Was Marx in the right here?

[Anonymous No.22124666]

>The only point upon which I am in complete agreement with Mr Proudhon is the disgust he feels for socialist sentimentalising. I anticipated him in provoking considerable hostility by the ridicule I directed at ovine, sentimental, utopian socialism. But is not Mr Proudhon subject to strange delusions when he opposes his petty-bourgeois sentimentality, by which I mean his homilies about home, conjugal love and suchlike banalities, to socialist sentimentality which—as for instance in Fourier's case—is infinitely more profound than the presumptuous platitudes of our worthy Proudhon? He himself is so well aware of the emptiness of his reasoning, of his complete inability to discuss such things, that he indulges in tantrums, exclamations and irae hominis probi, [6] that he fumes, cures, denounces, cries pestilence and infamy, thumps his chest and glorifies himself before God and man as being innocent of socialist infamies! It is not as a critic that he derides socialist sentimentalities, or what he takes to be sentimentalities. It is as a saint, a pope, that he excommunicates the poor sinners and sings the praises of the petty bourgeoisie and of the miserable patriarchal amourous illusions of the domestic hearth. Nor is this in any way fortuitous. Mr Proudhon is, from top to toe, a philosopher, an economist of the petty bourgeoisie. In an advanced society and because of his situation, a petty bourgeois becomes a socialist on the one hand, and economist on the other, i.e. he is dazzled by the magnificence of the upper middle classes and feels compassion for the sufferings of the people.

>He is at one and the same time bourgeois and man of the people. In his heart of hearts he prides himself on his impartiality, on having found the correct balance, allegedly distinct from the happy medium. A petty bourgeois of this kind deifies contradiction, for contradiction is the very basis of his being. He is nothing but social contradiction in action. He must justify by means of theory what he is in practice, and Mr Proudhon has the merit of being the scientific exponent of the French petty bourgeoisie, which is a real merit since the petty bourgeoisie will be an integral part of all the impending social revolutions.

[Anonymous No.22124669]

>>22124666
They were both faggots.

[Anonymous No.22124684]

>>22124666
>socialist in-fighting
Don’t give a shit. Both are thieves who want to take my property and my land, just like they did to the kulaks. I really WANT the socialist revolution to happen and I really really can’t wait till they try to take my land because I’ll literally gun them all down with my AR-15 and hang their corpses up as a warning to the others. I want some fucking action so do it thieving niggers.

Lenin hanged the kulaks, then a few years later reinstituted capitalistic private farming, which produced most of the Soviet union’s food and outpaced all the other industries.

Also
>patriarchy and homesteading bad
Go cut your dick off you motherfucking bottom feeding disgusting slime maggot reeking bastard. I just want one of these socialists to try to claim my property and I will literally rip the fucking jugular out in front of my obedient wife and kids who will look to me as a protector and provider as the Creator desires me to be.

[Anonymous No.22124696]

>>22124684
You sound insane.

[Anonymous No.22124702]

>>22124696
I sound insane for wanting to defend myself, my family, and my property from gangs of armed thugs who want to take it away from me? Their whole “intellectual” theory has one (not even hidden) goal in mind: seizing the property of others.

I sound insane to you, meanwhile your hero Lenin:
> Hang (absolutely hang, in full view of the people) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, fatcats, bloodsuckers.
Publish their names.
>Seize all grain from them.
>Designate hostages - in accordance with yesterday's telegram.
>Do it in such a fashion, that for hundreds of verst around the people see, tremble, know, shout: "the bloodsucking kulaks are being strangled and will be strangled".

>Telegraph receipt and implementation. >Yours, Lenin.

>P.S. Find tougher [ie more savage thug criminal] people

Just try it with me, communist. Try it. I really want you to.

[Anonymous No.22124706]

>>22124666
>petite bourgeois type A is mad at petite bourgeois type B
Love it, very entertaining.
>bovine utopian socialism
This was funny.

[Anonymous No.22124707]

>>22124702
Yikes. Reported.

[Anonymous No.22124711]

>>22124684
>my obedient wife and kids
Bait. No wife is obedient.

[Anonymous No.22124721]

>>22124666
Undoubtedly Marx. The contradiction of the Proudhon-Bakuninist is exemplified in these posts:
>>22124684
>>22124702
As Marx said about Proudhon
>In fact he does what all good bourgeois do. They all maintain that competition, monopoly, etc., are, in principle—i.e. regarded as abstract thoughts—the only basis for existence, but leave a great deal to be desired in practice. What they all want is competition without the pernicious consequences of competition. They all want the impossible, i.e. the conditions of bourgeois existence without the necessary consequences of those conditions. They all fail to understand that the bourgeois form of production is an historical and transitory form, just as was the feudal form. This mistake is due to the fact that, to them, bourgeois man is the only possible basis for any society, and that they cannot envisage a state of society in which man will have ceased to be bourgeois.

The petite-bourgeois is a psychosis personified. It has to be done away with, the entire class has to be liquidated. Lenin was justified hanging the kulaks. (1877. From Russian кyлáк (kulák, “wealthy peasant; fist; tight-fisted person”),)

[Anonymous No.22124726]

>>22124711
Just because YOU (a feminist communist who’s against the patriarchy) can’t control your wife doesn’t mean nobody can.
As Saint Thomas Aquinas says, a disobedient wife can be corrected with words, threats, and, if necessary, blows. But most of all you act manly and speak with authority and she will listen. It is in her nature to please and obey her husband; which is what filthy Marxists don’t understand: the Creator’s law is infrangible.

[Anonymous No.22124736]

>>22124721
Lenin was justified in hanging farmers who had done nothing to aggress against anybody?
Then why did he, a few years after hanging them, reinstate private farming, which industry produced the Soviet Union’s food supply almost single-handedly, and outcompeted all other state run (ie. stolen) businesses.
This is why, although the founders of America were Freemasons and evil men, they were nevertheless wise to implement the right to bear arms. Try this against American farmers and you will get a bullet in your filthy skull.

[Anonymous No.22124745]

>>22124736
Source?

[Anonymous No.22124749]

>>22124726
I'm literally black and I make my living as a proud capitalist fucking wives like yours. I have you booked for Tuesday, massa.

[Anonymous No.22124758]

>>22124745
It’s called the New Economic Policy. They allowed private farms again a few years after stealing the Kulak land and hanging them. These private farms were immediately more efficient than the stolen farms, and outpaced all the stolen industries.

[Anonymous No.22124774]

>>22124758
That's literally not true though. What happened first was that during the NEP peasants divided expropriated land between themselves, and the bolsheviks urged the smaller farmers to collectivize. Hence in the beginning, private farms did outperform but just because of sheer scale of landmass they managed to acquire, while collective farms consistently outperformed private farms from the 30s onward.

Pic semi related. Death rates during the 1930s Famine in the USSR vs the Russian famine of 1891–1892. The latter was correctly have been identified to bad weather conditions while the 1930s is blamed on systemic error. I find that hard to believe. If you look at the weather conditions, the 1930s were pretty bad. Even so, collectivization objectively reduced mortality rates (as the graph shows). So, take your anti-communistic non-sense away from a board which engages in critical thinking.

[Anonymous No.22124783]

>>22124666
>which is a real merit since the petty bourgeoisie will be an integral part of all the impending social revolutions.
This is actually a really important point with regard to which, it seems, later socialists did not get the memo.

[Anonymous No.22124801]

>>22124666
Wagner was the best Young Hegelian because he took Proudhon, Feuerbach et al., to whom a mildly bourgeois sensibility was already considered endemic by Marxists, to the furthest extreme of proclamations about eternal truth and nature. Among the so called 'true socialists' the truest. He made Marx seethe.

>At the sight of numerous closed unknown palaces in Venice he had exclaimed: "That is property! The source of all corruption! Proudhon had a far too material and external view of it. For considerations of property determine the vast majority of marriages and this in turn is the root cause of racial degeneration."

[Anonymous No.22124811]

>>22124702
this Lenin guy sounds based
>>22124783
lol, like who? all the socialist and pseudo-socialist revolutions that followed have seen a significant participation from small proprietors, and that participation was recognized by the leaders of those revolutions

[Anonymous No.22124844]

>>22124736
>muh le aggressor justification
cuck

[Anonymous No.22124860]

>>22124774
The NEP allowed private farms based on a capitalist mode of production whether you like it or not. Lenin himself called it “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control“ and said that state industry would operate on a profit basis.

> After the New Economic Policy was instituted, agricultural production increased greatly. In order to stimulate economic growth, farmers were given the opportunity to sell portions of their crops to the government in exchange for monetary compensation. Farmers now had the option to sell some of their produce, giving them a personal economic incentive to produce more grain.[15] This incentive, coupled with the breakup of the quasi-feudal landed estates, surpassed pre-Revolution agricultural production. The agricultural sector became increasingly reliant on small family farms, while heavy industries, banks, and financial institutions remained owned and run by the state. This created an imbalance in the economy where the agricultural sector was growing much faster than heavy industry. To maintain their income, factories raised prices. Due to the rising cost of manufactured goods, peasants had to produce much more wheat to buy these consumer goods, which increased supply and thus lowered the price of these agricultural products. This fall in prices of agricultural goods and sharp rise in prices of industrial products was known as the Scissors Crisis (due to the crossing of graphs of the prices of the two types of product). Peasants began withholding their surpluses in wait for higher prices, or sold them to "NEPmen" (traders and middle-men) who re-sold them at high prices. Many Communist Party members considered this an exploitation of urban consumers. To lower the price of consumer goods, the state took measures to decrease inflation and enact reforms on the internal practices of the factories. The government also fixed prices, in an attempt to halt the scissor effect.

They allowed private farms based on a capitalist mode of production, and it so strongly BTFOd the gangster-run communist industries that they had to impose PRICE CONTROLS (more violent gangsterism opposing free voluntary non violent barter and trade).

>the famine argument
Kek. Well done, with all the benefits of industrialisation and technology you managed to have less deaths (but still millions!) from a famine. The reason it is blamed on systemic error is because without communist gangsterism, with free trade, property rights, and liberty the number of deaths would have been even lower, if the famine even occurred.

[Anonymous No.22124866]

>>22124811
>lol, like who? all the socialist and pseudo-socialist revolutions that followed have seen a significant participation from small proprietors, and that participation was recognized by the leaders of those revolutions
Like almost every single Western socialist after, fuck, I don't know, 1919? I've only seen one single guy acknowledge the need for broad social involvement in revolutions, and he died a few years ago.

[Anonymous No.22124872]

>>22124811
He sounds based because he wants to call up his scoundrel gangsters to hang innocent people and deprive them of their property? Communists deserve to get shot in the streets, because you are open rapscallions and thieves.
>>22124844
You are a malformed communist specimen

[Anonymous No.22124879]

>>22124666
Of course he was right.

[Anonymous No.22124881]

>>22124872
I'm not a communist, but you are a pants pissing faggot
>rapscallions
Oh but I see Im being baited, gg

[Anonymous No.22124882]

>>22124872
>deprive them of their property
How come post-socialist and currently existing socialist countries rank among the highest when it comes to home ownership, then?

[Anonymous No.22124886]

>>22124860
there were no "communist industries". Russia had no material basis for a proper capitalist industry at that time, let alone communist
>>22124866
literally every "socialist" acknowledges it. communists acknowledge it because they've read Marx, pseudo-socialists acknowledge it because they represent the petty bourgeoisie
>>22124872
>He sounds based because he wants to call up his scoundrel gangsters to hang innocent people and deprive them of their property
yes

[Anonymous No.22124889]

>>22124881
Yes, a rapscallion, a knave, a thief, a person who existed from the dawn of human society and wished to take the property of others for himself out of envy, spite, or a laziness which wants reward without working for it. You are that person, with all his ugliness and mischievousness, that all civilisations have known and put to death mercilessly wherever they encountered you. The fact that you've elevated thievery to an "intellectual", "academic", "middle class" status and called it "Marxism" doesn't mean anything. You are the enemy.

[Anonymous No.22124895]

>>22124882
Because the communist gangsters took over everything and produced "free homes"; ie. disgusting-looking soulless flats in which all were forced to live. I know, because I am the owner of one of these flats.

[Anonymous No.22124896]

>>22124702
You do not sound insane for the things you mentioned. You sound insane for fantasizing about this hypothetical scenario where you play hero/murderer.

[Anonymous No.22124906]

>>22124896
So it doesn't even make you angry in the slightest bit that communist gangsters are now discussing on this thread how best to steal YOUR property and the property of all your family, community, country, and, yes, even the world....

And not only is this something they fantasise about doing, right in front of your eyes, it is something they have done before, in a most violent and merciless fashion, which I have demonstrated by the quotes of Lenin I shared with you; which quotes, unlike my words, are not mere fantasies of protecting oneself from thieves, but are actual orders to actual gangsters who killed actual people with actual families and actual wives and actual children who actually had to see their actual friends and parents and loved ones hang in full view of everybody with their blood crying, SCREAMING out to Heaven for justice with no answer since the whole community was gripped with terror from these abominable gangsters...

No, I want them to come and try. Try in a country with an armed and ready populace. Try it PLEASE, so I can kill you all and take retribution for all the people you murdered.

[Anonymous No.22124911]

>>22124906
what property do you even have you loser

[Anonymous No.22124913]

>>22124684
You will be pleasure slave in the gulag

[Anonymous No.22124984]

>>22124906
What tf are you talking about dude? The government RIGHT NOW owns the soil under your house (electrical lines and plumbing) the animals that walk onto your property (poaching is still illegal on your own land) and the airspace above your house. All this and you do nothing. All the admit theft of taxation and yet nothing. You're a poser dude.

[Anonymous No.22124989]

>>22124984
let him believe in the myth of private property, they're a dying breed anyway

[Anonymous No.22124996]

>>22124984
I’m against government expansion and welfare statism. However the king derives his legitimacy from God, which is why he has the power to tax (but not exorbitantly like today).

[sage No.22124997]

>>22124702
communism is about abolishion of private ownership of means of production.
They dont give a fuck about personal property

[Anonymous No.22125000]

>>22124996
economic cuck

[Anonymous No.22125008]

>>22124997
Yes, which means you aren’t even allowed to own your own farm (which humans have been doing since the start of civilisation) or set up your own business. Instead the gangster thugs in the state will come and murder you if you try to compete with them.

[sage No.22125011]

>>22125008
you know what collectivism is? You know what mutual aid is and how farms worked since start of civilsation until porkies starting demanding whats "theirs"? Read Kropotkin

[Anonymous No.22125014]

>>22125011
I can read the Bible:
Thou shalt not steal.
Thou shalt not covet your neighbour’s goods or his wife.
Here, in 4000BC, we have property rights enshrined.

[Anonymous No.22125035]

>>22124895
>I know, because I am the owner of one of these flats.

The communists gave you a house and you're mad about it?

[Anonymous No.22125043]

>>22124666
Look at those trips...
TL;DR
No one really cares about either of these demonstrably and fundamentally incorrect "thinkers"...

[Anonymous No.22125052]

>>22124997
just as the product of private means of production belongs to the private owner of those means of production, the product of means of production held in common belong to society as a whole. and the part of this product intended for consumption is then given in usufruct to the consumers. but there's no "personal property"
>>22125008
private farms and businesses belong to the past. primitive humans doing something out of a lack of developed technology doesn't mean that humans will keep doing that thing forever

[Anonymous No.22125055]

>>22125035
The communists destroyed my country and murdered legitimate property owners such as the kulaks. They destroyed churches and turned one of our most ancient churches into a “museum of atheism”. They deported thousands of resistors to their tyranny. They implemented abortion thus leading to the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent babies, if not millions. They murdered the legitimate, God-appointed king of Russia replacing him with atheist leadership. Their whole rule meant that God withdrew his support for our nation. In return for this I got a dingy flat which I don’t know what to do with because nobody wants to buy it and I certainly refuse to live in it.

[Anonymous No.22125059]

>>22125055
god doesn't exist. when was your last psychiatric examination?

[Anonymous No.22125068]

>>22125059
Some people are so far behind in the race they actually believe they’re ahead

[Anonymous No.22125075]

>>22125052
Communists know their system of production is inefficient. Otherwise, they would advocate free market and outcompete capitalist businesses with worker co-ops. But instead they use the state to murder all competitors, thus acknowledging that capitalist competitors pose a massive threat to them .

[Anonymous No.22125087]

>>22125068
true
>>22125075
communists don't advocate for any "system of production".
co-ops are capitalists enterprises where the wage workers are also their own capitalists. and since wage labour and capital are the two sides of the basic social relation in capitalism, this little to do with communism.
and yes, capitalism does pose a massive threat to communism, because it uses all means available to suppress it. it's funny for you to bring up using state force when this was first perfected by the fascist state to defend capitalism against communists.

[Anonymous No.22125089]

>>22124996
Liberal democratic governments don't derive their right from God. Are you aware what century it is?
>>22125014
If I steal a tv dinner from walmart that was going to be thrown out along with 2 grand worth of other food a day what is being stolen? Are you aware of what century it is?

[Anonymous No.22125093]

>>22125089
>what is being stolen
a tv dinner

[Anonymous No.22125094]

>>22125087
>communists don't advocate for any "system of production".
Then we all die.
>>22125089
>Liberal democratic governments don't derive their right from God. Are you aware what century it is?
I know, which is why they are illegitimate.
>If I steal a tv dinner from walmart that was going to be thrown out along with 2 grand worth of other food a day what is being stolen? Are you aware of what century it is?
No, but if you murder people and take their land, like Lenin and his thugs did, you are a thief. Obviously "stealing" something that is thrown away isn't really theft.

[Anonymous No.22125096]

>another commietroon thread

[Anonymous No.22125100]

>>22125094
>Then we all die.
no we don't. future humanity doesn't need communists to impose any production systems on it. it will instead develop its productive relations freely, on the material basis at hand.
>Obviously "stealing" something that is thrown away isn't really theft.
both of you anarchising morons don't even know what theft is, which isn't surprising

[Anonymous No.22125101]

>>22124989
>dying breed
But enough about gommies anon.

[Anonymous No.22125104]

>>22125101
two more weeks and communists will finally go away

[Anonymous No.22125108]

>>22125100
You demonstrably don't believe in the free market since you want to murder property owners and take their property for yourself.

[Anonymous No.22125114]

>>22125104
More like "two more weeks and we'll own the means of production" or "two more weeks and america'll collapse" or "two more weeks and workers will rise up for sure, comrade!".

[Anonymous No.22125120]

>>22125100
>both of you anarchising morons don't even know what theft is, which isn't surprising
It literally isn't you stupid nigger. One man's trash is another man's treasure etc. etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.22125122]

>>22125104
jej

[Anonymous No.22125127]

>>22125094
>they are illegitimate
So why do you use render under ceasar as an argument? Why do you pay taxes? Because you're a cuck bitch according to your own beliefs.
>murder people and take their land
But that's the point, does walmart own the land it is on? Who is walmart? The entire conversation is about who the land and property even belongs to to begin with. It's the most rudimentary part of the entire thing.
>>22125093
Ya a tv dinner is poison so it's an ironic example. It cant be compared to stealing bread 4,000 years ago when bread was bread and not alien ectoplasm.

[Anonymous No.22125134]

>>22125127
>Why do you pay taxes
Because the state will murder me if I do not. If enough men got their forces together and demanded freedom from taxes (as, say, in the American Revolution, which I do not however support), it would be a different matter. But the free market has produced such great material wealth that even with the heavy burden of taxation the vast majority are too comfortable to do anything about it.

[Anonymous No.22125138]

Funny how mentioning communism gets the state's internet lapdogs into attack mode. Kinda weird that all discussion of communism is forcefully shut down by the petite-bourgeoisie. But that must just be a coincidence.

[Anonymous No.22125144]

>>22125138
Is this the prime example of
>jew cries out in pain as he strikes you
???

[Anonymous No.22125146]

>>22125134
So you would do something about commies but not the bourgeoise? No, you wouldn't. You are a cuck bitch.

[Anonymous No.22125149]

>>22125120
The shit Walmart puts in it's own garbage bins is still their legal property; taking it constitutes theft.

[Anonymous No.22125155]

>>22125138
This but change "communism" to "nazism/fascism".

[Anonymous No.22125157]

>>22125144
shoo shoo

[Anonymous No.22125159]

>>22125055

Then move to the United States, where you don't even get the dingy flat

[Anonymous No.22125160]

>>22125146
What about we kill them both at the same time? Let's start with CCP!

[Anonymous No.22125161]

(Petite) bourgeois interference is inevitable, class collaboration is the only solution.

[Anonymous No.22125164]

>>22125155
https://famous-trials.com/hitler/2529-1923-interview-with-adolf-hitler
>We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists.

[Anonymous No.22125168]

>>22125157
>listen to this french cuckold about "why anti-semites are le bad"

[Anonymous No.22125175]

>>22125164
What does that have to do with my post?

[Anonymous No.22125214]

>>22125149
Legal, but that's the whole point is that real theft is legal and "theft" is illegal .
>>22125160
Usually in a 1 v 2 scenario you start with the guy currently beating the shit out of you, but idk about cuckold shit so I'll just let you do your thing man.

[Anonymous No.22125239]

>>22125214
Don't worry, chinks can't fight. It'll be like beating bunch of pre-teen kids.

[Anonymous No.22125248]

>>22125239
Hey man chinks are another question and, yes, uncle sam probably should have just turned us loose on them by now.

[Anonymous No.22125267]

>>22125248
Uhm, no ma'am.

[Anonymous No.22125295]

>>22125267
I was agreeing with you, dumbass

[Anonymous No.22125327]

>>22124872
>call up his scoundrel gangsters to hang innocent people and deprive them of their property
Uhhhhhhhh we simply ROB theeeee BATMAN... or should I say... bourgeoisman...

[Anonymous No.22125339]

>>22124666
No. Marx was subject to the strange delusion. Bakunin told him, Stirner refuted him, history proved him wrong.

[Anonymous No.22125348]

>>22125108
I do believe in the free market, just not that it's eternal. and I also don't want to take anyone's property for myself, or kill anyone who uses doesn't ask for it by using violence against the proletariat
>>22125114
no, communists are a dying breed, two more weeks and they will finally go away, surely
>>22125127
>Ya a tv dinner is poison so it's an ironic example
poison is still unironic property. there's alcohol in almost every store
>>22125214
>the whole point is that real theft is legal and "theft" is illegal .
no, theft is a legal category. "real theft" is what's defined in law as theft, so it necessarily coincides with what's illegal. believing in some real theft existing beyond what humans have invented regarding law is just as stupid as believing in some real god existing beyond what humans have invented regarding religion, if not more stupid

[Anonymous No.22125381]

>>22125155
>>22125164
>>22125138
>Between the two world wars, the revolutionary workers’ movement was annihilated by the joint action of the Stalinist bureaucracy and of fascist totalitarianism which had borrowed its form of organization from the totalitarian party tried out in Russia. Fascism was an extremist defense of the bourgeois economy threatened by crisis and by proletarian subversion. Fascism is a state of siege in capitalist society, by means of which this society saves itself and gives itself stop-gap rationalization by making the State intervene massively in its management. But this rationalization is itself burdened by the immense irrationality of its means. Although fascism rallies to the defense of the main points of bourgeois ideology which has become conservative (the family, property, the moral order, the nation), reuniting the petty-bourgeoisie and the unemployed routed by crisis or deceived by the impotence of socialist revolution, it is not itself fundamentally ideological. It presents itself as it is: a violent resurrection of myth which demands participation in a community defined by archaic pseudo-values: race, blood, the leader. Fascism is technically-equipped archaism. Its decomposed ersatz of myth is revived in the spectacular context of the most modern means of conditioning and illusion. Thus it is one of the factors in the formation of the modern spectacle, and its role in the destruction of the old workers’ movement makes it one of the fundamental forces of present-day society. However, since fascism is also the most costly form of preserving the capitalist order, it usually had to leave the front of the stage to the great roles played by the capitalist States; it is eliminated by stronger and more rational forms of the same order.

[Anonymous No.22125392]

>>22125348
>>22125122

[Anonymous No.22125446]

>>22125348
>theft & tv dinners
I was simply pointing out his arguments we're invalid by his own standards

[Anonymous No.22125463]

>>22125446
How did you become disabled?

[Anonymous No.22125627]

>>22124721
>this quote
I swear Marx might be one of the most retarded well known thinkers to ever live. I recognize that in OP's post, for example, he has a good rhetoric, but look at this one. Not even wording things decently can surpass the retardation of his thoughts.

[Anonymous No.22125803]

>>22124684
Least deranged ancap

[Anonymous No.22125945]

>>22125627
you forgot to say what's wrong with that quote

[Anonymous No.22126363]

>>22124886
>literally every "socialist" acknowledges it
No they don't lol, this is why socialists today will literally support the disarmament and gagging of the working class, simply because not doing so would allow the chuds to get stronger.

[Anonymous No.22126510]

>>22126363
>this is why socialists today will literally support the disarmament and gagging of the working class
yeah, because they represent the petty bourgeoisie. that's literally what I said

[Anonymous No.22126529]

>>22125803
>ancaps are deranged
Meanwhile socialist heroes like Lenin (referring to peaceful farmers who objected to their land being stolen):
>HANG THEM! HANG THEM! HANG THEM ALL! PUBLISH THEIR NAMES! KILL THEM! AAAAAAA! RIP THEIR GUTS OUT! GET MORE PEOPLE ON THEM! KILL THEM!!!!!
>WE CANT HAVE PEOPLE BEING WEALTHIER THAN US!!!! USE ALL YOUR SLAVE RESENTMENT AND HANG THEM!!!

Then couple years later:
>btw we need to reintroduce private farming cause we’re gonna starve to death

[Anonymous No.22126534]

>>22126510
Oh so in your post you meant that "pseudo-socialists" acknowledge this principle in order to act against it with a divide and rule strategy? Is that it? You should've probably been a bit more specific lol. Although I think I still disagree. A lot of young people who are "pseudo-socialists" really are honest. They just have no idea how to actually pursue a revolution.

[Anonymous No.22126553]

There's a reason leftists cult worship Marx, he was the only seriously coherent thinker they ever really had. Pretty much all leftist intellectuals are just writing in his shadow. Bakunin, Proudhoun and Kropotkin were retarded morons whose books were full of incoherent trash. Marx was basically the Jordan Peterson of his day, an intellectual for a movement mostly made up of brainless idiots looking for some father figure to give them arguments.

[Anonymous No.22126568]

>>22126553
>Marx was basically the Jordan Peterson
7/10, made me angry

[Anonymous No.22126574]

the real hot take is that Marx was right and the real revolution of the proletariat will be national-socialism

[Anonymous No.22126576]

>>22126529
get over it already
>>22126534
>Oh so in your post you meant that "pseudo-socialists" acknowledge this principle in order to act against it with a divide and rule strategy
no, pseudo-socialists still need and want support of the proletariat, but they want support in favour of the bourgeois state and of policy that uses the state to shift some of the burden from the pb to the big bourgeoisie.
they might be doing "divide and rule" in so far as they want to separate the proletariat from its revolutionary vanguard and have it support social-democratic bourgeois parties, but in doing that they aren't acting against but for a movement embracing both classes. it's just that in their version the proletariat is subordinate to the petty bourgeoisie, and through that to the bourgeoisie proper, just like in a time when the communist movement is rising, parts of the pb subordinate themselves to the proletariat.
in other words, nobody rejects participation from other classes, because everyone needs for their own success. it's just that each class needs other classes to be subordinate to it, because doing it on equal terms is impossible -- the classes have contradicting interests

[Anonymous No.22126596]

>>22126576
Why would I get over it when you’re still planning to murder people in this very thread

[Anonymous No.22126617]

>>22125055
>They destroyed churches and turned one of our most ancient churches into a “museum of atheism”.
They featured scientific exhibits featuring dinosaur bones along with artworks depicting torturers of the Spanish Inquisition. "We don't need religion to accomplish miracles!" The atheists of today can barely compare.

https://youtu.be/BzDJBqOmzTY

[Anonymous No.22126652]

>>22126596
I'm not planning anything. also the fact that some people will get killed remaining true doesn't mean you can't get over it. you can and you should. my life will end one day too, but I don't keep crying about it like a bitch

[Anonymous No.22126659]

>>22126652
You are planning the mass murder of innocent people in this thread. It doesn’t matter that you’ve made it “intellectual” and “middle class”: you are no better than any other murderer, and your victims will get retribution.

[Anonymous No.22126665]

>>22126659
I'm not planning anything, I'm just saying it's virtually certain that some of the people who will use violence against the revolutionary proletariat will end up getting killed in response. this is not a plan of mine, it's going to happen regardless of my volition. it's just a prediction based mostly on common sense.

[Anonymous No.22126670]

>>22126665
You are planning to steal other people’s property, which is an act of violence, and therefore any claim to “self-defence” on your part is immediately null and void. YOU are the murderer, because you instigated the violence, and they merely defended themselves. So yes, in this very thread you are planning to murder innocent people, just like your hero Lenin.

[Anonymous No.22126673]

>>22126596
>>22126659
Didn't you say you wish communists would come to murder you so you could murder them instead?

[Anonymous No.22126680]

>>22126673
It wouldn’t be murder it would be self defence. If a rapscallion comes to steal your property you have a God given right to defend yourself.

[Anonymous No.22126699]

>>22126576
So are you suggesting that the Labour Party in the UK, for example, is a revolutionary party?

[Anonymous No.22126716]

>>22126670
>You are planning to steal other people’s property
no, the proletariat will first change the law to make the necessary expropriation legal
>which is an act of violence
yeah
>and therefore any claim to “self-defence” on your part is immediately null and void
there's no claim to self-defense on my part. on the other hand, maintaining private property using force, as the bourgeoisie is currently doing, is also an act of violence (see https://www.marxists.org/archive/bordiga/works/1946/violence.htm)), so a claim to self-defense on my part would be as valid as on yours
>because you instigated the violence
this violence goes all the way back to the beginning of class society. to arrive at your supposed purely defensive stance you must conveniently ignore both the past violence that has led to the status quo and the current violence that sustains it.
>>22126699
no, I'm suggesting it's a bourgeois party that however appeals to proletarians for support for a program that benefits the petite bourgeoisie and the big bourgeoisie

[Anonymous No.22126743]

>>22126716
>the proletariat will first change the law
>implying morality conforms to laws

great bait btw.

[Anonymous No.22126787]

>>22126716
No, capitalism is just voluntary exchange with no violence involved. Only time violence is used is when one party breaks the non-aggression principle and starts the fight. Now it is true that businesses today do use violence in the form of patents, copyright, subsidies, lobbying, etc.. And the system of fiat currency, money-printing, central banking, taxation, government industry regulation, and so on is all based on violence. But the answer to this is to reduce the power of the state over the economy so that we could have a truly free market based on peaceful voluntary exchanges, not to increase it and add even more brutality and violence.

[Anonymous No.22126788]

>>22126743
morality of a given group is an expression of its interests, and law is an expression of the interests of the ruling class in particular. so targeted expropriation won't be immoral according to proletarian morality and it won't constitute theft according to the law in force under the proletarian dictatorship

[Anonymous No.22126811]

>>22126788
morality is absolute, unchangeable, and God-given.
Murder and thievery is wrong.

it is merely a cope to pull other people down into your crab bucket, at best.

[Anonymous No.22126822]

>>22126787
This kinda reminds me of what Marx is saying about Proudhon, the ideal perfect competition reflecting a petty-bourgeois class status, and desiring a world in which the contradictions of the capitalist mode of production which bear down on him wouldn't exist. But the contradiction is where you locate the essence of the system, with the state being little else than an executive committee than manages the affairs of the capitalist ruling class.

Part of that is removing competition, either from smaller competitors (which are crushed in the so-called "free market") or from rival capitalist states, necessitating an army and navy and air force and marines. It means enforcing intellectual property laws, which you can be sued and found liable by a judge, or your country can be sanctioned or subject to military blockade by the capitalist state. They might contradict the interests of particular sectors of industry, and particular capitalists, but in the main do so to protect their class as a group. And since you want to prevent them from doing that, then that has real merit, and helps the impending social revolutions.

[Anonymous No.22126828]

>>22126787
>No, capitalism is just voluntary exchange with no violence involved
the violence is involved in creating the property being exchanged, sustaining it as property, and keeping in tact the general organization of society that allows for and is based on those exchanges
>Now it is true that businesses today do use violence in the form of patents, copyright, subsidies, lobbying, etc.. And the system of fiat currency, money-printing, central banking, taxation, government industry regulation, and so on is all based on violence.
i.e. all the things that keep the economy based on private property actually functioning
>But the answer to this is to reduce the power of the state over the economy
the state performs necessary functions which keep that economy alive, and its power over it will only keep expanding as the material basis keeps growing beyond what the capitalist mode of production is appropriate for into the sphere where production based on common ownership would be more suited instead.
so this is not only not an answer, but it's also something that's historically impossible under the assumption of further development of the means of production
>>22126811
god doesn't exist. killing people who violently oppose the revolution and can't be dealt with any other way is not murder. theft being wrong is irrelevant, because bourgeois morality and law no longer apply once the proletariat is in power.
>it is merely a cope
bro you believe in the sky daddy that happens to will your political opinions. don't talk to me about cope

[Anonymous No.22126971]

>>22126680
So this thread makes you happy?

[Anonymous No.22127114]

>>22124684
wtf is wrong with you desu

I would reckon you have no military experience otherwise you would understand the prolific theft in any military organization within itself to fulfill its needs and sometimes expressed through its acts of war. By fighting for what you believe is yours unless it is directly under you control, you are admitting that you don't own anything and that you can only occupy it. Like a squirrel.

[Anonymous No.22127537]

>>22124669
>fpbp
A "no u" circle of inanity ultimately discarded by Lenin's type outright. It's all window dressing.

[Anonymous No.22127557]

>>22124666
>was marx in the right
yes. if you have any more questions let me know

[Anonymous No.22127630]

>>22124666
2 more weeks, sisters

[Anonymous No.22127758]

>>22124684
Based

[Anonymous No.22127770]

>>22124666
>He must justify by means of theory what he is in practice,
Good God Marx was so based. Every mix he drops is straight fire.

[Anonymous No.22127775]

>>22125157
>Funny how mentioning Jews gets the state's internet lapdogs into attack mode. Kinda weird that all discussion of anti-semitism is forcefully shut down by (((them))). But that must just be a coincidence.
Let's not pretend you commies are arguing in good faith.

[Anonymous No.22127777]

>u r petite bourgie!
>no u r!
I guess.

[Anonymous No.22127826]

>>22124666
History has proven Proudhon right in all aspects.

[Anonymous No.22127832]

>>22124749
Okay, then I’m gonna fuck you. Bend over negro

[Anonymous No.22127834]

>>22125059
>Jewish psychoanalysis
Of course you would say that, kike

[Anonymous No.22127876]

>>22127114
>wtf is wrong with you??? Just let us take your property!!! Weirdo!!

[Anonymous No.22127958]

>>22126822
>>22126828
I’m in total agreement with you that the state uses violence and coercion to prop up big business. In fact the classic libertarian objection to the state is that it exists to stifle competition and prevent the circulation of elites. Under a free market competitive system, these elites would face much greater pressure from competition; and in the absence of state violence to enforce their hegemony over their particular market, the only way they would be able to remain on top is to provide a better or cheaper service than anybody else.
That is what is so beautiful about competition. It is a completely non-violent way of producing the most efficient and highest quality production. For if I am the only farmer in my town selling bananas, I can sell them at a high price and not worry much about the quality; as soon as a competitor non-violently steps in and sells his own bananas, I must lower the price of mine or ensure better quality to compete with him, otherwise I die out. And thus society is materially wealthier, since each money-unit now purchases a higher quantity and better quality bananas. It’s much like natural selection.
When the state imposes such things as tarrifs, regulations, central banking, patents, licenses, subsidies, and so on, it insulates the elites from free competition.
Communism is decidedly NOT a solution to this, since it proposes to destroy competition ENTIRELY by stealing everybody’s property and giving it to the state, thus radically increasing state power. Communism proposes violence in such a radical form that even the state of today would blush at it.

[Anonymous No.22128044]

>>22127958
>I’m in total agreement with you that the state uses violence and coercion to prop up big business.
no, it uses violence and coercion to sustain the possibility of any business

[Anonymous No.22128049]

>>22124684

[Anonymous No.22128058]

>>22127958
>>22128044
overall, if you're serious about understanding the role of the state in capitalism, start with reading https://en.gegenstandpunkt.com/books/democratic-state

[Anonymous No.22128070]

>>22128044
>>22128058
You repeat this over and over like it’s a religious dogma embossed onto your brain. Explain the REASON this is true, don’t just assert it.

[Anonymous No.22128117]

>>22128070
it's explained in the very short book I linked >>22128058 if you're really interested in the explanation, then just read it

[Anonymous No.22128219]

>>22128117
So you don’t even have a reason for your beliefs other than appeals to authority xD

[Anonymous No.22128251]

>>22128219
you don't even know what an appeal to authority is
>The appeal to authority fallacy is the logical fallacy of saying a claim is true simply because an authority figure made it
I'm not saying the reason it's true is because an authority figure has said it. I'm saying the reasons it's true are laid out in that brief text, so anyone who's interested in knowing what they are can go read that. if you can't even distinguish between the two concepts, you're too stupid to participate in this discussion.

[Anonymous No.22128281]

>>22128251
It’s not a discussion it’s just you asserting something without offering a reason and then linking some book when asked. I already explained how government regulation of the economy is bad for competition since it erects artificial barriers to entry so the top dogs are insulated from those who want to compete with them… which is bad, not good, for society. Can you just offer an argument instead of linking an entire book? Or do you not even know why you believe what you believe?

[Anonymous No.22128373]

>>22128281
>It’s not a discussion it’s just you asserting something without offering a reason and then linking some book when asked.
the reasons are clearly laid out in the book. if you want to know them, you can read it. if you don't, then don't. why keep whining about it?
>I already explained how government regulation of the economy is bad for competition
no, you stated it has aspects that hamper competition when taken in the abstract, which is true. but I pointed out that if you don't just cherry pick those aspects and instead take government regulation as a whole, it turns out that it's what enables competition in the first place.
yes, regulation puts limitations and impositions on the competitors, but those limitations and impositions, such as the rule of law enforcing fairness of the competition, the police and welfare state keeping the victims of the competition from overturning the entire system, and so on, are also things that makes this competition possible in the first place.
so simply saying that it hampers competition is a grave mistake that results from looking at the issue one-sidedly, like someone with a political agenda, instead of holistically, like a scientist. if you want a proper scientific exposition of the functions of the bourgeois state that doesn't just cherry-pick specific aspects but explains the whole, see >>22128058
by the way, the mistake in your thinking had already been pointed out ITT before I even made my first post. see >>22124721
>What they all want is competition without the pernicious consequences of competition. They all want the impossible, i.e. the conditions of bourgeois existence without the necessary consequences of those conditions.
you want all the "good" sides of competition, i.e. those that the owner of capital sees as immediately beneficial, without the "bad" sides, i.e. those that have the immediate appearance of deductions from his profit, like the fact that competition requires a state to guarantee conditions for it and intervene to correct for so-called externalities, or the fact that it leads to monopolies. but this is a pipe dream, those are two sides of the same coin.
>Can you just offer an argument instead of linking an entire book?
this isn't a debate. the book answers your very question in a detailed and focused way. it explains why capitalist economy needs the bourgeois state. I'm not interested in scoring debate points, so I won't be wasting time writing summaries for you, especially because you yourself are clearly in debate mode and you aren't actually even genuinely seeking answers to the question you posed.
I have already pointed out where you're wrong multiple times and I gave you directions as to how you can go about correcting this. what you do with that information is up to you.
>Or do you not even know why you believe what you believe?
if I didn't know the reasons, I probably wouldn't have been able to point out to a text dedicated basically exactly to listing those reasons

[Anonymous No.22128390]

>>22124669
fpbp

[Anonymous No.22128398]

>>22124666
Sell me on Marxism

[Anonymous No.22128402]

>>22124684
>>22124702
extremely based.

[Anonymous No.22128430]

>>22128398
Get a lobotomy and ur halfway to becoming a marxist. Its an ideolgy created out of envy by failed trustfund babies that cry because they have to actually put in some effort to succed in life. Even marxs own father called him out on being a trustfund baby bitchboy.

[Anonymous No.22128446]

>>22128430
heh literally me. but im man enough to admit im fucked in the head lol

[Anonymous No.22128449]

>>22124684
t. 35 bmi

[Anonymous No.22128452]

>>22124684
You are genetically a pedophile

[Anonymous No.22128456]

>>22127958
From a Communist perspective this is also true. This is basic Adam Smith level understanding of economy which Marx starts his analysis with in Capital.

>And thus society is materially wealthier, since each money-unit now purchases a higher quantity and better quality bananas. It’s much like natural selection.
Exactly, but have you ever noticed how the lives of Gazelles and Lions despite being in competition and undergoing natural selection never actually really improve their lives? Human progress is defined as freeing ourselves from the vicissitudes of nature. While Humans needed nature to create them no longer need to be defined by it. Likewise with Capitalism. It is needed to build up a productive base of Capital but after that can simply be managed in a non-competitive way.

>When the state imposes such things as tarrifs, regulations, central banking, patents, licenses, subsidies, and so on, it insulates the elites from free competition.
Yes, the issue is that the elites know that Capitalism is not a game that can run on forever. Monopoly ends exactly when you stop injecting new money into the system.

>Communism is decidedly NOT a solution to this, since it proposes to destroy competition ENTIRELY by stealing everybody’s property and giving it to the state, thus radically increasing state power.
The state power is only an issue in relation to manipulating Capitalism for the benefit of the Bourgeoisie. Once the collective of productive forces is in the hands of the state it can simply manage it. Also, please keep in mind, by the definition were using here 90% of people own close to 0 property.

[Anonymous No.22128482]

>>22128430
And yet with the effort he put in just the first volume of Das Kapital, he accomplished more than you ever will and cemented his name in history.

[Anonymous No.22128498]

>>22128482
>he accomplished more than you ever
He died broke and his whole family, wife and children hated his guts.
>cemented his name in history
cemented as a failure who accomlpished nothing, every country that applied his theory in practice turned into a third world shithole. You sure showed me faggot.

[Anonymous No.22128519]

>>22124684
>>22124702
>>22124736
Someone is upset.

[Anonymous No.22128525]

>>22128498
USSR, Vietnam, Venezuela, China and Cuba are/were all capitalist

[Anonymous No.22128534]

>>22128430
Envy is a justified emotion. If someone I deem as inferior to me has something I deserve by superior intelligence and strength, I rightly should feel envious and in the cave man days I simply would take what ought to be rightfully mine.

[Anonymous No.22128536]

>>22128525
What about Cambodia?

[Anonymous No.22128538]

I am petty bourgeoise.

[Anonymous No.22128541]

>>22128430
You have father issues via proxy.

[Anonymous No.22128552]

>>22128534
>If someone I deem as inferior to me has something I deserve by superior intelligence and strength
If this was true which i doubt considering the average marxists is a limpwristed faggot who have never actually worked in their life, you wouldnt need to be a bootlicker communist in the first place to succed.

[Anonymous No.22128557]

I don't even care about anti-communists. The Cheka showed us how to deal with them. They know what happens after a communist revolution and they are scared. Did you know that peasants and workers themselves organized punishing committees for the petite-bourgeois and landed farmers? In the end, history will make away with everyone standing in the progress of productive forces.

[Anonymous No.22128559]

>>22125055
Then you will really enjoy the capitalist west where Godless bolsheviks have also taken over our society but we don’t get free houses or any labor protections

[Anonymous No.22128564]

>>22128559
are the bolsheviks in the room with us now?

[Anonymous No.22128569]

Capitalist bros are making some good points. Should I delete Das Kapital and read Atlas Shrugged instead?

[Anonymous No.22128585]

>>22128498
Cope and seethe
Marx is one of the most influential nineteenth century thinkers, people will still read him in a hundred years, while you won't even be a footnote.

[Anonymous No.22128592]

>>22128552
Marxists are not Marxists which is precisely the point Marx is making in OP. Class struggle ensues independently of ideology. As it stands in America, the proletariat are poorfag trump voters that make $15 an hour working at walmart driving beat up Chevy malibus. The bourgeoisie and those who benefit from the current system are wealthy urbanites with IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WE LIKE FAGS AND BELIEVE IN SCIENCE that have millions of dollars, drive new BMWs. The deplorables will be the Cheka one day.

[Anonymous No.22128600]

>>22128536
yes, Cambodia too. all those shitholes were simply imitating 1930s USSR and doing state-directed capitalist industrialization under the guise of communism

[Anonymous No.22128937]

>>22128373
The state providing protection of property is not coercion, obviously, since in its law-enforcement capacity it only uses violence against those who try to steal or aggress against another in some way, which is not coercion but defence of the innocent. However when it enforces patents or regulates industries so only the big players can compete, it is coercion, since nobody violates the non-aggression principle by making a product similar to a company who claims a "patent" over it.

>you want all the "good" sides of competition, i.e. those that the owner of capital sees as immediately beneficial
Competition is just a mechanism whereby the firms who most efficiently satisfy economic demand survive, whereas the ones who don't go bankrupt. If a bunch of farmers compete against each other in the sale of meat, the only way they can survive is if they provide a better or cheaper service than the others, or at least a comparable one. This forces them to lower the price of meat, since if they keep it above market value, one of their rivals could undercut them and make them go bankrupt. Now if one of them went around with armed thugs like Lenin and hanged all of the others, he would no longer have to worry about this, and could provide shitty meat at a high price since there are no other options.

Is competition universally good? No, competition in goods (like meat, cars, phones, etc.) is good, but competition in bads (heroin, pornography, cocaine, etc.) has the same effect of efficiently satisfying demand, but this is a bad thing for society since this demand is to the detriment of the people who demand it and to society as a whole.

Lastly, the "owners of capital" hate competition, which is why they do all in their power to lobby the state to crush competitors. Watch Dragon's Den and listen to how many times the word "patent" is brought up.

>>22128456
>Gazelles and Lions despite being in competition
Gazelles and lions are not in competition with each other in the same way that two private firms are. The definition of economic competition is two firms providing the same, or similar service to the same target market. If two Indian restaurants are established in the same town, they are in competition with each other, but it doesn't mean they hate each other or are violent.

In fact, the moment violence and coercion is introduced, there is no longer competition. If one Indian restaurant decides to firebomb the other, this is no longer economic competition, but gangsterism.

Monopolies are not able to last in a free market environment precisely for the reason that, without competitors, they are at a serious risk of degrading and becoming vulnerable to competitors.

What you are proposing is a state monopoly that just kills all competitors. Now I can no longer establish my own company to compete with the state-owned companies, because goons will come to hang me.