/lit/ - Literature

>>20628872
If you're smart? Just read Marx. Don't talk to actual communists, they all know very little about actual marxist theory until you penetrate their inner circles and that will require loads of virtue signalling or political activism. See how you understand him, then engage in some dialogue. If you're not super smart, communism really, really isn't for you, at least not in the modern day and age. Communism is an absolute beast of an ideology and not really important nowadays for intellectual roundedness unless you want to get into extremely technical discussions with die-hards.

>>20628872
Read Hegel, Feuerbach, Marx and Engels.

>>20628872
>How do I get into communism?
Unless you're Jewish you'd be a slave.

>Unironically,give me your best recommendations to understand communism.
Unless you're Jewish you'd be a slave.

I would say for a basic reading list
>Manifesto of the Communist Party
>Socialism Utopian and Scientific
>Wage Labour & Capital
>Value, Price, and Profit
>Critique of the Gotha Programme
>The Civil War in France
>Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (with a more modern preface)
>The German Ideology (at least the first chapter)
>Capital (at least the first chapter)
>State and Revolution
>Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism
>What is to Be Done?
>Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky
It looks like a long list but many of these are short pamphlets.

>>20628903
>How do I get into critical theory?
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>20628893
I consider myself smart in general but I haven't gotten into economics ,I study law.

Which books do you recommend and in what order?
Same goes for >>20628899

>>20628872
Five year plan report

>>20628915
Marxism is barely an economic theory, and very far from a legal one. It sounds like a waste of your time to me. Just read the basics/a few wiki pages if you want to incorporate it into your worldview

>>20628903
/thread

>>20628924
The basic knowledge it's just not enough ,it feels like repeating stuff you heard rather than actually knowing what you are talking about.

That's why I'm cautious with most 'communists',I just feel they follow the crowd.

>>20628914
OP, screencap this and close the thread because it's all you need and every other reply will be worthless pol spam.

>>20628914
>The German Ideology
>German
Must be a comedy.

>>20628954
Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about. Skim through Capital vols. I & II and see if anything jumps out at you. Take notes and look them up or talk to the commies themselves if you're in college. Enlightening stuff. One time I told a lefty friend of mine that I was reading the Gulag Archipelago and he took it nearly as an insult and went, "Well Stalin wasn't that bad you know"

>>20628914
>>20628967
Already did ,fren

>>20628924
>just read wiki pages
nice bait, pleb.

>>20629106
Je suis wikipatrician.

>OP reads book with his brainpussy spread wide open, absorbs all the text with no criticality, assuming that it must be the truth
good goy. redistribute wealth!

>>20628872
If you have an IQ over 60 you’re going to have a really hard time reading anything that will convince you communism would be good but read Marx.

>>20628872
Chapter 8 of "Blackshirts and Reds" by Michael Parenti gives a good introduction to Marx, and quickly refutes all the "but it doesn't WORK!" garbage you've probably heard from Americans.
>>20628903
Pee pee, poo poo, etc.

>>20628872
Austro-Marxism is all you need.

I like communism just because it pisses off Amerilards and Eurocucks

You read Bakunin and never consider it.

>>20628872
State and Revolution is the perfect gateway.
It does require some knowledge of the history, politics and philosophy of the century prior and later to it, but that shouldn't take too long.

Go with Lenin

>>20628991
He rly wasn't lmao

>>20628872
>Marxism in a nutshell: From the criticism of capitalism to a classless society
https://www.robingoodfellow.info/pagesen/rubriques/meren.htm

>>20628915
There’s a “reader” that collects his major stuff, if you look up “The Marx-Engels Reader” you’ll find it. It’s what gets used for sociology classes and stuff, pretty easy to follow along.

>>20629721
>le BASED Stalin!
Can this meme die?

>>20628872
Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell

The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin

>>20628914
This and Engels' principles of communism early on. its posited as a FAQ for communists and really easy to understand.

>>20628872
Call of the Crocodile

>>20629629
sounds like cope, juden

>>20628872
Unironically, get a job.

Communism is cringe and only LARPers believe in it today, the fuck are you doing

>>20628872
Work a day in a sweat shop, and you know everything about communism.

The Communist Manifesto
Socialism, Utopian and Scientific
Ludwig Feuerbach & End of Classical German Philosophy
Critique of the Gotha Program
What is to be Done?
The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State
State and Revolution
Left Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder
Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism
Wage-Labour and Capital
Value, Price and Profit
The Foundations of Leninism
On Practice & Contradiction
Capital, Vol.1

Blackshirts & Reds by Michael Parenti debunks common tropes against communism and if you want Stalinist apologia you can refer to Grover furr

The seethe in this thread

>>20628872
I have a recommended section in Das Capital if you're interested but I'll only bother finding it if you'll read it.
The intro to grundrisse is superb too https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch01.htm

>>20630381
ikr dumb fucking "commie" kikes

>>20630140
>Larpers
>china
>Cuba
>Laos
>Vietnam
>Korea
>Wa State
>Rojava
>Zapatistas

>>20630224
True, if you experience that intensity of exploitation intuitively on your body you'll realize the importance of the working class' self-liberation.

>>20630396
kek

>>20628899
>>20628914
>>20630372
good answers

>>20629736

>>20628872
Unironically start with the Wikipedia page. Don't delve into Marxist word salad until you understand the very point and goal of the ideology.

>>20628872
Why are people so interested in a system that leads to mass killings, famine, and poverty?

Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy
Wage Labour and Capital and Value, Price and Profit
Capital

>>20628915
Ok anon. This order.

Read Proudhon (the actual first socialist
Read Adam Smith (optional because he invented the LTV)
Read Marx/Engels
Read Bakunin
Read Lenin
Read Kropotkin

If you can manage to do this, then you will automatically know more about the history of socialist thought than 99.99% of this board and probably the whole world.

>>20630442
he's trying to learn communism anon, he has made no mention of capitalism

HRT

There a bunch of people in this thread who will tell you not to follow your interest and read these things, because they are afraid of you drifting away from the herd. Seriously follow this list>>20630463 but only if you are willing to have your entire worldview changed. You cannot unread them.

>>20628872
Nobody understands communism. It has no definition, it's not a real philosophy or whatever it's supposed to be.

>>20630485
Communism is a stateless, moneyless, propertyless, classless society where the workers own the means of production.

>>20630493
The eschatology of the “working class”

>>20628872
Read marx and engles, after that read later marxists from different marxist currents.
Start with something easy to digest like Socialism: Utopian and Scientific or Wage-Labour and Capital/ Value, Price and Profit as some examples.
Don't bother with the Communist Manifesto, it was largely outdated a few years after its publication, and not much better now.

>>20630427

>>>20629736(You)
Anything worth doing is worth doing peacefully

The McDonald's M of politics.

>>20628893
>an absolute beast
When you need that many words to begin to hint at your underlying points the issues that emerge in practice can easily be hidden in the mountain of premises that are given as the text goes along.
If you use basic principles you can construct a description in relatively few words. With less components, a simpler description you're more likely to be able to model any given system and debug inconsistencies in your model.
Capital accumulates in the hands of capital holders. That's not specific to capital, it's a more fundamental phenomena. The simpler description includes capital accumulation and many more things so it's a better description. A more accurate and more useful model of reality.

>>20630372
Blackshirts and Reds is one of the most biased and disingenuous texts ever. Parenti is a fraud and a propagandist. He takes things out of his ass and presents them as facts. Not worth wasting your time reading such garbage

>>20630470
And communism did all of those things he mentioned

>>20630402
A lot of these are only communist in name.

>>20628893
Communism for smart people? Give me a break. Only low IQ savages would say such thing. You don't even have to be the most expert person on philosophy to realize it is full of errors and it's probably the most inconsistent philoshopy ever created.

>>20630707
Just makes you hungry by looking at it

>>20631000

>>20628903
I don't know Communism tends to make everything worse.

>>20628872
das capital

>>20630402
>Rojava
This is a CIA backed commune

>>20628893
fpbp

I've been on the left my entire adult life. I am still on the left.

That does not mean that I think that traditional communism in its intellectual form makes any sense.

Ideology is just that, going from theory to practice is a fucking gong show, and you end up with the messes that are russia and china. These are not 'true' communist countries, they are elites re-enforced with a powerful military in communist costumes.

You want to be a communist? Vote, and vote for progressive canidates. Vote in EVERY. SINGLE.ELECTION.

Do simple things like be a good neighbour, pick up after your dog, plant trees, give to the food banks.

You want to read communist literature, pick up a bible, Jesus was about as far left as you can get. This is why I laugh at all the right wing ding dongs saying they are following Jesus.. No, they are not.

The reality is that in order to bring about a better world, it involves action, not theory.

>>20628872
>How do I get into communism?
I think people get into it in a lot of different ways. For me, the point is to enable people to liberate themselves in their own way and take back their creative virtues which become alienated from us. It's ultimately about people at the center of things but capitalism turns these social relationships into relationships between things. I think the Principles of Communism by Engels is better than the Manifesto. Just read and make up your own mind and be wary of people trying to hustle you into a particular interpretation which is the absolute truth as professed by two people in a sect so the fate of the world depends on them. I actually thought this video was good at getting down to the basics (and very basic) although it's a bit silly but not totally silly as it's based on actual curriculum which she has translated and is about to release as a book which will have a free pdf version.

https://youtu.be/neI-ol2AowM

>>20630991
This is "capitalist realism."

>>20628893
based

Read Breaking the Bondage of Interest

>>20631915
Theory = voting
Action = striking, participating in union meetings, consuming less, teaching kids not to stress too much about homework, etc

The landed classes want so badly for you to think change is coming just around the corner at the next election which did I tell you is the most important election ever?

>>20628872
To be a communist, you need to treat all people like human beings.
You need to be kind and courageous, you need to know the basic principles of decency.
If an old man is beaten, then you must stand up for the old man.
If someone humiliates a woman, you must stand up for her.
Communism is actually a Christian philosophy for atheists.
Live with honor and die with honor.
This does not mean that you should not see your class or your race.
This means that you must be Human.

>>20630993
Marxism is probably the most complicated political, economic and social theory in the history of the world. Pick up some of these books and read it yourself.

At least 1/3 of Marxism is about various rules summarized from philosophy and natural science. The basic framework is called "dialectical and historical materialism" which were based on criticisms and combinations of the 19th Western philosophy and scientific developments. Dialectical materialism's core values are the conservation of mass, the unity of opposites, the interchange of quantity and quality, the negation of negation in addition to some well-known materialist principles.

Marxism would try to tell you about logical fallacies of mechanical materialism (including Eurocentrism and social Darwinism being falsely applied in social science that led to justify fascism), subjective and objective idealism (religion, metaphysics, the end of history, linear history, circular repetition, individualism, heroic historicism) dominating Western philosophy before Marxism's rise. It would try to answer the nature of the material world and human consciousness, explain how the world has been functioned and what human beings are doing here.

The second part is about how that can all define and explain pretty much everything that primarily matters in the social sciences (contradictions, class, productivity, means of production, economic substructure, political superstructure, the role of religion). Only the last part is about why socialism and communism will be respectively waiting in the next two stations after the bus departs from the current station of capitalism. But for the vast majority, they can't really understand Marxism because it's too complicated. So what they get is usually a few sentences and iconic symbols.

>>20632031
You're talking bullshit.
Karl Marx, i.e. Carl Levy was a Jew from the Levitical caste.
The Levites were Indo-European nomads who arrived in the Levant and founded the Muhammadai tribe, the Kurd tribe, etc.
These were the ancient Indians of the Middle East. From them came Darius the Great, the King of the Persians, although before him the land of the Persians was called Media, i.e. Middle Earth, just like Midgard, which fights against the evil many-headed snake Azhi-Dahak and destroys Angra Mainyu.

>>20632002
You are not wrong. However, we still live in democracies, and we need to make educated decisions. And for my money, voting is still a vital action of resistance, when in reality they(the right wing, neo fascist capitalists) do not want you to vote.

>>20632043
So you attack Karl Marx with an ad hominem and an attack on his origin without responding to the philosophical system?

>>20632031
Marx was a self indulgent windbag that obfuscated everything he wrote. He deliberately pandered to the intellectual elites because they put food on his table.
In an era of conspiracy theories and the compression of ideas to the time span of a tik tok we need clear concise language on why imperialism and capitalism are bad and working together and improving the conditions of the working class is the way to make a better future.

>>20632043
TF is this word salad.

>>20632066
>
Philosophy is crap.
Karl Marx said everything correctly.
If you don't understand this, then...
You and live in this chaos!
If you are an American, then burn in this chaos!
You kindled this fire yourself!
You betrayed the Cherokee, you betrayed the Ulzana!

>>20628872
Books on why communism lost so badly?

>>20632074
Are you anarchist or a based Strasserist?

>>20630493
How can the working class exist in a classless society?

>>20632142
when you have one class there is no class. look at it this way: when you have only one nation in the whole world, there is no citizenship. nor passport.

>>20632171
If only workers exist, then the statement "workers own the means of production" is trivial

>>20628872
First of all, you need to hate yourself

>>20632194
no, it's not.
today, pretty much everyone owns a part of the means of production.
for example, through your retirement plan.
but that doesnt mean that workers actually own anything. having the property of a share, doesnt make you trully in control of the means of production.
there is a disproportion, which would take a lot of time to be leveled.
saying "everyone should own the means of production" is an understatement which is wrong and instead you should say: "workers (as a class which exists today, compared to every other class which exists today) own the means of production".
by saying "everyone own the means of production" you are implying "capitalists, proletarians and small bourgoisie own the means of production".
let's take the example i used before:"citizens should be defended", instead of "everyone should be defended". if you say:"everyone should be defended", means you are saying "stateless people, aliens, citizens and rebels should be defended".
having one category of people doesnt qualify you as one: it is a very slow process which can be disrupted or corrupted, recreating those classes which existed before. in the end there will be just one class, yeah, but it takes a lot of time.
another example, which actually exists: laws according to your origin.
the fact that in medieval times there were different laws according to you being a latin or a german, doesnt mean now there are latins and germans in europe which have different laws.
sometimes, during history, there were reconstitutions of laws applied to different categories of people (e.g. apartheid), but they were eventually suppressed.
this is why, even if the bolsheviks were from the communist party, when they took power in russia, they decided to call it union of sovietic SOCIALIST (not communist) republics.
while they never actually accomplished actual communism, their intentions were clear because they called ussr ussr and not uscr.
hope i explained you well.

>>20632266
>by saying "everyone own the means of production" you are implying "capitalists, proletarians and small bourgoisie own the means of production".
But in a society where only workers exist, the statement"workers own the means of production" is equivalent to "everyone own the means of production"

>>20628872

Why was the Berlin wall built?

>>20632290
true. but this can become not true.
if you are a racist, you will say:"only the white people should have the right to live".
to create a country where this statement is true, you need a lot of time.
when you eventually kill all the niggers, you end up with only white people.
but eventually a black man will immigrate in your racist country, and you will be able to kill him according to the statement stated above.
so, should a racist person say:"everyone should have the right to live" when in reality he is refering to white people only?
eventually, it will become trivial when the statement will lead to having a country having only white people.
but until then, "only white people should have the right to live" will be the statement of a racist person

>>20632266
This sounded like a lot of insipid junk. Who are these 'workers'? What do they 'own'? A spanner? A factory? You don't need to live in a communist regime to own the means to produce things for yourself, so I assume you mean factories, production in the sense of the mass production of goods that form the backbone of society.
So you take Everyman Oiljeans off the factory floor and give him command of a factory.
Great. Now what?

>>20628872
>How do I get into communism?
Can you add and subtract? Do you know the difference between net and gross? When you think of an apple, do you see a fill color applemin your mind?

Then Im sorry, but you cant be a communist.

If you read Marx you will just laugh at the ridiculous chain of reasoning.

>>20632293
to prevent people from the capitalist side of germany to immigrate illegally into the communist side of it.
build walls for this same reason is a very common practice throughout all history.
see, as examples:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_wall
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier

>>20632343
>give him command of a factory.
Great. Now what?
command doesnt always mean ownership, anon.
you dont need to own to command, nor to command to own.
bezos doesnt command now, he just owns.
also, read das kapital if you have these questions.

>>20632350
>build walls
building walls*

>>20628893
>>20628872
Communism is for losers & slaves, it has killed more people than any ideology. Even marx had to ask for money in order to live lmao.
>Inb4 it wasn't real communism

>>20630993
>>20628903
Based

>>20632031
>Marxism is probably the most complicated political, economic and social theory in the history of the world
Thats an indictment not a praise, its complicated because it doesnt make sense.

>>20628916
Critical Semite Theory

>>20629721
You're retarded.

>>20628967
its an -ism for people who want to commit murder on thin pretexts

why should you NOT get bullied you edgy queer?

>>20632369
>*eats meat*
>muh dead gay russian peasants

>>20629130
/thread

>>20630991
>A lot of these are only communist in name.
#notrealcommunism

>>20630442
>Why are people so interested in a system that leads to mass killings, famine, and poverty?
They think theyll be on top, directing the workers to gulag and playing Civ5 with peoples bodies.

>>20630474
>>20630474
>HRT
kek

>>20632384
You don't make any sense.

>>20632358
You took what was a basic practical problem and made it even worse than it was by driving the issue into one of even deeper semantics.
Everyman Oiljeans owns and commands this factory.
For this factory to produce anything, it needs people working in it, ie, workers.
Unless you compel them with punishments, these workers will need to be compensated to a degree they accept if they are going to work in the factory.
But since this is communism, there is no compensation beyond food, and potentially not even that.
The route you went with this was, 'the workers still own the factory, even though they are doing the exact thing they would be in a capitalist regime, in the exact power dynamic of a capitalist regime, except even worse now because they're not getting paid, because the person telling them what to do and organizing the work used to be a worker on the factory floor'.
That the very idea someone who had a former commonality with them is now in a position in authority is compensation enough in itself.
The individuality of the workers is completely discounted into some hivemind meta-demographic of 'worker', which Oiljeans isn't even in anymore. He's got off his overalls and now he's putzing about in the offices.
Essentially, that the workers should accept getting less because they should equate themselves with the people over them.
Or does everyone get a factory with nobody working in it?

>>20632130
Strasserism kinda based too

>>20630493
>stateless
but we're in a state of communism, thats what state means, its a framework for organizing society... and the framework is communism
true "stateless" would be anarchy, and it would permit capitalism, which would quickly become the dominant system for interacting with strangers

>moneyless
what, barter? coupons? how do you know X worker "needs" Y product? money isnt wealth or value, its just a number system to describe it.

>propertyless
then how can anyone "own" a means of production?

>working class
ah the class in the classless society, and the other class is the people deciding who gets what, the kleptocrat bureocracy

>own the means of production!
just buy shares in a corporation retard, thats a better version of communism than marx ever invented

tl;dr communism = contradictions in terms which evil bastards use to kill people

>>20632425
>Or does everyone get a factory with nobody working in it?
kek that sounds like communism in real life

>>20632425
it's much simpler than that, actually.
ever heard of cooperatives?
can you apply the logic of cooperatives to one factory?
also, you are implyin that Everyman Oiljeans is someone who has no expertise in the field of managing a factory. why? managers are workers too.
they have a degree for that job. just like a medic have one for his own.
why should you be the only one to own a factory to be its manager?
i mean, anon, there are people who pay the rent to their landlord, but they still manage the place. these same people might employ someone to clean the place. you dont need to put in charge of the house the cleaning lady.
kill the landlord and everything else can stay the same.
>inb4 b-but what if the guy that rents the house acts like a nigger?
it gets much more complex than that, anon. i just use easy to grasp examples.

>>20632469
i can GUARANTEE to you that factory floor workers do not have management degrees

>>20632454
you should definitely read marx. you have some fundamental misunderstanding of his system.

>>20632472
correct.
so factory floor workers will not command the factory and will just own it.
what did you not understand again?

>>20632350
>to prevent people from the capitalist side of germany to immigrate illegally into the communist side of it
you put the barbed wire on the wrong side comrade

>>20632469
I see. So everyone will assemble upon the factory floor and vote on how to do work.
They still aren't being compensated, so most of them want to piss off, and do.
The end
F

tl;dr i like thick booty so i cant condone communism

From the lit point of view Marx writing is absolute shit, it doesnt make any sense. Even leaving aside the inconsistencies and bad arguments, how do you stop 2 capitalist people in your communist utopia from freely exchanging goods unless you straight up murder them and their families?

It has a completely warped understanding of economy, where if 2 people voluntarily exchange goods, it must mean the one is the winner somehow and the other is exploited. It completely fails to realize that in a voluntary exchange both parties benefit, and the overall value in the system is improved. The only time an exchange of goods is bad, is if its not voluntary, which takes place during communism, feudalism, big government etc.

>>20632486
i tought the barbed wire hurts everyone that touches it, no matter from what side you touch it. did commies use a special kind of it which would hurt only if the communists touched it from their side?

>>20632497
>would hurt only if the communists touched it from their side?
typical of communism desu

>>20632477
I read as far as I needed to in order to set off my bullshit detector. I am not obligated to read every page of a logically inconsistent body of work.

And "read book" is not an argument, you should be able to explain in your own words why you believe in this shit. YOUR OWN WORDS, in simple terms, so anyone can understand. Otherwise the belief isnt yours, its just a program running on an NPC hard drive.

>>20632490
>you vote for medics in countries where there is M4A.
also, compensated for what?

>>20632501
>I read as far as I needed to in order to set off my bullshit detector.
then you must know that ownership still exist in communism, even if it is not called property.
>>20632498
can you show me the photos of this communist barbed wire?

>>20632502
The work that they would be doing in the factories except they already hopped the border to work for Finkel Goldenschmitt who at least pays them.

>>20632497
You thought this because you are low IQ and dont really know anything about how the works works. This is frankly the only way people CAN be communist.

>>20632510
>then you must know that ownership still exist in communism, even if it is not called property.
Yes I know you redefined terms mid sentence to make your ideology look good, while using old definitions in the other part of the sentence to shit on other ideologies.

>>20632510
>can you show me the photos of this communist barbed wire?
Its a joke you blithering retard, I thought the clown made it clear. Still if you want see
>>20632513
and read
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbed_Wire_Sunday

Still catr believe you tried to overthink a simple joke and failed. How low is your fucking IQ lol?????

>>20632523
but do you know that in communism there is no property but ownership?

>>20628872
go outside and throw molotovs at policemen

>>20632534
Repeat it a few more times

>>20632534
how can our eyes be real if mirrors aren't real

>>20632530
>Its a joke you blithering retard, I thought the clown made it clear.
mine was a joke too. tought it was clear.
>glowiepedia on communism
>not even one direct quote
>not even one actual executive order cited
>only paywalled secondary sources
>even one ted talk youtube video
>three sources in german
no thanks anon.

>>20632544
you can read it again, anon. it doesnt disappear.
>>20632548
how can philosophical terminology be real, if it was invented by some random dude and then spread out by academic institutions?

>>20632391
It’s not you fucking brain let

Imagine being filtered by a meme

>>20632469
That is a very unimaginative communism.

>>20632369
This is all wrong

>>20632358
Why should you want anyone to "own" anything? "Ownership" is a specific historical concept, prior to the 13th century in England seisin was more important than any concept of "ownership". I think "control" might be a better word, since it is "contra".If the working class "controls" the means of production, that is "contra" what? The specter of the dominating class.

>>20632747
>T. it wasn't real communism

>>20632484

>so factory floor workers will not command the factory and will just own it.
>what did you not understand again?

Tell me in your magical world how R&D spends are evaluated

>>20632350
>to prevent people from the capitalist side of germany to immigrate illegally into the communist side of it.

Lol
How many people were shot to death trying to cross the berlin wall and which direction were they going

>>20632029

To be a communist, you have to prevent people from leaving, so you need to make it illegal to leave without permission.

You must make prisoners of your citizens.

>>20628872
>Leftypol.org

>>20628872
A minority of intellectuals become the government and get to tell everyone else how to live. They rule by fear and intimidation (if they themselves aren't murdered and usurped). Millions die or are sent to re-education camps.
Forget inventing the time machine and going back to kill Hitler. Hitler was only a response to Marxism. Save 200+ million lives by killing Marx.

>>20632454
>thats what state means, its a framework for organizing society
no, state is a separate entity that gets projected above society and is tasked with preventing its disintegration as a consequence of class struggle by making the interests of the ruling class prevail over those of other classes. when class division is absent and all members of society share a common general interest, state is no longer needed and what suffices is direct self-organization of those members.
>how do you know X worker "needs" Y product?
by census and by everyone being able to take part in planning production
>what, barter? coupons?
central reglementation at first, and then nothing -- people just take what they need
>money isnt wealth or value, its just a number system to describe it
sure, "moneyless" actually stands for the abolition of value relations, so expressing it as if it were just about money is indeed misleading
>then how can anyone "own" a means of production?
they can't. "common ownership" is just a metaphorical way of speaking that aims at making the concept of the abolition of property clear by analogy with the society of private property. in actual fact "ownership" will be abolished, but if one's imagination is limited it might be easier to conceive it as entire society as a whole being the sole owner.
>ah the class in the classless society
true, that's another way in which the "definition" you're responding to misses the mark
>just buy shares in a corporation retard
and another. ownership doesn't give real control over production as long as production is capitalist

>>20632493
>It has a completely warped understanding of economy, where if 2 people voluntarily exchange goods, it must mean the one is the winner somehow and the other is exploited
you have 20 minutes to quote Marx saying or implying there's exploitation in simple commodity exchange
>It completely fails to realize that in a voluntary exchange both parties benefit, and the overall value in the system is improved.
Capital, chapter 2:
>All commodities are non-use-values for their owners, and use-values for their non-owners. Consequently, they must all change hands.

>>20632978
It’s amusing that people like >>20632493
even think of something like “feudalism” in terms of its voluntarism. But I would say, outside of the conversation on Marx, that the idea of a really existing society operating on “simple commodity exchange” is just very economistic nonsense.

>>20632747
>This is all wrong
Great argument

>>20628872
Look into Lenin.
Guy always gets overshadowed by Stalin due to WW2 it seems.

Trotsky also is a good figure to look into, although I believe a lot of his works are just to contradict Stalin.

>>20632978
So we are redefining "state" and "own" to be in your favor, you agree with two points, and youre only challenging two.
>money
>needs
A central bureocracy of distribution is a state even under your definition, and you never explained what prevents people from taking more than they need (eg as much as they want).
For moneyless, I dont know how you can have an abolition of relative value. Certainly you think communism is more valuable than other systems, to even have it. I THINK you may be redefining value as well.

>>20633011
The society isnt based on free trade and property rights, it permits free trade and property rights. These are different things, theoretically a feudal society can permit these things for an aspect of its society, and even in communist societies there is both a black market for the lower class and permissible free trade and property rights for bureocrats.

>>20633283
Also Dahmer, Hitler and Genghis Khan.

>>20628872
it doesn't work plus 100 million deaths, iphone, venezuela

>>20633379
Has nothing to do with voluntarism, the peasants were the ones highly antagonistic to modern property norms. What they mostly wanted was to be of a freehold tenure, which affords certain basic rights like freedom of movement and such. But the property regime was largely enforced on them by the landholders in England over time, as it was the landholders who were annoyed that they couldn’t easily sell or develop much of their lands due to estate laws and tenures that created a confusing amount of rights to the land. From the perspective of most average people, this was a good thing. The common law over time had developed a web of rules that were conceived of as protections to the social order, they were considered inherently conservative, because it was seen as socially disruptive to have some hypothetical situation where many people using land were getting ejected or having use rights suddenly denied them because somebody else in the chain of property rights had managed to sell it or lease it to someone else or build a mine on it even though somebody was actively farming there. That’s a part of why the rapid agricultural development of England in the early modern period is considered such a tumultuous time of social upheaval, because parliament was quickly passing a flurry of estate acts and changing how property was being handled, and suddenly there were masses of landless peasants flowing into the cities. Modern concepts of property simply weren’t as common back then. There was a seed of it that turned into what we recognize now, but it was a completely different social system. The major thing that most people felt unhappy about was unfree tenures, basically villeinage, but that was largely done away with as long ago as the 13th century. After that not many people felt like their society was inherently lacking in voluntarism or even exchange or anything like that. They often felt like their biggest social or political problem was the attempt by their social competitors (as in, the opposing claimant to property rights in an arrangement between a lord and his tenants) to take more for themselves in the zero sum game of control over some plot of land, which isn’t dissimilar to how people feel about their boss or state taxes or whatever today. But it was usually the lords who wanted to be able to sale land and such, average people wanted to know that the land they were using would be for them and their family in perpetuity. They were generally opposed to expansion of a “free property” kind of society. In a sense they still are, it’s more likely to be average people that think something like residential investment property should be illegal, because it makes them uncertain about whether they will be able to own their home due to the rollercoaster of housing prices.

>>20632827
No I mean those numbers are fudged

>>20632827
33 million people died in the gulags? Really? Do you know how many people that is? Source? Do you have a statistic to back up your claim?

>>20632363
>Communism is for losers & slaves, it has killed more people than any ideology
Glad to see christianity and communism is still inseparable.

>>20633379
>>20633481
Which incidentally I’d say that this is the major difference between feudalism and the modern system. It’s just that the way real property was handled changed, and it primarily changed because the ruling class wanted it. The crown of England had accrued a lot of power to itself, much of the tenures became directly under the crown and landholders increasingly felt in conflict with the interests of the crown, which was able to make a lot of money on incidents of tenure that wasn’t as significant to the majority of landholders. So their revenues were declining, and they ultimately agitated to shift the royal revenue over to direct taxes on goods and trade, which was not such a thing in the medieval period. The crown was more like the biggest household of a bunch of other lordly houses. The king had special rights, but he made money in a similar way to the other lords, but his vassals were more likely to just be the lords and clergy and such rather than peasants. But as time went on for various reasons the crown managed to suck up quite a bit of land and prerogatives to itself, and the landholders in parliament decided it would be better to just reform the system to more favorable terms for their revenues while giving the king some direct taxes. So you approach the truly modern state. But then the king was thought to be abusing his powers to get more taxes and revenues again, parliament revolts and kills the king, and the landholders are running the asylum. They pass a mass of laws giving them lots of power over their landholdings at the expense of the peasants, and a little ironically this leads to the decline of agricultural land as the primary wealth generator and opens the door to machinery and capital assets being a key source of wealth, because the lords started to lease their lands pretty freely to anyone who could use the land to produce the most profit, and capitalist agriculture was born.

>>20633521
>>20633481
TLDR; in pre-modern times peasants really just wanted to farm and drink and fuck their wives. Freely selling and leasing real property was what lords were interested in, capitalism only appears more voluntaristic or free because it’s what we are used to. The peasants didn’t even bother to kill the king in the revolt of 1381, generally I’d even say the king was actually their guy because he was the lord of the whole realm, and it was his courts and his power that could enforce a ruling on a lord that favored a tenant. Some kings weren’t liked much, and lords weren’t always hated or anything, but if you thought your lord was fucking you you could at least make an appeal to the king’s court. It all sounds very stifling to us, but peasants just cared about the harvest, festivals, family and god. Their whole way of life got fucked up when property rights pivoted so strongly to the “owner”.

>>20628872
just get into Georgism instead if you like reviving dead 19th century ideologies.

>>20628872
You can easily simulate it at home. Just abstain from food for a week or two (after that it collapses and it's "not real communism" anymore)

>>20633327
>So we are redefining "state" and "own" to be in your favor
no, I'm defining them to match the things they're referring to in the real world
>A central bureocracy of distribution is a state even under your definition
a communist society doesn't have a central bureaucracy. a bureaucracy is an insular organ of the state made up of career managers. a communist society won't have a state and it won't have a caste of people who are career managers. it will rather distribute such tasks within as large a part of society as possible.
>and you never explained what prevents people from taking more than they need (eg as much as they want)
in the first phase the reglementation prevents them, and in the second phase the fact that most people no longer feel the need to take more than they need and want to take only as much as they need, because they're generations removed from a society of private property
>Certainly you think communism is more valuable than other systems
no, communism is not a "system" and it can't be compared to other "systems" from a purportedly neutral standpoint, especially not in terms of some undefined abstract value
>I THINK you may be redefining value as well.
I was talking in the context of money, so it should be obvious that I meant the relations between producers as expressed in the economic value of the commodities they produce. think harder next time

>>20633481
Why are you redefining freedom as another made up -ism?

>freehold
Dont you mean voluntaristhold?

Also the entire comment isnt addressing anything I said. Are you just pasting stuff from a source file?

>>20633481
>>20633521
>>20633592
What the hell, Im not going to read all that. If you cant make an argument in a few sentences, you font understand the material.

>>20633745
sorry, carry on

>>20633481
>>20633521
>>20633592
What the hell, Im not going to read all that. If you cant make an argument in a few sentences, you dont understand the material.

>>20633753
it's fine, you can be ignorant if you want.

>>20633489

>i know what people in pre modern times wanted to do, because pew and gallup did testing in greece 2000-3000 years ago
>heres a completely made up headcannon that belongs in /his/ which breaks character limit on two posts and fills up a third
>and none of it has anything to do with how and why free exchange of goods increases the value of a system and breaks the zero-sum economy lie
ok brainlet

>>20633489
>33 million people died in the gulags? Really? Do you know how many people that is? Source? Do you have a statistic to back up your claim?
The sheer panic dripping from these question marks.

Source is in the pic retard.

>>20628872
communism is when you are envious, stupid, and coward all at the same time

>>20633513
Not even remotely comparable. In fact, it is the opposite.

>>20628915
i study law in costa rica and we have courses of the modern state and political philosophy where we study authors by marx
i think, apart from philosophers, there is no better career to get into political philosophy like marxism like law
start with the basic, the manifesto, then the marx-engels reader, and then, to really undertans the mamooth, the entire Das Kapital

>>20628872
>how do i get into a dead ideology the preponderance of modern scholars think is bullshit and remains supported almost entirely by ignorant masses whose principal discourse on it exists in twitter memes
You can just read Marx like >>20628893 suggests, but it's not as dense as this nerd makes it out to be. It's incredibly easy to understand. I wouldn't take it too seriously - as much as people claim it to be this fundamentally revolutionary way of thought, they are almost always thinking of Hegelianism when they say that.

>>20633810
>source is in the pic
Lmao. Lol. No way. So if I posted some random image or linked some random website, would believe everything it says because it’s a “source” ? Lmao. Get a grip bro. 33 million people, yeah right. You better have some extraordinary evidence.

>>20633782
>and none of it has anything to do with how and why free exchange of goods increases the value of a system and breaks the zero-sum economy lie
It was about the notion capitalism is voluntaristic in comparison to feudalism. We know what the peasants wanted, because they revolted and made demands, and their demands were always that they be left alone on their land and have more rights to it against the lord's rights. It wasn't the peasantry that demanded the ability to sell land, it was the big landholders in parliament. The soviets faced the same dilemma the English did, they had a bunch of peasants that just wanted to know their rights to the land were secure. Much like the English landed interests, this was not what they wanted, anymore than a modern landlord would be happy to hear when he comes into possession of a piece of real estate that there is actually a guy living in the backyard they can't get rid of because his family has lived in the backyard for centuries, and there is another guy who blows glass in the basement, and he can't use the basement for anything else because that guy's dad was blowing glass in that basement 50 years ago. But the guy in the backyard and the guy in the basement are acclimated to not thinking of either the basement or the backyard as strictly "theirs" in a market sense. They think of it as the place they blow glass and the place they pitch their tent. All they want is to be left alone, it's a nuisance to them that some guy they've never met just shows up one day and says "yeah all this shit is mine, I want to build a condo here, how can I get you to leave?". These are two historically conflicting groups of interests, and they conflict over their rights to the same piece of real property.

>>20630804
No, Marxism is actually a pretty substantive ideology. Its modern descendants are the disciplines guilty of doing this.

>>20632031
Marxism is the most complicated political economic and social theory in the history of the world in the same way that Chris-chan is the most written-about person in the history of the world

>>20634146
It is very dense. Only the basic premise that sells it to the masses is easy to understand. Most people do not have the right-brain to really follow Das Kapital. It is also very much a fundamentally revolutionary way of thought in the way that Hegelianism isn't.

>>20628872
i would say heinrich's "introduction to the three volumes of karl marx's 'capital'" is the most natural place to start. be warned that it's biased toward a certain interpretation of marx though

>>20634591
a good secondary source that represents the other "side" of the scholarship is kliman's "reclaiming marx's capital". might be worth reading if you want to have your views colored. of course you could try reading capital without these secondary sources but you're unlikely to succeed without a reading group or something, and the group will likely be biased toward a worse reading (like trotskyism or some shit)

>>20634591
What school of interpretation does Heinrich represent?

>>20634609
>to have your views colored
*to avoid having your views colored toward one side

>>20634612
value-form theory. it's descended more or less directly from adorno and mixed with some althusser

>>20628872
Communism with the Mask Off and Bolshevism in Theory and Practice.
Pretty short but a good simple start

>>20634618
Wait, do you mean the Postone thing? Isn't that camp pretty anti-Althusser?

>>20632031
If you think Marxism is hard, try explaining capitalism, which is literally metaphysical market anarchy.

>>20634050
Lmao. Complete retard. Marx was a christian convert. He raised his daughters to be christians. He constantly praised Martin Luther. He despised the institutional church (the actual antichrist btw) because he recognised they were masquerading as christians. He loathed christians in that they weren't christian enough.

>>20634627
postone is but vft more widely isn't i don't think. anyway heinrich in particular is definitely a "post-althusserian", it's althusserianism with some marxological tweaks

If you read Louis Marschalko's excellent 'The World Conquerors' (1958), you will learn that communism is Jewish and is a talmudic ideology, slavery for the goyim

>>20630402
So many of these have almost nothing in common, the dilution of "marxism" to be anything left wing was a disaster

Sowell - Marxism
Hayek - Road to Serfdom

>>20634161
i didn't know you had internet access in the basement of the vatican

>>20634609
>of course you could try reading capital without these secondary sources but you're unlikely to succeed without a reading group or something
stop projecting your retardation
>and the group will likely be biased toward a worse reading (like trotskyism or some shit)
as if anything can be worse than Heinrich or an economist

>>20628914

/thread

>>20628914
wow, this online pamphlet convinced me that being psionically mind-controlled by gray aliens is a great idea!

>>20628893
>they all know very little about actual marxist theory until you penetrate their inner circles and that will require loads of virtue signalling or political activism
The painful truth, there is a lot of good that can come from a good faith analysis of communism but these self righteous cunts who claim the title of being a communist create a force field of cringe that rightfully causes normless to turn away
>>20628872
Richard Wolff is a good star heres his reading list, he is the only academics I've found who analysis communism and capitalism in a good faith.

https://bookshop.org/lists/prof-wolff-recommended-reading-socialism

black book of communism

>>20634856
ok reddit leftcom

>>20634779
Oh ha-ha-ha. You silly thing.

>>20634226
>voluntarism
I cant talk to people who dont speak straight.

Berrypicker basket weaver meets bearslayer spear maker. Spear maker trades basket weaver a spear for a basket. Now both of them have both baskets and spears. Total value in system has doubled, both of them have more varied and healthier diets, and there has been zero change in amount of products. All that has changed is where those products are.

Economies arent zero sum games, people dont lose when someone else wins, and free exchange of goods is the cornerstone of wealth creation. In fact the stock market (a betting place for product allocation), with its trillion voluntary transactions per second, is exactly why wealth has grown tremendously among those who invest in it.

I have no idea why youre rambling about peasants and feudalism, you are so schizo that I cant even tell if you agree with me or not.

>>20628872
here are some active scholarly communists worth following:
>amia srinivasan
>lea ypi
>william clare roberts
>david graeber
>michael heinrich
>michael albert
>andrew kliman
>slavoj zizek
>robin hahnel
>alex callinicos
>robert brenner
>silvia federici
i think you should investigate these rather than 20th century stuff because it'll be more easily applicable and you'll look like less of a larper to normies

>>20636137
here are some i forgot:
>nicholas vrousalis
>angela davis
>michael hardt
>ellen meiskins wood

>>20634638
imagine believing this

>>20636137
>>20636154
a few more:
>bob black
>saul newman
>john zerzan
>kathi weeks

>>20632031
>when you create a political system based on science but forget to apply K.I.S.S.
galaxy brained move by Marx right there
he really wanted to be the king of the entropic civilization eater, huh?

Why do conservatards seethe so hard at Marx? Is he just that much of an alpha dawg?

>>20636493
It's not even really Marx, it's his fans. He's the Rick and Morty of political theory.

>>20636493
Marxists are the epitome of the controlled opposition. You would not get the real opposition to occupy academia and poison all "social sciences" kek. The destruction they bring on daily basis is real.

>>20636519
>You would not get the real opposition to occupy academia and poison all "social sciences" kek
Yes you would. In fact that’s been the pattern for most of history with a few exceptions like medieval times and nazi germany/the ussr.

>>20632350
Omg this is absolutely delicious bait

>>20638268
They are not independent scientists though, gaberments are funding them. Or make it "zillioners", same difference.

>>20632369
yeah and?

>>20636238
i'd maybe replace either newman or zerzan with cornel west

>>20633617
haven't heard of his books but his ideas seems at least interesting

>>20628872
Any system based around material is doomed from the beginning

>>20640886
What a stupid blanket statement

>>20633617
zzzzzzzzz

>>20628872
Read the works of Marx and Engels of course. Watch David Harvey's course on Youtube.

Additionally, read other works in sociology and anthropology. For starters, do "small places, large issues". This will expand your understanding of Marxism and leftist theories, as it is more empirical.
Do not just dig yourself deep in theory to a degree where communism and socialism are just abstract concepts that you debate for the sake of flexing your intellect and knowledge, and do not go to the other extreme and be a total fucking tool. Move. Engage. Understand that it is not just about engaging in fruitless debates on the internet. Do not limit yourself to any leftist community. Engage with workers, academics, and unemployed people. Engage with your own community. Seriously, browse the internet or go outside, seek others who have the same interests as you, and be active. But also, do not get too excited. Don't be a tool. Understand the community you're in. Understand their reasoning. Understand their flaws. Analyse the actions of your collective, their motives. Do not obey blindly or it could get you into real trouble.
My point is, to be active and well-read. If you're just active without any knowledge of theory then you're as good as a braindead faggot. You'd be a tool. If you're well-read but all you do is argue on the internet and create long-ass charts starting from the ancient Greeks on "HOW TO UNDERSTAND MARX" then you'd be pathetic and a pseud.
All the best, anon. I hope what I wrote is understandable and grammatically flawless. I'm not doing well in terms of my current cognitive abilities.

Das Kapital is easy to understand unless you are retarded

>>20641178
i bet you think marx had an ltv

>>20632493
>From the lit point of view Marx writing is absolute shit, it doesnt make any sense.

t. filtered low IQ pleb

>Even leaving aside the inconsistencies and bad arguments, how do you stop 2 capitalist people in your communist utopia from freely exchanging goods unless you straight up murder them and their families?
>It has a completely warped understanding of economy, where if 2 people voluntarily exchange goods, it must mean the one is the winner somehow and the other is exploited. It completely fails to realize that in a voluntary exchange both parties benefit, and the overall value in the system is improved. The only time an exchange of goods is bad, is if its not voluntary, which takes place during communism, feudalism, big government etc.

Oh nevermind you never actually read Marx and are just saying dumb shit for low effort (you)s

>>20628899
>>20628914
>>20630372
Good replies, nice and simple. Why is the rest of this thread filled with retarded leftists and seething /pol/tard schizos spamming absolute nonsense? Why can't we have nice things?

>>20632031
>complicated
Communism isn't really complicated at all. Its one the many useless social sciences for grifters. Nothing Marx wrote was of practical value to anything, and there's no bigger proof of that than your empty platitudes, and the constant self masturbatory praise you cuckholds make of him. Marx was a bum who never worked a day in his life and never a business. He was a self hating Jew that begged Engels to pay his bills while he had an affair with his maid and blew his inheritance on the stock market. He was a bum, and he would have been forgotten if it wasn't for retards like Lenin popularizing him with propaganda.

Marxists are just pseuds. They're basically a shitter version of Christianity that merges millennialism (communist revolution) with Manichaeism (historical materialism, class struggle).

Marxism is for people who don't understand genetics and scarcity. Don't ever ask a Marxist about the inheritablity of intelligence and behavior. Never ask a Marxist what causes inflation. They'll tell some stupid ass spiel about how its all fascism and racism.

>>20628872
>How do I get into communism?
Join a Satanist church.

>>20641796
>>“The Jews should be denied everything as a nation but granted everything as individuals …” Such views were argued in the revolutionary years by the Jacobins of Paris, who were pro-Jewish (almost all the others and especially those in eastern France were anti-Jewish) and by the main body of moderate revolutionaries, who ultimately made their feeling prevail, that emancipation was a moral necessity, its purpose being to improve the Jews so that they could be part of a regenerated society.
>The Society of the Friends of the Constitution (French: Société des amis de la Constitution), renamed the Society of the Jacobins, Friends of Freedom and Equality (Société des Jacobins, amis de la liberté et de l'égalité) after 1792 and commonly known as the Jacobin Club (Club des Jacobins) or simply the Jacobins (/ˈdʒækəbJn/; French: [ʒakɔbɛ̃]), was the most influential political club during the French Revolution of 1789. The period of its political ascendancy includes the Reign of Terror, during which time well over 10,000 people were put on trial and executed in France, many for political crimes.
>The political rhetoric and populist ideas espoused by the Jacobins would lead to the development of the modern leftist movements throughout the 19th and 20th century, with Jacobinism being the political foundation of almost all leftist schools of thought including anarchism, communism and socialism.
They were just kikes. Torah says Jews have to kill Christians. Guess what revolutions killed mainly Christians and were led by Jews.

>>20641737
>>20641747
>>20641755
why is this samefriend seething so much

All you need to do to understand communism is to read >>20641904 The Protocols and Elders of Zion along with "Communism With the Mask Off" by Gobbels.

>>20641904
Christians didn’t exist when the Torah was written, I think you mean the Talmud. The problem with people saying the ‘Talmud said this’ or the ‘Talmud said that’ is that the Talmud isn’t exactly like what you imagine your average holy text to be, it’s a collection of different oral traditions, stories and debates stuck together for the sake of cultural archiving pretty much. The talmud isn’t a coherent work, it’s a bunch of things put together which make up Jewish culture and this includes various contradictory ideas and points because it collects some influential rabbinic talking points on the law, thus one rabbi can say this and another that in argument and both will be in the Talmud, it’s not like the bible it’s criticism of it. The rabbis use the Talmud to reach a decision on the interpretation of the law and the oral law, but since the Talmud has various opinions not everything in the Talmud is set in stone or taken seriously

I am not even Jewish btw, at all

>>20642573
Dumb newfag. Torah doesn't have to mention Christians to indict them.
https://youtu.be/cPVoU6PjC3U