>more deaths than all of world war I and II combined >still reading Marxists >still considering trying it out again What's it with undergrads and their working class romanticism?

File: 134 KB, 960x770, nuffin wrong starter pack.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:15:03 2015 No.6298134 [DELETED]

>more deaths than all of world war I and II combined
>still reading Marxists
>still considering trying it out again

What's it with undergrads and their working class romanticism?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:16:40 2015 No.6298140 >>6298134 >a bunch of people in a quasi-socialist state starved to death because of a war >communism is bad! fuck off

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:17:01 2015 No.6298142 >>6298134 Ahaha I love this starter pack meme. Someone post the existentialist one.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:17:30 2015 No.6298145 >>6298134 They grow seeing that the world is bad. They are slightly more intelligent than the average person, willing to read. But they can't think for themselves. Put it together.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:19:07 2015 No.6298151 File: 196 KB, 961x969, diCTxKx.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298142 nvm I got it

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:19:22 2015 No.6298153 File: 96 KB, 960x801, fool the people.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298140 >i-i-it was inspired by Marx b-b-but they just misinterpret it Just like ISIS has nothing to do with Islam right?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:21:11 2015 No.6298163 >>6298151 Perfect >>6298140 >quasi-socialist Why not just admit that that's what socialism looks like?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:21:16 2015 No.6298164

>>6298134

I'm actually reading this /pol/ right now thread where some guy seems to be suggesting that non-communists need to be slaughtered en masse. If that's a typical communist mindset then I don't think your point about communism causing war is going to convince anyone. At least some communists seem to embrace the idea of war, so your "starter pack" mostly consists of images of what they consider to be awesome things.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:22:53 2015 No.6298178 >>6298153 Lenin was a brilliant revolutionary with a god-tier practical interpretation of Marxist theory then the war happened and a shitload of people died, Lenin included then Stalin, the true shitshow, happened Lenin warned us of Stalin

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:23:39 2015 No.6298181

>>6298140

9/10 leftist outbreaks lead to disaster. Either tyranny or dysfunctional states that pay the price sooner or later.

Leftism is a nuissance that's been keeping us from managing a decent state for way too long because it's indeed a type of romanticism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:24:03 2015 No.6298182 >>6298164 I talked to a communist not too long ago who understood material conditions would be poor, but insisted that everyone being equally in squalor was better than a hierarchy. Is spoogy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:24:18 2015 No.6298184 >>6298163 >why not just admit there has never been a proper socialist state Burkina Faso came close, but then their leader was assassinated kill yourself

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:24:33 2015 No.6298185 >>6298151 i like all this shit, except smoking.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:24:48 2015 No.6298186 File: 541 KB, 793x1400, communism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298178 >Lenin didn do nuffin wrung >it wuz all bad bad stalin's fault, otherwise world would be worker's paradise

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:24:53 2015 No.6298187

>>6298178
Fucking bourgeois apologist scum. Stalin was a fucking hero. Heroic men (Lenin, Stalin, Ho Chih Minh, Mao Zedong, Castro, Che, Hoxha, Salvador Allende) have acted on this vision. It isn't my vision. This idea goes beyond me, beyond Marx, Engels, or any flesh and bone man. Men are the mere products of determining factors caused by ideas, environments, and genes. This particular idea goes against the conformity and liberalism of "there will always be" this or that. It is an active ideological struggle that continues to this day and will eventually, inevitably win out. It will win out when weapon in hand, against the tyrannical bourgeois forces. We have to do it without fear, sentimentalism, or cowardice. Some people deserve the Gulag.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:25:01 2015 No.6298188 >>6298185 Why would you be an existentialist and not like smoking?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:25:26 2015 No.6298190 >>6298163 it's what state socialism, i.e. fascism, looks like. it is not what direct worker's democracy looks like.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:26:02 2015 No.6298194 File: 7 KB, 249x148, 1425258031281s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298187

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:26:33 2015 No.6298197

>>6298134
just because people die, it does not make the theory wrong.

same with capitalism.

people who say "communism din du nothing" are indeed retarded though, because real communist thought would not feel the need to defend its right to kill people for its cause.

just the same as any state. (not calling communism a state)

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:27:18 2015 No.6298200

>>6298182

It is spooky!

These people have a truly religious ferver about them. They think they're bringing about heaven on earth and their fiery rhetoric reflects that. I get a sinking feeling in my stomach whenever I read their material, very similar to how I feel when watching Westboro Baptist Church videos.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:27:57 2015 No.6298202

>>6298190
If direct worker's democracy can be achieved, why hasn't it been achieved yet? The whole of the 20th century was basically an attempt to get to it and every attempt you'll write off as state capitalism, fascism, or some other term you can use to get away from the fact that socialism is inherently violent.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:28:04 2015 No.6298203 File: 83 KB, 500x579, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298200 >these people

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:28:41 2015 No.6298206

>>6298134
Hello friend. The quote from your post is apocryphal. I'm going to assume you aren't ill intentioned and are just stupid enough to beleive everything you read on the internet. I hope falling for neonazi lies will make you question any future neonazi propaganda you might come accross.
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1856/04/14.htm

inb4 the pic isn't neonazi, most of this kind of shit originates from stormfront and similar sites

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:29:08 2015 No.6298208 >>6298202 >If x can be achieved, why hasn't it been achieved yet? good thing you're not in medicine or science, shitlord

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:29:14 2015 No.6298209

"Real communism" has not been tried because it's not something you can just "Try."
Marx said the revolution would happen hundreds of years from now in an industrialized capitalist nation. It was Lenin's idea to try it in a country that was still technically a feudal state.
The result was Fascism justified with Marxist rhetoric rather than nationalism.

Communism is probably inevitable, but we probably also won't see it in our lifetimes, and the 20th centuries attempts at communism probably pushed the actual revolution further into the future.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:29:19 2015 No.6298210

>>6298197

This sort of relativism over human death undermines communism.
It should be that communism is the only choice because it's the most humane idea out there.

If every society requires its human sacrifices why should we opt for communism then since it causes a lot more suffering than capitalism does?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:29:50 2015 No.6298212 >>6298203 The people who subscribe to said idea.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:29:51 2015 No.6298213

>>6298153
Not really. Has a lot more to do with foreigners fucking their shit up and killing innocent civilians by the hundred thousand. If Christianity was the most popular religion in that region they'd still be pissed about that.

Also
>Christians never took land by violence and/or committed mass slaughter of innocent people.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:30:20 2015 No.6298216 >>6298186 there should be a version of this with "capitalism" instead of "communism" and a picture of franklin roosevelt, john foster dulles, lyndon johnson, j.b.m. hertzog, sani abacha

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:30:45 2015 No.6298220 >>6298151 >filtered cigarettes >existentialist Try again.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:30:54 2015 No.6298222 Because everyone knows the 1900s were a plethora of happiness for everyone except that,right? >people commit violence because of their opinions, and not at all because of material circumstances >being this spooked

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:31:15 2015 No.6298224 >>6298209 >Communism is probably inevitable You keep saying that but trends have no evidence of this whatsoever.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:31:34 2015 No.6298227 >>6298182 That's just because you can't understand how much worse things should be for a few of them to be drastically better than the most.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:32:17 2015 No.6298228
File: 244 KB, 1024x768, Manila_shanty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298134
I fucking swear; seeing anti-communists makes me question their sense of morality. These people actually want to continue capitalism!

Capitalism as a system creates then perpetuates:
>global starvation and malnutrition despite that we have enough food and water to go around
>poverty and massive inequality
>consumerist culture
>hyper-exploitation
>imperialism

By the way, most of deaths within so-called socialst regimes were excess-deaths; deaths as a result not from direct killing per se, but through hunger and desease. By that logic capitalism as a system kills 10 milllion children every year.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:32:19 2015 No.6298229 >>6298208 Revolution isn't like medicine because society isn't like a human body.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:32:32 2015 No.6298230 File: 67 KB, 594x960, capitalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298216 The communist paradise that is virtual reality has already provided you with such a thing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:33:02 2015 No.6298232 >>6298224 >hasn't looked at the history of the global market in the past twenty years capitalism is done for

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:33:25 2015 No.6298236 >>6298227 >to be drastically better than the most But it won't, and it hasn't in any attempt, quite the opposite happening can be argued.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:33:32 2015 No.6298238 >>6298228 >I have no problem taking part in anti-bourgeois death squads >anti-communists their sense of morality is off

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:33:52 2015 No.6298240 >>6298222 >there is a scientific process of continuous class struggle that 100% explains every conflict ever, because it is 100% about material wellbeing, and eventually there will be a proletarian paradise >calling others spooked

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:34:26 2015 No.6298242 >>6298228 I don't, I want third positionism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:34:32 2015 No.6298243 >>6298232 You guys have been claiming this for over 200 years. Every prediction by commies has always been wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:35:29 2015 No.6298246 >>6298232 >twenty years >trend to predict the global course in the next few centuries

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:35:35 2015 No.6298248 >>6298243 it's been true for over 200 years, dipshit better vomit up that kool aid

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:36:15 2015 No.6298250 the failure of regimes which adopted marxianism clearly wasn't communism but totalitarianism. so we have to ask, what did marx say about totalitarianism

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:36:41 2015 No.6298252

>>6298240
>this level of mad
Is that you, Christopher Hitchens' ghost? Are you going to tell me that conflict in the Middle East is caused by the evil of religion, or are you going to realize it's because they're all poor as fuck and constantly being invaded?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:38:09 2015 No.6298258 >>6298238 >I have no problem supporting in anti-communist death squads >communists their sense of morality is off.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:38:29 2015 No.6298260

>>6298248

Just because you predict the end of something ( wow, much Nostradamus ) means shit.
Christians have predicted the Apocalypse for centuries now and have always been wrong about when it would happen.
Pretty much like communists saying:

>"Ok the world has gone to shit, it's 1918, communism is really happening now, the bourgeois states will not survive this wave."

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:38:44 2015 No.6298263

>>6298182
"A second source of those destructive passions by which the peace of society is interrupted is to be found in the luxury, the pageantry and magnificence with which enormous wealth is usually accompanied. Human beings are capable of encountering with cheerfulness considerable hardships when those hardships are impartially shared with the rest of the society, and they are not insulted with the spectacle of indolence and ease in others, no way deserving of greater advantages than themselves. But it is a bitter aggravation of their own calamity, to have the privileges of others forced on their observation, and, while they are perpetually and vainly endeavouring to secure for themselves and their families the poorest conveniences, to find others revelling in the fruits of their labours. This aggravation is assiduously administered to them under most of the political establishments at present in existence. There is a numerous class of individuals who, though rich, have neither brilliant talents nor sublime virtues; and, however highly they may prize their education, their affability, their superior polish and the elegance of their manners, have a secret consciousness that they possess nothing by which they can so securely assert their pre-eminence and keep their inferiors at a distance as the splendour of their equipage, the magnificence of their retinue and the sumptuousness of their entertainments. The poor man is struck with this exhibition; he feels his own miseries; he knows how unwearied are his efforts to obtain a slender pittance of this prodigal waste . . . "

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:39:11 2015 No.6298264 >>6298242 Third positionism is capitalism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:39:30 2015 No.6298267 File: 15 KB, 173x195, AK antifa_thumb[6] - kopie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298258 >ur a fascist if u dont join us Antifa spooks gtfo

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:39:35 2015 No.6298268 >>capitalism inevitably seeps into all communistic societies >guys we just need to crush individual will and the desire for self betterment then we can have a true workers paradise #radicalleftists

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:40:17 2015 No.6298274 >>6298268 Ayn Rand pls go

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:40:55 2015 No.6298277 >>6298252 >the middle east is poor as fuck I'd rather live in Egypt than I do in Congo.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:41:15 2015 No.6298281 >>6298263 >plebs are angry because people are richer >plebs make rich people into plebs >plebs are no longer angry >communist paradise Brilliant!

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:41:55 2015 No.6298284

>>6298264
absolutely not.

the third way of politicians tweaking the world economic system to find the perfect balance owes more to statism than commerce. the defining factor in every country is not the condition of private enterprise but the size and shape of the state

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:43:01 2015 No.6298290 >>6298264 >every modern solution that isn't mine is capitalism Commies confirmed for "it's of the devil" christfags.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:43:20 2015 No.6298292 >>6298284 So? The defining factor of capitalism is private ownership of capital, not commerce or a small state.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:43:40 2015 No.6298293 >>6298277 cool meaningless statement, bro

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:43:46 2015 No.6298295

>>6298228

Uh, there's a difference between people starving to deaths in gulags or as the result of deliberate economic policies, and people dying in third world countries because they don't have adequate medicine. The former is obviously a direct result of certain policies; the bureaucrats who ordered the food allocation system are DIRECTLY culpable. The latter is simply a difference of relative outcome; third world countries have higher infant death rates than first world countries, and in some of these cases, there may be corporations operating somewhere near the starving people, But this doesn't mean capitalism is "killing" the third worlders the same way Stalin killed those Ukrainians; most societies that aren't first world have high infant death rates, the problem is much worse in tribal societies than in today's third world countries and would be worse in third world countries now if Western capitalist charities weren't helping out.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:43:49 2015 No.6298296
File: 23 KB, 359x176, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298208
>if a dogs head can be grafted to a different dogs body why hasn't it been achieved yet
Because the dogs body inevitably rejects the foreign genetic material
>communist_morality.jpg

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:45:25 2015 No.6298302

>>6298293

Some African countries are way worse off than the Middle East.
Yet Middle Easterners always manage to always bring that next level retardation and violence to the table.

Plus some of those ISIS thugs are actually Saudi's and other Gulffags.
Not exactly poor people who like themselves a bloody orgy.

>it must be white people's fault, because I'm a cuck

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:45:49 2015 No.6298303 >>6298296 that doesn't make it impossible just currently unachievable

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:46:50 2015 No.6298305

>>6298210
communism is more about a society where everyone can be actualized rather than reducing suffering.

there is a difference.

I'm not a communist so i have no skin in the matter. but in general no communist would be 'happy' about hurting people (supposedly), and yes the less people you hurt the better, and yes they might see faux communism as subversive to a communist revolution; but ultimately revolution is not just justified its (seemingly) necessary in some form (not necessarily violent, but predicted to be so).

Communism is a way towards the end goal of human civilization, not just equality for equalities sake but a society of total human actualization.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:47:31 2015 No.6298308 >>6298295 >let's allocate these resources is such a way that millions of people die of starvation >let's let the market allocate these resources which results in millions of people dying of starvation So much better.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:47:33 2015 No.6298309 >>6298302 You realize that there's been a fucking huge war going on around the Congo for the last twenty or so years, right? The largest loss of life in a military conflict since WWII.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:47:53 2015 No.6298314 >>6298292 and the condition of the modern economies is advantageous to those affiliated with the state, not just 'private owners'. You are only free when the law and the the government banking nexus is on your side.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:48:01 2015 No.6298315 >>6298292 It is not the unfettered capitalism and consumerism that you so fear.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:48:26 2015 No.6298317 >>6298303 Fascinating. Under what conditions is communism "achievable?" And further, how can bureaucrats determine prices faster than modern trading computers?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:49:03 2015 No.6298320 >>6298317 >he hasn't read wr

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:49:15 2015 No.6298322 >>6298309 Congo was a bad example, I'll admit that. But if I had to pick between Zambia or say Lebanon, I would know what to pick.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:50:05 2015 No.6298328

>>6298308

You're missing the point. As a result of capitalism there's less net deaths in these countries. In the USSR, famines reached a level completely unheard of in Tsarist Russia (which did occasionally have famines but nothing like what happened under stalin, rendering commies' terrible argument where they try to claim communism dindu nuffin because it arose in states that already sucked utterly defeated).

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:50:11 2015 No.6298329 >>6298308 >Literally billions of people over the planets natural carrying capacity >let's continue doing the nitrogen fixing >hey why are there people who are hungry ?????????

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:50:25 2015 No.6298331

>>6298295
most of the people that died in the famine didn't die in the gulags. It was a result of a beuracratically enforced (I fucking swear, the fact that people associate socialism with bureacracy shows how bloody terrible the USSR's system was. Marx, Engels, and Lenin all emphasized democratic referendum when it came to deciding economic planning) policy that over-estimated the productive efficiency of collectivization.

And yes, capitalism does kill these people because it is undeniable that we have enough food to go around. What is failing is the ability to give people who need food the ability to obtain it properly. In other words, it is a failure of the markets (which is the primarily place people go to to recieve food) to properly distribute food among the populus.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:51:14 2015 No.6298335 >>6298184 >there has never been a proper socialist state >Burkina Faso came close, If you'd said revolutionary Spain I might have taken you seriously.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:51:33 2015 No.6298338 >>6298328 >implying most contemporary communists argue in repeating the Soviet Union's system

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:52:15 2015 No.6298341 >>6298230 No one here makes the claim that capitalism has never been tried. You're attacking a strawman.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:53:14 2015 No.6298346 >>6298331 That would make people content with being lazy and getting fed.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:53:54 2015 No.6298352 >>6298328 There's one retard in the whole board that defends stalin so your point is irrelevant. Capitalism is good at increasing productivity but shit at allocating the excess resources towards people who need it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:54:21 2015 No.6298353 >>6298346 >having food Those lazy borgeousie shits

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:55:11 2015 No.6298357

>>6298281
Don't talk to me you illiterate cunt. Nowhere in that quote is any of that implied and it actually comes from an anarchist. I actually advocate neither anarchy or communism, but that quote demonstrably refutes the post I was responding to. Fuck off.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:55:52 2015 No.6298359
File: 143 KB, 960x678, FULL COMMUNISM.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I think automation will bring communism, if not greatly cement it.

Pretty much like the industrial revolution played a major role in bringing us capitalism since the 19th century.

The whole idea that "revolts" brought about capitalism is really myopic. It was a myriad of changes, not just bourgeoisie hitting the streets.
I don't understand why commies miss this when they've obviously read the history books.

Technological changes will help in pulling it off. Uprisings by workers will play a minor role.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:57:59 2015 No.6298367 >>6298359 >The whole idea that "revolts" brought about capitalism is really myopic. It was a myriad of changes, not just bourgeoisie hitting the streets. Who said that? Certainly not historical materialists.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 15:59:21 2015 No.6298371

>>6298359
>automation will bring communism
>undreamed of technology will bring a 200 year old terrible idea into being
>not a world of automatic semi-sentient corporations not quite aware that humans are relevant outside of sources of labor or impediments to their goals
Step up your game

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:00:03 2015 No.6298374 Disgusts me how you people can defend capitalism. How can you people be happy in a system that feeds the bourgeoisie banker fatcats while your fellow proles suffer from intense poverty?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:02:24 2015 No.6298382

>>6298290
Well, no. Capitalism is a system defined by social relations. Fascism doesn't just abolish anything that associated with capitalism. All 3rd-positionists really argue for is more state-intervention or state sponsered enterprises, and a resurgence in nationalism, which in no way negates capitalism.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:03:38 2015 No.6298391

>>6298374
>posting on /lit/
>prole
Hahahahahaha
Black Americans and white trash are the primes. You're so borgeous you don't even know how borgeous you are. If a communist revolution takes place, within a year the extremely well armed lower class will wrest control of the revolution from limp wristed ideological intellectuals like you

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:03:53 2015 No.6298395 >>6298134 >Guilt by association

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:05:23 2015 No.6298402 >>6298391 This. Every Marxist on /lit/ is painfully bourgeois.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:05:53 2015 No.6298404

>>6298341
It's a meme that attacks a strawman with a strawman to expose how rediculous the basing of the original argument is.

Besides, it's a meme you dip. Political memes don't exist to convey a rational arguement, they exist to play into our unconcious ideological assumptions.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:08:52 2015 No.6298424

>>6298391
>>6298402
yes and no
Many marxists are increadibly bourgeois and intellectualist, and yes, many marxists are unconcious Girondinds, but asserting that lower classes can't be intellectual and that bourgeois intellectuals leading the lower classes can't get into power either are both blatantly wrong.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:09:46 2015 No.6298431

>>6298252
>Are you going to tell me that conflict in the Middle East is caused by the evil of religion, or are you going to realize it's because they're all poor as fuck
>he genuinely thinks ''being poor'' causes the conflict in the Middle East.

Fuck me, you're a moron. I guess it's easy to be a Marxist if you know nothing about history.

At least read some Cleveland before you spout so much nonsense.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:11:54 2015 No.6298438 >>6298431 >I guess it's easy to be a Marxist if you know nothing about history. >Go to occupy Wall Street >attempt to have actual conversations >18 year old dating a Frenchwoman says best case scenario a new French revolu

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:12:06 2015 No.6298439 >>6298424 >yes and no stopped reading there

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:13:57 2015 No.6298448 >>6298438 You've told this story b4

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:16:05 2015 No.6298454 >>6298188 Because dying is inconsequential to me but I really don't want to fucking die.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:17:57 2015 No.6298463 >>6298439 Well, it wasn't completely wrong, but it wasn't completely right either, so yes and no. I don't see how this is a problem.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:55:13 2015 No.6298645
File: 55 KB, 200x200, 1387766391026.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Discounting all memes for a moment, people don't seriously believe the PRC and USSR were ever communist, do they? I mean it's fairly obvious that they never came close to transitioning to a stateless, moneyless, classless society, and in the case of China, never will. Marxism is essentially anarchism seen through the lens of class conflict and brought about through gradual transformation.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:58:47 2015 No.6298659 >>6298454 you'll die as a pussy then

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 16:59:47 2015 No.6298663 >>6298645 >brought about through gradual transformation. Marx preached class warfare and revolution.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:00:19 2015 No.6298666 >>6298663 So?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:01:02 2015 No.6298668
File: 27 KB, 640x360, 2133214354.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298134
>responsible for the all the deaths in world war 1 and 2
>still reading capitalists
>still considering trying it out again

What`s it with /pol/ neets and their race/free trade romanticism?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:02:20 2015 No.6298675 >>6298666 So marxism is not "brought about through gradual transformation" you fucking moron.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:03:20 2015 No.6298679 >>6298668 >What`s it with /pol/ neets and their race/free trade romanticism? It's called being intelligent.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:04:22 2015 No.6298682 >>6298675 Do you even understand basic marxism? While anarchists want to get rid of the state immediately, marx advocated for a transition phase. That's what he was saying.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:05:22 2015 No.6298687 >>6298682 Yes, Marx wrote that the state is meant to fade away due to uselessness once a successful socialist state is established.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:06:05 2015 No.6298691 >>6298682 >marx advocated for a transition phase Which is anything but gradual. The way he phrased it was disingenuous, by making it seem as though marxism is obtained through smooth transition.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:08:10 2015 No.6298702 >>6298691 >a transition phase >is anything but gradual alright m8

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:09:12 2015 No.6298706

>>6298691

It is after the revolution. You're not wrong the transition from communism to socialism would be abrupt and violent by Marxist theory; but once a socialist state is established and industrially and economically stable, the state would fade away due to uselessness. Of course this is all within the idea of "international communism" so there would be no external threats, so even as a defensive tactic the state is not needed.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:11:42 2015 No.6298713

>>6298702
>implying the "transition phase" of marxism isn't a violent destruction of the established hierarchy.

>>6298706
The problem is that we've got absolutely no proof that a socialist state can ever be "industrially and economically stable", as all attempts to establish socialist states so far have had nightmarish consequences.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:17:25 2015 No.6298736

>>6298668
"Capitalism" wasn't really responsible. It was all Austria. It will always be Austria. You may think oh gee, you know, Austria's a really nice place to be. Beer and mountains and culture and history. But beware: there exists a dragon beneath the veneer of calm and civilization, waiting to break the Earth once again. Do not misunderstand me: I greatly respect the Austrians, but it must be acknowledged that theirs is the true Heart of Darkness.

Anyways, here's a radical idea, guys: What if we just have a mixed economy, and avoid the dangerous excesses of either Communism or extreme lasseiz-faire Capitalism?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:17:54 2015 No.6298738
File: 11 KB, 264x295, 2331231232.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298679
>He thinks intelligence is better than experience
>mfw intellectuals
Why does every capitalist nation have to cede to State reform and control to prevent a revolution? Capitalism works in theory, just not in practice. You intellectuals and dreamers just can`t give up on your anti-human-nature ideas. People don`t want to have their freedom taken away, sorry. Racism doesn`t work. The failure of the NATIONAL socialist german worker`s party proved that. How many times do your idealist philosophies have to fail before you realize that they are nothing more than utopian soap bubbles?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:19:37 2015 No.6298749 >>6298738 I can't tell if you're being ironic or not, especially the part about "it works in theory not in practice", "anti human nature" and "take freedom away", as those are usually arguments used agains socialism.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:21:06 2015 No.6298754

I think Marx's critique of capitalism is essentially correct, but come on, 20th century communism was horrible, a complete disaster.

And I hate how Marxists treat Marx. He was a philospher/economist with a really good model of capitalism, not a prophet, it's more important to create better conditions here and now instead of worrying about what Marx's vision was

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:22:55 2015 No.6298763
File: 210 KB, 1214x648, tumblr_mzfpjbPE5Z1rd8tfco2_1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298134
nice try stormturd but you forgot that the USSR had :
>full LGBTQPQUALMNOP rights
>full civil rights
>supported civil rights struggles all over the world (including the US)
>free education
>free sex + gender (alligned + non aligned) change operations
>best educational facilities at the time
>cheap, plentiful food
>free entertainment for the working class
>free holidays for the working class
>free world class healthcare for the working class

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:24:45 2015 No.6298768 >>6298763 >>>/pol/

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:25:33 2015 No.6298773

>>6298713
There are a number of reasons for the failed socialist economics, much of which was ignorance or poor decision making. As humanity's intellect grows, and experience in state management, we could form a working socialist economy. Another aspect to remember is foreign interference; though the communist states hyperbolize it, western forces often tangle in their domestic affairs.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:27:26 2015 No.6298777

>>6298749
Sorry if you can`t recognize reality after being cooped up in your pro-capitalist ivory tower for so long. Anyone with common sense will see Marx`s theory of alienated labour under capitalism is correct and agree with it, except for college libertarians. Sorry dude, but the moribund nature of capitalism was proven with the Great Depression. You can read outdated economics books all you want, I`m going with what works.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:29:52 2015 No.6298785 >>6298763 what the fuck is this pic trying to say? is it a joke implying people think Spanish are white or whites are christian?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:29:55 2015 No.6298786 >>6298777 I still can't tell if you're joking or not. If you are, you're doing a pretty good job.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:31:44 2015 No.6298790

>>6298773
>There are a number of reasons for the failed socialist economics, much of which was ignorance or poor decision making.
Doesn't this prove that humans are unable to manage a country's economy as efficiently as the free market?

>As humanity's intellect grows, and experience in state management, we could form a working socialist economy.
That's wishful thinking.

>Another aspect to remember is foreign interference; though the communist states hyperbolize it, western forces often tangle in their domestic affairs.
Sure, but plenty of foreign interference in capitalist countries didn't prevent them from growing.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:34:21 2015 No.6298802

>>6298786
Partially. I`m interested in Marx but not big on Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc. I think Marx is interesting in what he says about capitalism but I fall in with the anti-Leninist left when it comes to socialism in practice, at least so far in what I understand of it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:34:25 2015 No.6298803 all these american middle class commie apologists smh

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:42:57 2015 No.6298824 >>6298424 Intellectualism arises from soft and bourgeois people Those lower classes will become bourgeois the instantly they get intellectualism and power

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:44:33 2015 No.6298829 It makes me laugh to see people use the not-real-communism line to try to absolve their ideology of the crimes of the USSR in the one moment, and deny the crimes in the next.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:53:14 2015 No.6298857

the funny part is that the actual working class is usually apolitical or leaning to the right. i worked in a warehouse, in a supermarket stacking shelves and as a sort of general assistant / caretaker for an old folks home and not one of my colleagues ever seemed like the type of person to have a Ché poster on their bedroom wall.

idk about actual marxist ideas; but the rhetoric has been outdated for at least 50 years now. working class in the west has been shrinking; and those who are technically workers live drastically different lives than workers did a hundred years ago.

if marxist in the west want to be taken seriously by a larger audience that lingo has to go, it's bullshit.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 17:57:58 2015 No.6298868

>>6298857
>idk about actual marxist ideas; but the rhetoric has been outdated for at least 50 years now. working class in the west has been shrinking; and those who are technically workers live drastically different lives than workers did a hundred years ago.
That's why they've gone from "working class" to "minorities", "homosexuals" or whatever other protected species is the flavor of the month.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:07:45 2015 No.6298893

>>6298868
>That's why they've gone from "working class" to "minorities", "homosexuals" or whatever other protected species is the flavor of the month.
eeeh idk that's not quite the same. one is basically old-school marxist rhetoric and the other is ID politics, which some may argue works against classic marxist class struggle. personally i'd still have a marxist roomie rather than a SJW one.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:14:12 2015 No.6298904 >>6298893 Identity politics is the new marxism of the 21th century. The rhetoric is exactly the same.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:18:28 2015 No.6298917

>>6298904
u sure? marxism is mass vs elite, workers vs capitalists, a vs b. the rhetoric is strong and decided/aggressive. ID politics pitches everyone against everyone and appeals to social justice and guilt; there's no actual revolutionary sentiment in there.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:20:24 2015 No.6298921

>>6298917
> ID politics pitches everyone against everyone
No it doesn't. The enemy isn't the bourgeois anymore, but the white heterosexual male, who represents the new "elite class".

> there's no actual revolutionary sentiment in there.
There is though
>down with the patriarchy
>down with institutional racism

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:20:46 2015 No.6298922 >>6298917 And yet it's all based on Marxist logic.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:28:21 2015 No.6298941 File: 999 KB, 500x281, 1376871488940.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Why are you fags still arguing about this it has nothing to do with literature.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:29:04 2015 No.6298945 >>6298941 Marxism is /lit/-related

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:31:25 2015 No.6298950

>>6298921
>No it doesn't. The enemy isn't the bourgeois anymore, but the white heterosexual male, who represents the new "elite class".
then why do you get feminists fighting gay dudes, why is there no equivalent to unions or socialist student unions etc ... i'm not saying there aren't parallels but ID politics are a lot more fragmented. for one, the whole idea of "the masses" which was p much at the core of marxist rhetoric is gone. ID politics are too hysterical and fickle to establish and sort of genuine concept of mass, of union, etc. it's based on way-of-least resistance shit and jealousy rather than the actual struggle to live and stay alive that marxists and social democrats had going on

>>6298922
partially. also from the black social justice movement and several waves of feminism. somewhat isolated groups hoping to get a share of the cake rather than a broad front consisting of everyone but the few who actually ran things, trying to fuck shit up. the last time i heard something vaguely resembling marxist sentiment was probably the whole "we are the 99% thing".

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:38:56 2015 No.6298980 >>6298941 It's better that they make their own shitty threads to circlejerk, rather than them coming in on-topic threads to shitpost.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:42:00 2015 No.6298997

>>6298950
>then why do you get feminists fighting gay dudes
I highly doubt that.
>why is there no equivalent to unions or socialist student unions etc ...
There are plenty of LGBTQ+*@& unions on every american campus.

>i'm not saying there aren't parallels but ID politics are a lot more fragmented. for one, the whole idea of "the masses" which was p much at the core of marxist rhetoric is gone.
I guess that this is true. It's about the majority anymore, but the minority. But the rest of the rhetoric is pretty much unchanged.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:48:44 2015 No.6299025

>>6298945

how does it not belong on /pol/ ? Just because karl marx wrote a book doesn't make marxism lit related. No one is engaging with the text they are just having a temper tantrum over muh politics. It's no different than the religion threads. "oh but there are books in religion!" fuck off there are books about computers and growing pot and fixing cars but we don't discuss that here. People have always abused this to turn /lit/ into some sort of /pol/ lite.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:55:21 2015 No.6299047

>>6298997
>I highly doubt that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_sexual_orientation#Feminism_and_gay_men
>There are plenty of LGBTQ+*@& unions on every american campus.
yeh but that's just one sub-group. you got the queers, the women, black people, immigrants, etc etc.
>But the rest of the rhetoric is pretty much unchanged.
i haven't been around back then but i don't think marxists would have appealed to justice, fairness or any other form of established idea of how power/opportunity should be distributed.

eh, i don't mean 2 fight you, i just really think you can't equate marxism with ID politics. they're intertwined for sure, but marxism almost purely a worker's thing, ID pol comes from many different movements; the black social justice movement had religious influences, feminism is somewhat humanistic, etc; ID politics focus on individuals; marxist don't waste a thought on individuals (for better or worse).

>>6299025
>how does it not belong on /pol/ ?
same reason discussion of fine art happens here rather than on /ic/: it just kind happened and it fits with the board culture

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:55:22 2015 No.6299048

>>6298209
Communism has been demonised. There was a favorable setting in mid nineteenth century, but now people are just too closed to communism. Any kind of intention of a revolution and suppression of a burgeoisie is damned because people just fucking hate it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:56:14 2015 No.6299050 >>6298209 The real socialist revolution took place in Germany in 1933.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:58:06 2015 No.6299053 >>6298230 What about Sukarno, Rhee, Sese Seko, and Ríos Montt?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 18:58:37 2015 No.6299054 >>6298209 >Communism is probably inevitable yeah and 2016 will be the year of the linux desktop.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:02:49 2015 No.6299062

The only true form of socialism is National Socialism. Trying to implement socialism on an international scale is doomed to failure. Socialism needs an organic volkisch base, otherwise a classless society is impossible to realize. Capitalism was the thesis. Marxism was the antithesis. National Socialism was the synthesis. Deal with it, Judeo-Bolshivists.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:04:11 2015 No.6299064

>>6298164
>mfw that was me

Sorry if I scared you! But seriously, people should be reeducated. And well, Nazis and fascists should be exterminated. This is just a fact of ideological war. Liberals are too scared of this and they prefer the passive method of gradual reforms that never fix anything. It's ok if problems don't get fixed. WE aren't hit with the blunt force of capitalism. WE get all its benefits. Why care? This is the mentality of true psychopaths.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:04:19 2015 No.6299065
File: 19 KB, 583x293, garl marx.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6298134
Since there are marxists and anti-marxists (who I hope they have read marx), I always here from rightist and Teabaggers that Marx "said an industrialised nation like England was going to go full commie, and he and his friends considered this a SCIENCE...".
Is it true? Because I do know Marx said that, but a science? I'm not sure. I only read The Communist Manifesto.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:06:22 2015 No.6299073 >>6298164 Dude what So do you think most nordics are autistic because most of the shitpost on /int/, and latin-americans are neonazis because they do the same on /pol/? Remember this is 4chan.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:07:02 2015 No.6299075

>>6299065
You really want to read Popper on Marx's view of his project being scientific. He clarified all the issues and Marxism winds up being falsified.

https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Popper%20-%20The%20Open%20Society%20and%20its%20Enemies.pdf

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:08:28 2015 No.6299079 >>6299064 >>6299064 Wanting to exterminate people because they disagree with you is the mentality of true psychopaths.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:09:36 2015 No.6299082 >>6299075 I though Marxism was unfalsifiable?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:10:14 2015 No.6299087

>>6299075
I wanted to read this book but I was really busy last year. But, still, did Marx really called this science?
Because it's called scientific socialism, but it doesn't imply that all what this ideology/point of view states that "IT WILL HAPPEN BECAUSE SCIENCE".

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:11:28 2015 No.6299093 >>6299082 I was just being cheeky. But anyway, Popper says that early Marxism was actually scientific and was falsified... he also says that latter Marxism was unfalsifiable.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:13:30 2015 No.6299100 >>6299075 >criticizing Plato What a boipussy

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:20:05 2015 No.6299128 >>6299079 letting people die and letting people hurt you without fighting back is insanity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:21:59 2015 No.6299135 >>6299093 >early Marxism We talking Young Marx here or Kautsky or what?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:23:18 2015 No.6299140

>>6299128

That's absolutely correct but that doesn't on its own support the thesis that Leninist-style Marxism is the best way to achieve social progress in the world. Popper makes a pretty compelling case for social reformism in 'the open society and its enemies' (well, at least a pretty good case against Marxists who arrogantly dismiss democratic reformism).

https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Popper%20-%20The%20Open%20Society%20and%20its%20Enemies.pdf

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:24:37 2015 No.6299150 >>6299128 >>6299128 This is the exact same reasoning that NatSocs use for killing people. You realize that they're just fighting back against the Jews and commies right? How come you're allowed to kill people but they're not?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:25:40 2015 No.6299154

>>6299079
Every single ruling class and state in history is psychopathic?

Strong research results from such a simple assertion.

>>6299082
>>6299093
If you're actually interested, which you're not, GA Cohen would be the next person to read. Not that Cohen's right mind you.

>What's it with undergrads and their working class romanticism?
Usually it is the same reason as in the past. An incipient desire for nomenklatura formation.

You can tell the quality of a "marxist" organisation by its class composition, and the only question worth asking someone when you meet them is, "What industry do you work in."

Also, OP, you're obviously describing Capitalism's death toll. But this has been dealt with up thread.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:27:00 2015 No.6299163 >there are people who are unironically marxist ITT Wow, I thought you guys were smart.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:29:08 2015 No.6299175 >>6299154 >You can tell the quality of a "marxist" organisation by its class composition, So... Basically, they all suck, since they're all made up of well off college leftists?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:30:16 2015 No.6299177 >>6299163 Then go back to whatever board you have come from.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:32:01 2015 No.6299189 >>6299163 >Political orientation: Ironic Marxist

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:32:09 2015 No.6299191

>>6299154
The difference between the state and you is that they kill people because it's their job and you kill people because it's your hobby. They do what they have to do to keep society functioning. You do what you want to do to tear society apart. Which is more fucked up? You're a sociopath by any definition. Marxism is pure evil.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:32:16 2015 No.6299192 >Americans talking about Socialism Funnier than Americans talking about literature!

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:35:31 2015 No.6299209

This is why nobody respects humanities. Only you can argue in favor of some utopian equality when the whole world is based upon inequality and difference. It is like you refuse to see the obvious differences between people, both physical and mental, which imply different abilities.
Capitalism is just a natural order of things, an economic selection if you will. Some win, others lose and that's the way things are.
Better adapted individuals will come out on top while the others will get a shitty deal. Unfair you say? Of course, but that's life.
You can argue for equality when we are 100% identical clones but until then fuck you for even thinking that some highly skilled individual is worth the same (to society) as some random ditch digger.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:36:06 2015 No.6299212

>>6299154
What's up with this "you need to firmly believe into whatever you are otherwise you are a hypocrite"?
So do you need to be a proletariat to be part of a "true" marxist organisation?
Even anti-communists can be marxists, just because most marxists are also communist doesn't mean marxism=communism.
>>6299191
Since you are talking about marxism=communism, even then, a communist state doesn't need to kill people. You could say the same about almost every political belief
>fascism
>kill people so society keeps working
>liberalism
>kill criminals so society keeps working
>conservatism/whatever
>kill criminals so society keeps working
>national socialism
>kill degenerates/criminals so society keeps working

Seems that you think killing actually works for society.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:41:29 2015 No.6299245 >>6299212 The difference is that those belief systems kill people for good reasons that serve a legitimate higher purpose. Marxist murders are just senseless death because Marxism is insane nonsense.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:41:36 2015 No.6299247 >>6299209 Commies BTFO

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:43:17 2015 No.6299255

>>6299191

I'm the guy who has been arguing all day with that hardline Marxist dude and I don't think Marxism is "pure evil."

Honestly, the idea of violently attacking your oppressors is correct. It's just a variant on fighting back when someone hits you, right?

The problem occurs when you jump from THIS position, to supporting a violent communist revolution (that apparently targets anyone who is critical of communism) is that communism and the principle of self defense are two separate things. One is a very specific ideology, the other is a purely pragmatic concern. Committing to Marxist ideology locks you into a whole bunch of specific commitments that are one can reject while still being a totally decent human being. If we have to fight violently against anyone who doesn't agree SPECIFICALLY with the Marxist programme, then we're not merely fighting oppressors, we're fighting everyone who doesn't agree with us. That, kids, is authoritarianism. And whatever our Marxist friend thinks, it is, in the general sense, a form of fascism.

But the more devastating (and I think crippling) blow to the over-enthusiastic Marxist is this:

What happens when the new proletarian revolution finally manages to kill all violent resisters and exile or imprison those who disagree with Marxism? We have a... What is... A hierarchy? A society where true believing Marxists... What, OPPRESS non-Marxists? The believers in such a society then become... What... An aristocracy? A privileged group that exercises domination over those who disagree with them (and not just those who are beyond the pale like Nazis, but even left libertarians), by force? The exact kind of thing that Marxism is supposedly trying to liberate us from?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:43:39 2015 No.6299257 >>6299209 >Capitalism is just a natural order of things, an economic selection if you will. Some win, others lose and that's the way things are. >You can argue for equality when we are 100% identical clones but until then >until then

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:43:48 2015 No.6299260 Man how dumb are you not to differentiate Marxist theory and Vanguardism. Tell me another superior social analyst of capitalism than Marx.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:50:32 2015 No.6299290 >>6299255 Why are Nazis beyond the pale? Nazis just want to build a classless society in one nation based on ideological and genetic purity. They have more in common with Marxists than libertarians do.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:51:42 2015 No.6299297

>>6299255
The state has always been used to enforce the will of one class against the other. The goal of communism is to oppress the bourgeois using state power. After that, there is simply one left and the state can be overcome. The state here is not the general idea of human societies (primitive human societies were stateless), but the institution. Since, the state also holds the reins on things like social programs it enforces every other hierarchy in class and gender to their historically contingent materiality, which ensures the domination of one over another.

This is why works like State and Revolution reference Origin of the Family Private Property and The State.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:52:47 2015 No.6299306

>>6299245
Well, assuming that all marxists governments in the future will do this (since they have done this before), then it's good according to you.
>kill people for good reasons
Whoa, what are good reasons?
Commiting a crime?
Guess what, it was a crime in the USSR to go to a place where you shouldn't be. So it's good according to you, because it's against the law and it will disrupt the production where they live since they now have a worker who wasn't assigned by the state which plans this to help the economy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:53:57 2015 No.6299315 >>6299209 Status quo is justified because it`s status quo?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:54:20 2015 No.6299317 >>6299290 >Nazis just want to build a classless society Opinion discarded.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:54:38 2015 No.6299321

>>6299297

What's this obsession with the bourgeois? Oppression has been done by all kinds of non-bourgeois throughout history. Roman slave owners, Chinese Emperors, Feudal lords. Why is the oppression of the mere bourgeois the sole goal? Seems narrow minded to me. What if some of the communist leaders operating in the proletarian revolution try to sneak a monarchy in through the back door and justify it on Marxist grounds, like in North Korea? Do those guys get a pass because they spout Marxist rhetoric, is it worth it because YAY NO MORE BOURGEOIS?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:55:05 2015 No.6299324 >>6299245 >kill people for good reasons Can we hear 'em?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:56:32 2015 No.6299329 >>6299290 Nazism is just a racist and nationalist 'heresy' of Marxism, you're right. Its relation to Marxism is like that of Islam to Christianity. And yes, Marxists have much more in common with Nazis than either group has with liberals and SocDems.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:59:06 2015 No.6299344

>>6299297
Marxists just form a new class called the nomenklatura. They're worse than capitalists in every way.

>>6299306
The preservation of social order is a good thing. Marxist societies exist in a state of perpetual disorder. Therefore the preservation of such a state is immoral, and thus Marxists killing people is never justified.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 19:59:22 2015 No.6299346 >>6299290 Yep, that's why it's called national SOCIALISM. In Mein Kampf Hitler's talk a lot about this. It's like marxism (or socialism in some cases) but for one nation/race. Of course Hitler gave a shit about that and had support of capitalists.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:00:42 2015 No.6299358 >>6299329 How retarded do you have to be to beleive this. Nazism has literally nothing in common with marxism. Its approaches to economics, science, individuals, arts, law, etc. are diametrical opposites.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:02:10 2015 No.6299364

>>6299317
I'm a National Socialist. I want to destroy the capitalist class system, just like Adolf Hitler argued for his entire life. The capitalist class system is a product of Jewish influence upon the Aryan volk and must be swept aside. This work was halted in the Third Reich because of practical considerations having to do with the war. Read up on Strasserism.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:02:27 2015 No.6299365

>>6299358

Oh sorry, I didn't know that when I talked about Marxism I had to talk about the pure theory, and not the reality (that is to say the consequences of the theory), which in all its implementations has been more similar to Nazism than liberalism or social democracy in every way.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:02:52 2015 No.6299372 >>6299346 That's why it's called the union of soviet socialist REPUBLICS. It's like republicans but with soviets. Nice argument broski :^)

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:04:13 2015 No.6299376 >>6299364 Comrade, can we truly throw off this hebrew yolk that is capitalism or is it too late? Will the Germanic peoples' of the world finally be freed?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:04:38 2015 No.6299380 File: 34 KB, 953x1760, 1392769212870.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6298736

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:05:25 2015 No.6299387

>>6299344
>The preservation of social order is a good thing
Stalin did well in preserving the social order. He supressed all those who tried to disrupt the soviet society, those who were against the laws, etc.
>Marxist societies exist in a state of perpetual disorder
Well, a society has never been exactly marxist, but lets consider that China had a marxist society.
Mao and all the authorities were the ones who ended the anarchy that was reigning there because of the civil war.
>>6299372
It's funny because the USSR was composed of republics.
Still national socialism itself as Rosenberg proposed is really similar to marxism. Just read some of his books.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:05:38 2015 No.6299388

>>6299150
who are we trying to kill?

Nazis want to kill the disabled, the weak, blacks, Jews, homosexuals, the downtrodden, the homeless, the stutterers, anyone with a facial or bodily deformity, hermaphrodites, atheists, gypsies, Communists, etc.

I have a shorter list: Nazis, racists, homophobes, sexists, capitalists, religious authority, drug lords, slaveowners, Fascists.

You can't say we're the same now, can you? It's still murder but our motivation and our enemy is COMPLETELY different.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:05:55 2015 No.6299390

>>6299364
Don't make me laugh, corporations worked closely with the nazi regime and the national income share of the capital increased in detriment of the worker class during the nazi regime. I don't give a fuck about your tinfoil hat conspiracies, nazism was empirically pro capitalists.

>>6299365
Then say soviets fagget. They aren't republic even if it's in the name, they aren't democracies even if it's in the name, why the fuck would you pretend they are marxists just because they claim so?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:06:47 2015 No.6299392

>>6299321
That's because it's outdated and I'm giving you the classic definition. The bourgeois as marx knew them are hardly any more the ruling class than proletarians. The rentier financial sector now has this role. Concretely speaking, this is the US and their allies. They're the one's threatening the lives of homosexuals in Russia from the material conditions wrought about through their economic warfare against Russia which obliges them to rely on primitive social structures such as the family for basic support of necessities.

Marxism didn't end with Marx.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:07:01 2015 No.6299394 >>6299390 >corporations worked closely with the nazi regime Not the anon you are talking to, but I think he follows the "true" national socialism which propose that. Look up Strasser.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:07:15 2015 No.6299396

>>6299175
>So... Basically, they all suck, since they're all made up of well off college leftists?

If you meet a group and it is only the children of the bourgeoisie, that's a bad bad sign. Though "well-off" isn't a class analysis. The people in my, well, it amounts to a cell are "well-off." None of us are homeless, we can give each other food, the unemployed ones live with the ones with jobs, etc. Class-relations is the key, diversity of industries is a secondary.

>>6299191
>because it's their job
So if I'm a paid cadre then its okay for me to kill? Thank you based Dzerzhinski. etc.

The real part of your argument is your smuggled in norm of what "society" is
>They do what they have to do to keep society functioning. You do what you want to do to tear society apart.

Not particularly persuasive.

>You're a sociopath by any definition.

So basically you have no respect for terms, meanings or discourses—you just hate marxists and cannot adequately account for that reason.

>>6299212
>What's up with this "you need to firmly believe into whatever you are otherwise you are a hypocrite"?
It is more that the only hope lies within the proles. Any reading of Capital 1 should indicate this.

>So do you need to be a proletariat to be part of a "true" marxist organisation?
Proletarian. And yes, actually, you do. Only workers at work working collectively can comprehend the "real" nature of capitalism and make actions that cause the suspension of the antagonistic contradiction.

>Even anti-communists can be marxists
When you abandon proletarian epistemology, revolutionary immanence and collective class ontology all you're left with is a 19th century German Idealism.

I know which one is defensible as "Marxism."

>>6299189
>>Political orientation: Ironic Marxist
>tugs shirt
>snorts coke.

>>6299209
>Only you can argue in favor of some utopian equality when the whole world is based upon inequality and difference.
Marxism isn't utopian or equalitarian. Please bother to read that which you're critiquing. Try the sections on the composition of complex labour in Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, iirc. The reduction of actual living labour to average social labour is decried and celebrated as the form of bondage of workers and the form of their production as a "compact" class.

>Capitalism is the natural order of things.
Oh I see you're a fucking idiot. If capitalism is in fact the natural order of things, why didn't single cellular life forms produce commodities in a speculative manner for sale on a totalising market. Capitalism is a historical phenomena, not a natural phenomena. Whether capitalism is the final moment of history or not (or desirable or not) is debatable, but claiming that it is natural and thus universal marks you as a cretin who denies the nature of external reality.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:08:39 2015 No.6299405 >>6299324 People should be put to death for blasphemy, treason, murder, espionage, racial defilement, and cowardice in battle.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:08:50 2015 No.6299406 Is this what /pol/ does now that their board is even shittier than usual?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:11:12 2015 No.6299417

>>6299396
>Proletarian. And yes, actually, you do. Only workers at work working collectively can comprehend the "real" nature of capitalism and make actions that cause the suspension of the antagonistic contradiction.
If that's true then it's impossible to make such a thing since, well, proletarians are blinded by false consciousness according to marxists, so such a thing is impossible.
>When you abandon proletarian epistemology, revolutionary immanence and collective class ontology all you're left with is a 19th century German Idealism.
What?
>>6299405
Stalin did those things except for blasphemy and racial defilement, what's your point?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:11:24 2015 No.6299419 >>6299344 >Transition Period They aren't the new class, they're the best elements of the old class as a working body.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:12:18 2015 No.6299422

>>6299388
>Marxism
Kill anyone who resists the "proletarian" dictatorship, whether it's a doctor, scientist, writer, or whatever. The revolution takes no prisoners.

>Nazism
Kill anyone who resists the National Socialist Party doctor, scientist, writer, or whatever. The revolution takes no prisoners.

you both espouse insane totalitarian ideologies

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:12:24 2015 No.6299423 >>6299405 >blasphemy >racial defilement why?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:14:30 2015 No.6299430

>>6299388

Hitler wasn't going around saying "let us kill all the disabled, stutterers, atheists, homeless etc." Yes the holocaust did in practice end up becoming that, but the only groups he declared an OPEN antagonism toward were ones that he saw as exploiting "his people" in some way. Jews (who he identified with global capital), communists, people from hostile countries, etc. The fact that the holocaust was expanded to include anyone hitler didn't like, is no more significant to this discussion than the fact that Pol Pot ended up killing all the intellectuals. So do I now get to say that communism wants to kill Western-educated intellectuals, educated people in general, people who had contact with Western countries or with Vietnam, disabled people, and the ethnic Chinese, Laotians and Vietnamese? We can agree that's fair right?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:17:00 2015 No.6299438 >>6299422 hahahahaha no way.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:18:49 2015 No.6299446

>>6299430
Marxism as a theory appeared long before stalinism, written by a man that had nothing to do with the dictatorships you mention. Nazism as a theory, if that exists, was born through the actions undertook by the nazis and as a justification for them. Nazism is what the nazis did. So no, it's not a fair comparison.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:18:59 2015 No.6299447 >>6298228 "Capitalist" Philippines has a higher HDI than "Communist" Vietnam, though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:20:30 2015 No.6299456 >>6299446 But most of what happened in the USSR was the logical conclusion of Marx's theories.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:21:08 2015 No.6299465 >>6299456 Enlighten me.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:23:30 2015 No.6299474
File: 241 KB, 626x787, pareto.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6299209
>This is why nobody respects humanities. Only you can argue in favor of some utopian equality when the whole world is based upon inequality and difference. It is like you refuse to see the obvious differences between people, both physical and mental, which imply different abilities.

They just, consciously or not, want what is best for them. A marxist society would give absolute power to the intellectuals who interpret Marx and other Marxist intellectuals, just like a Islamic theocracy gives absolute power to the ulema that interprets the Quran and the hadith. Communism as a ideology is merely the intellectual's path to become the ruling class, just like Liberalism as a ideology is the path for the merchants to become the ruling class, and Fascism for the soldiers and armed men etc...

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:24:04 2015 No.6299477

Are we going to ignore that regardless of your “my specific brand of communism” stab, that it doesn’t hold a grain of truth? You can’t say that “communism” had caused these deaths as none of your examples were true communism. The aren’t variations, when you look at the policy and structures you realise most were state-run capitalism at best.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:25:16 2015 No.6299485 >>6299474 >marxist society would give absolute power to the intellectuals 0/10

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:25:42 2015 No.6299489

>>6299417
>since, well, proletarians are blinded by false consciousness according to marxists
Who ever said Lenin was a marxist?

Look up the individuals responsible for the thesis of false consciousness as determinate in the early 20th century:

2eme Internationale rightists
Lenin

Compare against people who think false consciousness is not explanatory, and that fire and blood on the field of class war is explanatory:
Luxemburg
Councilists
Gramsci

Now compare the embeddedness of these thinkers in their respective movements of workers. Hell, in the case of councilists we have some thinkers who were genuinely proletarian.

Using a class epistemology we can see which argument is correct.

>What?
Lenin's approach to Marx is that of an approach to a 19th century german idealist, like Feuerbach. It is an idealist approach (see Empiro-criticism) that produces metaphysics.

Workers do it for themselves, revolution is immanent in the immediate potential to destroy elements of capital (because capital is all around us), and classes think collectively as subjects through active organisations.

>>6299419
Different relationship to production, different class.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:27:18 2015 No.6299497

>>6299465
Well, how else would the upper and middle classes have been forced to requisition their wealth? How else would political dissidents have been dealt with? How else was the "proletarian dictatorship" supposed to maintain global influence without building an empire in Eastern Europe?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:32:12 2015 No.6299528

>>6299497
The october revolution was almost bloodless. The civil war after it wasn't particularly terrible either. What happened after that wasn't marxism anymore given that lenin took the power away from soviets. Most of the bloodshed was a consequence of internal repression and not actually revolutionary struggle.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:34:11 2015 No.6299536 >capitalism >more slavery than egypt, babylon and rome combined

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:35:44 2015 No.6299545 >>6299489 >Different relationship to production, different class. Their production is the same, hence they are the best elements within.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:37:16 2015 No.6299553

>>6299528
But couldn't you ascribe the taking away of soviet power as a symptom of the failure of the revolution to surpass the basic tenets of Marxism. That the civil war even happened shows how much resentment there was to the communists, and Lenin was forced to centralize power in the hands of the party because otherwise the stability of the state itself was in danger. So everything that happened afterwards was still done in the spirit of Marx's theories.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:37:51 2015 No.6299555 File: 187 KB, 291x293, dfw.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6299489 Welp, I'm out of words since I never read Luxemburg and Gramsci. Well /lit/'d anon.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:37:52 2015 No.6299556

>>6299446

Nazism didn't appear out of thin air. It evolved out of German nationalism, national syndicalism, fascism, and other reactionary movements that all existed decades before Hitler's rise to power. These movements aren't as neatly packaged under a clear banner as Marxism is, but these groups had a deep a relationship to one another as the various Marxisms did to one another and their ideas had as much to do with Nazi Germany as Marxism had to do with Stalinism. Further, these movements were already scapegoating Jews as the being parasitical capitalist oppressors long before hitler came on the scene, so I don't think your attempt to wiggle out of this by a technicality is going to suffice.

Further, you're completely missing the central point of that guy's argument. The issue at question here is whether it's right to kill groups we associate in some vague way with an oppressing class. Nobody really denies that capitalist oppression isn't a thing (at least I hope not), but you're bringing in a bunch of other groups that need to be killed right there along with the capitalists. Once we're finished killing all the capitalists, then we have to kill the guy who's a bit bitter toward women because he got rejected, the girl who hates men because she read too much andrea dworkin, any worker who says "hey this communist utopia sucks I'd like to go back to capitalism," priests of any variety, anybody who dislikes another race. I'm sorry but killing people for liking a different social arrangement than you do or for preferring to date chicks with light skin isn't progressive, it isn't egalitarian, it isn't lightening the burden of humanity, it would not increase happiness or reduce suffering. You want a world where supposed moral exemplars hold those who think the wrong thoughts and feel the wrong feelings and explore the world a little bit outside the narrow range of dogmas you've prescribed for them. This is not how progressive minded people behave, this is what happens when authoritarians do mental gymnastics to convince themselves that their war against humanity is actually helping humanity. Beyond that it's also a complete contradiction: murdering people for having some latent prejudice instead of trying to talk them out of it is actually more immoral than having prejudice itself.

Whenever I have these discussions with you I just don't know what to make of it. You seem passionate and you hate the same things I hate, you hate them with a fiery passion. But what's this obsession with killing people man? It fucking creeps me out. Racism is bad but fuck I'm not going to kill someone over it, that's fucked up. (Nonviolent forms of racism) are not as bad as murdering racists.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:41:15 2015 No.6299575

>>6299545
So what you're saying is that Lenin was the best of the bourgeoisie? I don't think you're a Marxist mate.

>>6299553
>But couldn't you ascribe the taking away of soviet power as a symptom of the failure of the revolution to surpass the basic tenets of Marxism.
Simon Pirani on the destruction of the workplace soviets.

>Lenin was forced to centralize power
On day 1 of the soviets' revolution, the Bolshevik party took over the old bureaucracy intact, for itself. That isn't the Commune model, nor is it what happens when other workplace collectives rise up. It is known as a "coup d'etat," not a revolution.

>>6299555
Well maybe if you're going to get dubtrips and throw around "false consciousness" you should be aware of what the fuck you're talking about.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:41:22 2015 No.6299577

I give a shit about politics, but what really bugs me is the fact that most of politicfags think they are absolutely right and their opponents are 100% wrong.
>marxist discussing with anti-marxist
>you are wrong, Marx is always right
>marxism is unfalsifiable
>no, you see...
>DUDE POPPER LMAO

Can't you fags agree in something?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:42:23 2015 No.6299579 >>6299575 Fuck, wasted trips. Still I knew a little about false consciousness.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:42:53 2015 No.6299581

>>6299422
>Marxism: kill / overthrow the people who own you and everything you need to live. Independence, self-sustainment, self-governance.

>Nazism: kill / invade the people who you own and depend on you in the very fringes of society to survive. Expansion, imperialism, colonization, extreme centralized government with a small supreme racial elite who rule everyone else.

NO. NOT THE SAME. NOT EVEN CLOSE.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:43:39 2015 No.6299584 >>6298134 can someone explain to me what real communism means, every time i ask everyone just argues and the thread goes to shit >the thread is already shit

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:44:20 2015 No.6299587 >>6299581 Is this meant to be ironic?

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:44:52 2015 No.6299591

>>6299553
The bolsheviks were vanguardists long before the revolution, so there's no point in arguing their approach was a consequence of their practical needs. If you look at the kronstadt rebellion, for example, you see that the centralization of power was the cause of the need for internal repression and not the consequence.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:45:26 2015 No.6299594

>>6299584
Nobody knows what it means, not even communists, same as capitalism.
Communism according to X communists means something, but according to Y communists it means a completely different thing.
>>the thread is already shit
Well, it's going pretty good. So far we have no trolls and retards who just post infographics.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:47:12 2015 No.6299601

>>6299485

He's obviously talking about some latent threat implicit in Marxist theory. Of course Marx didn't openly say that intellectuals will be the ruling class of his utopia, but he did talk about the importance of theory and how revolutions without leaders will always fail. It also definitely has a history as being more a project of intellectuals than of the working classes IN PRACTICE, at least in some parts of the world.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:47:22 2015 No.6299604 >>6299556 You are mixing up anons, anon.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:48:11 2015 No.6299607

>>6299584
a classless, stateless society.

this implies undifferentiated access to productive apparatus, and an absence of coercion in human activity

>>6299594
>Well, it's going pretty good. So far we have no trolls and retards who just post infographics.
It is going very badly by /lit/ standards. Stop acting like an abuse victim.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:49:33 2015 No.6299611 >>6299607 >It is going very badly by /lit/ standards /lit/ standards vary a lot. Depends on the time mostly. >Stop acting like an abuse victim. Kek. I really hope /lit/ hasn't shitted my mind.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:51:25 2015 No.6299615 >>6299577 This is 4chan, breh. The point is to disagree. I wonder what Popper thought about Anti-Duhring.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:51:39 2015 No.6299617

>>6299604
Man I don't fucking know who's who. Whenever I refute someone on here I'll assume it's that passionate starry eyed marxist with a love of killing people, that's the one I'm really interested in refuting and if I misdirect my attack elsewhere I consider it an acceptable casualty.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 20:55:49 2015 No.6299628 >>6299615 I know, but it also happens in real life. I find that annoying.

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 21:00:24 2015 No.6299641

>>6299577
>I give a shit about politics,

LMAO you think this is an EXCUSE? Being apathetic is a tacit admission that the bourgeoisie do not need to be killed, and therefore, you need to be killed. Your lack of morality is fucking despicable, you're fucking disgusting in fact. All apathetics, and all the weak races like the Mexicans who deserved the death they got at the hands of the American empire, are bourgeois apologist scum who not only deserve death, but should be actively killed. Actually, anyone who is not actively engaged in violently murdering political apathetics every day, themselves deserves to be murdered.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 21:01:23 2015 No.6299642 >>6298134 Why do you post this shit everyday? Fucking /pol/ GTFO

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 21:02:32 2015 No.6299643 >>6299641 dude what I give a shit about politics, but I do care for philosophy and the usual topics /lit/ discuss (like memes). Why do you want to holocaust me?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 21 21:03:41 2015 No.6299646 File: 63 KB, 600x600, its-not-the-bait.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6299641 >>6299643

Anonymous Sat Mar 21 21:08:06 2015 No.6299665

>>6299628
You can never win against them, that's like going against a religious believer. Neither do you want to. It's like arguing with a robot to unplug itself. All you can do is make them look stupid in front of everyone else.
You can't change a man's mind without changing his material conditions.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature