workers out of serfs and slaves, with the goal of enabling capital accumulation for the nascent bourgeoisie.
nowadays it's mostly used by sections of the middle class to further their various particular interests, as well as pragmatically by the sections of the bourgeoisie that see excessive wealth inequality as a destabilizing factor, which hurts their long-term profits.
whereas in the revolutionary phase of the bourgeoisie, communists had a common cause with the egalitarians, now they're diametrically opposed. a different conclusion can only be reached if one ignores the real world and operates purely on irrelevant, invented abstractions.

>>20523628
>the debt-based stock market thing
This is called Finance, and is not mutually inclusive with Capitalism.

>>20525024
No shit, there are cardboards beneath.

>>20523447
>For sure. But whether or not it works, that’s what communism means.
Absolute nothing statement. This is like presenting someone with a pile of shit, calling it a diamond, and then saying "well, it's supposed to be shiny and precious. That's what a diamond is"

>>20537303
Because there's no difference between a Jehovah's Witness knocking on your door and telling you to believe in their bizarre eschatology and a communist telling you that everything you care about will be rightfully destroyed to make way for a communist utopia

>>20520761
All true philosophy sprouts from the common basic truths of life - suffering, love, humour, envy and so on.
The Greeks mastered the basics while most of modern 'thinkers' have not, mostly because they are urbanites, children of luxury; fundamental experiences of life haven been incongruous with the common way of 'civilised' living for many centuries now. It has mostly been theories referring to other theories based in turn on 10th hand reports of those basic truths. As may be expected, those jerry-built systems of thought stand no chance against those who actually knew what they were talking about.

>>20544367
Egalitarians do want to abolish class distinctions you want to eliminate the ability for to be rich, to have money - to have a distinct class status based on wealth accumulation. I'm not sure why you're still going. You're not convincing anyone here, but yourself of your own delusions.

>>20538995
>“He’s written a good thing in that manuscript,” Verkhovensky went on. “He suggests a system of spying. Every member of the society spies on the others, and it’s his duty to inform against them.
cancel culture is his dream

>>20537556
>Adam Weishaupt (fake name) was the first prophet and then Karl Marx (fake name)
yeah what are the real names

>>20523628
>Capitalism rather refers to the debt-based stock market thing
Capitalism, also known as a "free market", refers to people owning things and no one else telling them what they're allowed to do with that property. You don't have to have economists and bankers magically conjure Capitalism into existence through the power of spreadsheets.

>The solution, then, isn't for everybody to own everything, but for everybody to own something.
The problem is that population is increasing

>>20520715
Commies and feminists were BTFO even earlier by the Word of God.

>>20520715
They weren't.

>>20523197
And who makes and maintains these robots? Other robots?

>>20546356
And you are just another descendent of these alienations of fundamental experiences.