/Marx/

[Anonymous No.6370704]

[Anonymous No.6370723]

>>6370704
Can Marxist philosophy be separated from Marxist economics? Is his view of history a necessary conclusion from his methodology?

[Anonymous No.6370811]

litliteraturelit

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6370835]

>>6370704
>literal pleb philosophy
>shitty economics
>blind atheism
>excuse for atrocities of the last century

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370847]

>>6370835

Evola shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.6370848]

Die commie scum.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6370849]

>>6370847
>Evola shut the fuck up
no you ^_^

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370851]

>>6370849

Evola shut the fuck up

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6370859]

>>6370851
nou

[Anonymous No.6370863]

I'm starting to think all the tripfags on /lit/ are just one person monopolizing on all the shitposts

Well done, lad

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370867]

>>6370859

"Evola Shut the fuck up"

-Karl Marx

"Evola Shut the fuck UP!"

-Peter "Evola shut the fuck up" Kropotkin

[Anonymous No.6370870]

Is this the Marx thread where we praise Stalin and Mao for industrializing their ass-backwards countries, or the thread where we condemn them for sabotaging the revolution for personal gain?

[Anonymous No.6370874]

>>6370704
reminder that the liberty in the libertarianism is a negative liberty, while the liberty in marxism is the deliberate choice of the subject

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370880]

>>6370870

For the record Mao is better than Stalin. And neither of them did terribly. Stalin progressed shit to rival the Western industries, Mao basically turned China from land lord ruled bullshit to something capable of strong capabilities.

Basically, going forward in any capacity with insufficient resources requires mass death. There's no real way around it.

But Mao's more interesting than Stalin in that The Long March is absolutely fascinating. By the time Mao became leader, he had written so much fucking poetry theorizing, and speech work; it's a really interesting point of time in Chinese history.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6370893]

>>6370870
Maoism enables SJWs
>destroying ancient Chinese culture
>good
ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.6370894]

>>6370870
The latter, industrialism as it is is pretty counter-revolutionary anyway.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370899]

>>6370893

Did someone actually make that unironically?

>>6370894

Pretty much this. Progress matters little if nobody is getting good, shelter, etc. resources

[Anonymous No.6370911]

>>6370880
Wasn't it Hua Guofeng and Hu Yaobang who turned around the insanity of the Gang of Four, ended the Cultural Revolution, and got rid of those stupid matching uniforms everyone had to wear?

[Anonymous No.6370914]

>>6370880
Fuck you, utilitarianism is the worse excuse for murdering.

[Anonymous No.6370921]

>>6370899
open it up again and ask yourself if it was made ironically or not.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370929]

>>6370914

I'm an anarchist, I hardly fucking sympathize with Stalin or Mao. I'm just understanding of their positions. They did accomplish a lot, like it or not.

>>6370911

Deng fucked China more than The Gang of Four could have. Mao's rolling in his grave at mach ten.

[Anonymous No.6370935]

>/lit/
>generals

Get out if your incessant need for a thread overrides actually having any content to start a thread. Or go to /b/ if you feel the need to shitpost.

[Anonymous No.6370942]

>>6370835
And what is essential mr Ebola?

Because that sounds like "idgaf I just want to live my life withouth having to worry about anything"

>>6370880
>Basically, going forward in any capacity with insufficient resources requires mass death. There's no real way around it.

Yeah, death is so productive.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370950]

>>6370942

Death isn't productive. I'd rather have less death than any industry.

[Anonymous No.6370951]

>>6370935
we don't need a list of "helpful Marxist starter books XD" if thats what you mean. We are all quite familiar with it otherwise we wouldn't be here.

[Anonymous No.6370968]

>>6370950
The why the fuck did you say that? It truly makes no sense.

>>6370951
I think it would be useful for people to be able to access some of the basics, it might help mitigating the presence of "but I like muh freedom and my money" american liberals. Or at least a pic with big red letters that says "before soputing shit about Marxism please at least read Das Kapital"

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6370988]

>>6370968

Even though I despise both men, I find Mao more interesting a figure than Stalin. Stalin had a very shaky cult of personality around him, whilst Mao actually succeeded with various social theory and ideas he created on the run throughout China. Mao is a fascinating character, not one I particularly like, but fascinating nonetheless. If that makes sense.

And if you want to read pretty much everyone and anyone

https://www.marxists.org/archive/

[Anonymous No.6371002]

>>6370951
If you don't have anything but "lol we're all Marxists, let's talk about le Marxist stuff." You don't really warrant a thread let alone a general(one of the worst forms of cancer that has taken hold) on a topic that is only tangentially related to literature.

[Anonymous No.6371006]

>>6370929
It's not that I deny achievements made under their rule, but to say that the end justify the means is redundant, the means ARE an end on their own. If it means people are going to be murdered in order to reach certain goals, then the murdering is part of the goal itself.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371017]

>>6371006

Like I said. It's more interesting they managed to take a post-revolutionary society and heave it forth. Nothing like that is ever worth it, they totally ignored the principles of what the revolution was for to begin with, especially is the case with Stalin. It is redundant, it's just interesting the capabilities of a more organized society.

[Anonymous No.6371136]

>>6370870
Stalin did nothing wrong

[Anonymous No.6371165]

>>6371002
look up the definition of literature

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371232]

Arise ye workers from your slumbers
Arise ye prisoners of want
For reason in revolt now thunders
And at last ends the age of cant.
Away with all your superstitions
Servile masses arise, arise
We’ll change henceforth the old tradition
And spurn the dust to win the prize.

Refrain:
So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.

No more deluded by reaction
On tyrants only we’ll make war
The soldiers too will take strike action
They’ll break ranks and fight no more
And if those cannibals keep trying
To sacrifice us to their pride
They soon shall hear the bullets flying
We’ll shoot the generals on our own side.

No saviour from on high delivers
No faith have we in prince or peer
Our own right hand the chains must shiver
Chains of hatred, greed and fear
E’er the thieves will out with their booty
And give to all a happier lot.
Each at the forge must do their duty
And we’ll strike while the iron is hot.

[Anonymous No.6371257]

>>6370893
Ancient Chinese culture was ludicrously misogynistic and foul. Sun and Chaing took care of most of it, Mao just delivered the much needed coup de grace.

[Anonymous No.6371279]

>>6370929
Deng saved china from the insanity which is marxism. Thank god for Deng, or China would be looking like North Korea right now.

[Anonymous No.6371288]

So why should I care about marxism if I'm not proletariat
Why should I not be against marxism if I appreciate European culture?

And I'm asking about marxism not capitalism

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371294]

>>6371279

>Deng saved China from the insanity which is marxism

Thank You For Everything Comrade Deng!

[Anonymous No.6371305]

>>6371294
All these workers lead far better lives than the poor hunger stricken souls under Mao's rule.

[Anonymous No.6371308]

>>6370929
Actually no. Mao knew and wrote that capitalist shit was part of the whole equation and that it would almost inevitably spring back up again, as would Maoism (even tho with Bo Xilai up north it might take a while).

What part of protracted don't you understand?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371313]

>>6371288

>So why should I care about marxism if I'm not proletariat

Morals. What it means, what it stands for, how it could help you, and how it could help others more.

Ideals mean nothing if they cannot help improve quality of life issues. There is more to worry about, than just recycled ideals of philosophers long out dated.

Health, education, food, and shelter, for a lifetime, mean more, than competition among everyone to find meaning.

The fight of the reactionary in the third world and first world means the removal of what little we've gained.

>Why should I not be against marxism if I appreciate European culture?

Because there is other culture to appreciate. Europe did not invent "culture". You deserve to appreciate European culture just as much as any outsider, and any European should study what interests them, live where they want.

It's ultimately about a world without rules, yet a respect that binds men into community despite it.

[Anonymous No.6371314]

>>6371288
>So why should I care about marxism if I'm not proletariat
First, because you are still a human being, and second, because you probably are proletariat but you think you are burgeoisie only because your wage is higher than the average.

>Why should I not be against marxism if I appreciate European culture?
I appreciate it too and I still a Marxist, I don't know why do you think they are incompatible. What parts of european culture do you think are opposite to marxism?

[Anonymous No.6371326]

>>6371305
You fucking western scumbag. I hope you get shot.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371327]

>>6371308

I disagree with Mao, on mostly everything. Esecpially that. It's unlikely China will ever be "Maoist" again. To imply that Deng was working within Mao's plan and not taking advantage of it, anyways, is preposterous.

>>6371305

I don't disagree. But then again, their lives are still absolute shit, so if you want to say Xi Jinping's China is lukewarm to previous cold, It'd be better to disagree with both. Both have titanic flaws.

More at the cost of human life.

[Anonymous No.6371334]

>>6370911
Cultural Revolution had essentially ended with Lin Biao's death already. With Mao and Zhou out of the way, Guofeng's major role was in providing the official view of Cultural Revolution, which he deemed a failure on some grounds, essentially tearing away its legitimacy.


But yes it was Hua who got rid of the Gang of Four. And then he was betrayed by Deng: goes a long way to show how the capitalist functioned.

[Anonymous No.6371335]

>>6370880
>For the record Mao is better than Stalin.
Looooool. Your brain is totatally fucked up. Actually you don't know a shit about History.

[Anonymous No.6371342]

>talking predominately about Maoism in a Marxism thread
>mfw

Can somebody plz explain the permanent revolution to me? Every time I try to learn about it on Wikipedia, I somehow fail.

[Anonymous No.6371345]

>>6371305
Yes, and all the poor hunger stricken souls lived a better life under Mao's rule than they did under the 1911-1949 attempt of Capitalism in China. Is it mean to be suprising that with time living conditions tend to improve?

[Anonymous No.6371347]

>mfw I read a book about china's history in the XX century and I'm still too confused with all those ching chong names to follow what you are saying

[Anonymous No.6371349]

>>6371326
Typical marxist. Violent moron.

>>6371327
No, their lives are not complete shit. Their lives are exponentially better than when they were ruled by Mao. They have made an insane amount of economic and social progress since Deng's reforms. And they would have made more progress has they not suffered from marxism for 3 decades.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371353]

"I stand for the theory of permanent revolution. Do not mistake this for Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution. In making revolution one must strike while the iron is hot — one revolution must follow another, the revolution must continually advance. The Hunanese often say, ‘Straw sandals have no pattern — they shape themselves in the making.’ Trotsky believed that the socialist revolution should be launched even before the democratic revolution is complete. We are not like that. For example after the Liberation of 1949 came the Land Reform; as soon as this was completed there followed the mutual-aid teams, then the low-level cooperatives, then the high-level cooperatives. After seven years the cooperativization was completed and productive relationships were transformed; then came the Rectification. After Rectification was finished, before things had cooled down, then came the Technical Revolution. In the cases of Poland and Yugoslavia, democratic order had been established for seven or eight years, and then a rich peasantry emerged. It may not be necessary to establish a New Democratic government, but even so one must still unite all those forces which can be united."

Mao,
Speech At The Supreme State Coference

28 January, 1958

[Anonymous No.6371356]

>>6371345
Are you for real? China suffered a civil war and ww2 during 1911-1949. Of course anything is better than civil war and a fucking world war!

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371358]

>>6371353

for

>>6371342

[Anonymous No.6371359]

>>6371342
>going to Wikipedia to understand theory

[Anonymous No.6371362]

>>6371288
>So why should I care about marxism if I'm not proletariat
Because it's unwise to believe as (petite) bourgeoisie you aren't harmed by capitalism (IF you are indeed no prole, capitalism has become quite good at deceiving people about their class-affiliation). That can be as simple as being crippled by someone DUI'ing because the guy lost his job or something. Being a member of the upper class wouldn't save you from that.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371366]

>>6371349

>This terrible state run economy is at least better than the other state run economy! It's all good! A majority of China's population is happy now! It's all good! See, Capitalism really does solve all our problems! Look at all those happy workers!!!!!!!!

Stop

>>6371356

Don't defend the land lords. Just don't.

[Anonymous No.6371367]

>>6371356
> China suffered a civil war and ww2 during 1911-1949.
Which was largely caused by the failures of capitalist-imperialist system! You see, it has its shortcomings.

[Anonymous No.6371371]

>>6371349
> Violent
Yes. Violent. The revolution is build on acts, not on blind humanism that serves the establishment in its spineless apparatus. Oh poor revolutionary, must he feel sad now that you have judged him on Christian morality!

[Anonymous No.6371376]

>>6371362
I agree. In a marxist society you wouldn't run the risk of being hurt because of someone DUI'ing, because marxist economies are such shit that nobody would own a car in the first place ;^)

[Anonymous No.6371383]

>>6371288
It's a funny thing, the differentiation between the far-right and the far-left. The fascists hold disdain towards Western values, while adoring the West, while the Communists love Western values while disliking the West.

If you're talking about "European culture" in a conservative, imperialist sense, then no, marxists are opposed to chauvinism, but if you like the ideals (liberty, equality, fraternity), from European culture, Marxism is great.

[Anonymous No.6371388]

>>6371376
How incredibly original of you. But please, if you don't mind, what exactly is a marxist society?

[Anonymous No.6371396]

>>6371366
Except that the average chinese person is way way way better off today than under Mao. China has made immense progress ever since Deng freed her from the shackles of marxism. Only a complete ideologue would deny that.

>>6371367
No it wasn't. The Japanese invasion can't be blamed on capitalism.

>>6371371
Not only violent, moronic too.

I would support the liquidation of all marxists in a heartbeat.

[Anonymous No.6371407]

>>6371388
I already anticipate your answer

"No, x,y and z weren't reaaally marxist bro! If we had real marxism the rivers would turn into rivers of milk and honey! I know that because some jew wrote it 150 years ago!"

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371411]

>>6371396

>China has made immense progress ever since Deng freed her from the shackles of marxism. Only a complete ideologue would deny that.

>Hey! Buddy! You're nation is rich now! Stop being all sad and suicidal because your education is a nightmare and you work a majority of your life! Shut the fuck up, stop complaining! Deng saved you! You're rich!

You're being naive.

[Anonymous No.6371416]

>>6371407
lmao

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371424]

>>6371407

"Poverty, the existence of the poor, was the first cause of riches. This it was which created the earliest capitalist. For, before the surplus value, about which people are so fond of talking, could begin to be accumulated it was necessary that there should be poverty-stricken wretches who would consent to sell their labor force rather than die of hunger. It is poverty that has made the rich. And if poverty had advanced by such rapid strides by the end of the Middle Ages, it was chiefly because the invasions and wars, the creation of States and the development of their authority, the wealth gained by exploitation in the East and many other causes of a like nature, broke the bonds which once united agrarian and urban communities, and led them, in place of the solidarity which they once practised, to adopt the principle of the wage-system. Is this principle to be the outcome of the Revolution? Dare we dignify by the name of a Social Revolution that name so dear to the hungry, the suffering and the oppressed - the triumph of such a principle as this?"

[Anonymous No.6371426]

>>6371411
Sure beats making pig iron while starving to death.

[Anonymous No.6371427]

>>6371411
Of you think that chinese people were objectively happier, better educated and had shorter working hours under Mao, you're seriously delusional.

[Anonymous No.6371439]

>>6371424
It always makes me chuckle when a marxist talks about dying of hunger.

[Anonymous No.6371441]

>>6371396
> The Japanese invasion can't be blamed on capitalism.
>competition between naional capitalists taking the form of imperialist wars can't be blamed on capitalism


>Except that the average chinese person is way way way better off today than under Mao
muh sweetshop hyperexploitation makes the average worker better off


>I would support the liquidation of all marxists in a heartbeat.
>violence is horrible
>let the fascists liquidate the marxists
lel contradiction

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371447]

>>6371426

Literally these comparisons are the most pointless act is self-servitude.

How the fuck is China in any way good right now? Cite me some sources.

>>6371427

In some ways yes, in same ways no. I'm saying they both suck shit, as do you.

>>6371439

Capitalists naturally starve anyone. What are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.6371448]

so if you retards believe that a communist state is inevitable, why not just wait until it comes into the world on its own?

you don't want to pick the apple before it's ripe

[Anonymous No.6371450]

>>6371427
If you don't think that the underground labour movement in contemporary China doesn't look at the Maoist era with inspiration, you're seriously delusional

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371455]

>>6371448
>communist state

>communist
>state

[Anonymous No.6371460]

>>6371441
Lenin's theory that capitalism leads to imperialsm is complete bullshit. I can't believe still believe it nowadays.

And yes, the worker working in a sweatshop has a much higher standard of living than the starving peasant under Mao.

I'm against violence, but I wouldn't mind killing off all marxists, if only to raise the global average IQ.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371467]

>>6371460

>And yes, the worker working in a sweatshop has a much higher standard of living

[Anonymous No.6371471]

>>6371447
In what ways is the average chinese person worse off today than under Mao?

Also capitalism is pretty much the only economic system to have ended famines. How many famines happen in the west?

>>6371450
And how many chinese adhere to that movement?

[Anonymous No.6371472]

>>6371396
> No it wasn't. The Japanese invasion can't be blamed on capitalism.

> Great depression causes military to gain power in Japan
> The imperial power aims to protect and improve its economy by expanding into Asia
> Not Africa-all-over-again but with natives actually resisting

[Anonymous No.6371476]

>>6371460
>denying that imperialist wars in capitalism is a result of competition between national capitalists

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371478]

>>6371471

>In what ways is the average chinese person worse off today than under Mao?

I'm not even going to respond to this anymore, this is absolutely pathetic

[Anonymous No.6371479]

>>6371447
>How the fuck is China in any way good right now? Cite me some sources.
You're just too retarded to grasp that he said, let me quote

>China has made immense progress
> the average chinese person is way way way better off today than under Mao

Keep moving the goals post though.

I could point you to Chinese automotive sales in China, more and more Chinese own cars, including luxury SUV's and limousines while the best Chinese under Mao had was bicycles.

Oh, you're a tripfag, never mind, explains your retardation.

[Anonymous No.6371486]

>>6371471
It didn't happen in the West, but a famine as a result of market failure to meet people's needs would be the Bengal famine of 1943.

[Anonymous No.6371487]

>>6371479
> More Chinese own cars than under Mao
Wow! Its almost like industrialization happens first, and the consumer goods follow!

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371489]

>>6371479

Nice cited sources.

[Anonymous No.6371493]

>>6371342
Twatsky: Hurr Stuhpit Plebes Leave Politics to the Liberals. Muh Uneven Developement (#notracist)

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371499]

Funny how Singapore is so much better than China and they didn't even need millions of deaths

[Anonymous No.6371503]

>>6371467
I don't understand you commies
>chinese pesant works 12 hours a day on a collectivized rice field. He is paid a pitiful wage and is chronically hungry
>Finally the workers own the means of the production! The chinese are finally free!
>a chinese worker makes consumer electronics for the west. He is paid a much higher wage than before, which allows him to have a high standard of living, and plenty of food on the table.
>what a disaster! The evil capitalist is exploiting the chinese proletariat! Revolt! Revolt!

[Anonymous No.6371504]

>>6371407
You ain't anticipating shit. Marxism is an economic theory, not a way of organizing society/economy.

[Anonymous No.6371506]

>>6371487
1976 was when Mao left office. 1976.

>>6371489
I'm not obliged to give you citations, retard. You missed the whole point and moved the goal posts. He asserted that Chinese are better of than they were under Mao. The fact you have to demand "citations" really shows off your retardation, faggot.

[Anonymous No.6371513]

>>6370893
the only thing wrong with the gpcr was that it was forced and that the destruction of historical monuments turned into a meme

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371514]

>>6371506

>1976 was when Mao left office.

Wow! Its almost like industrialization happens first, and the consumer goods follow!

>I'm not obliged to give you citations, retard.

Nice cited sources.

>>6371503

If you think quality of life improvements mean sweat shop labor a majority of the populace, and your understanding of Chinese culture and history is as shallow as it seems, you might be a liberal.

>>6371499

The leading capitalists, the millionaires and billionaires, are sad specimens of the human race, useless and hurtful. The mark of degeneracy is upon them. Their sickly offspring are old at birth. Their organs are sapped with diseases. Exquisite meats and wines load down their tables, but the stomach refuses to digest them; women expert in love perfume their couches with youth and beauty, but their senses are benumbed. They own palatial dwellings in enchanting sites, and they have no eyes, no feeling for joyful nature, with its eternal youth and change. Sated and disgusted with everything, they are followed everywhere by ennui as by their shadows. They yawn at rising and when they go to bed. They yawn at their fests and at their orgies. The began yawning in their mother’s womb.

[Anonymous No.6371517]

>>6371467
I don't understand you commies.
>a chinese peasant works 12 hours a day in a collectivized rice field. He is given a meager wage and is chronically hungry
>finally! The workers own the means of the production! The chinese people are finally free!

>a chinese worker makes consumer elzctronics for the west. He works decent hours, and has a high wage for the standards of his country. This enables him to live a comfortable life and has more than enough food on the table.
>what a tragedy! The evil capitalist is exploiting the chinese proletariat!

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371527]

>>6371517

Are you seriously implying the answer is sweatshop labor, which is good, somehow.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371533]

>>6371517
>>6371503

The pessimism which, in the wake of capitalist property, made its appearance in ancient Greece six centuries before Jesus Christ, and which has since formed the foundation of the moral and religious philosophy of the capitalist class, became the leading characteristic of the philosophy of the second half of the nineteenth century. The pessimism of Theognis sprang from the uncertainties and vicissitudes of life in the Greek cities, torn by the perpetual wars between rich and poor; the pessimism of the capitalist is the bitter fruit of satiety, ennui and the impoverishment of the blood.

[Anonymous No.6371535]

>>6371396
>wars cannot be blamed on capitalism

[Anonymous No.6371545]

>>6371506
> 1976 was when Mao left office. 1976.
Let's make an allegory.

More people owned hand watches in China during Mao's period than during Chiang's. This means that Mao's period is automatically better, and that socialism > capitalism.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371555]

>>6371514
Everything you said was correct.
However that is no excuse for socialism
that doesn't make China better than Singapore.

When are lefts going to defend their ideology on the basis of their ideology and not simply arguing against capitalism?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371563]

>>6371555

>evola

I too, have been red pilled by moldbug

[Anonymous No.6371565]

>>6371514
>Wow! Its almost like industrialization happens first, and the consumer goods follow!
Looks like Mao failed to industrialize then seeing as only after his death large scale exporting (thus industrialization) to the west started taking place and the living standards of the chinese started to rise.

>Nice cited sources.
Tripfag can't see the pic I attached, what a suprise. I don't need to cite a source to show you the minimum of 20 million people that starved under mao, kek.

It's good though, that you have it, easy to filter out

>>6371545
Except they didn't, they didn't have the surplus of resources they have today in order to afford them.

Very simple, you can make allegories all you want, doesn't change the fact of the matter.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371567]

>>6371563
moldbug is too libertarian for me

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371580]

>>6371567

It's a good thing both of you and moldbug and the dark enlightenment, are all, equally, absolutely pathetic

>>6371565

>Maybe if I say sweatshop labor is good one more time he'll believe me........maybe I'll convince myself
>look at this car sales bar graph I gottem!

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371583]

>>6371580
>It's a good thing both of you and moldbug and the dark enlightenment, are all, equally, absolutely pathetic


not as pathetic as marxism :^)

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371592]

>>6371583

No, the dark enlightenment is ten times more pathetic than your average neckbeard.

It is perhaps the pinnacle of all that is an example for how not to live.

It is beyond the border of pathetic into something else entirely.

[Anonymous No.6371602]

>>6371517
>a chinese peasant works 12 hours a day in a collectivized rice field. He is given a meager wage and is chronically hungry
Peasants in work units worked around 22 to 30 hours a week on the productive agriculture season during Cultural revolution. During Winter, field work (mostly spend with improving fields, tending animals and packaging/milling/storing past harvest) amounted to 10 to 15 hours a week.

Rice fields were collectively owned, but individual pieces of land were by custom given to families to tend over. In practise the work was not different from that under capitalist era.

> He is given a meager wage
Peasants who worked in collectives did not earn wage. The collectives kept their production from which a quota was sold at fixed price to the government who then distributed the food to cities and non-agricultural areas. What is done with the rest of the food was chosen by the collectives democratically. The wages of peasants were not as meager as your make them out to be: average peasant's income increased by average of 18% a year between 1951 and 1969.

> is chronically hungry
The nutrition of Chinese peasants increased massively under Mao's reign, which is the leading cause (with improved medicine) to the massive growth rate of population (310 million in 27 years). After Great Leap, starvation, famine and chronic hunger became isolated and relatively rare incidents and the food production increased massively during 1960s.

these are all documented by the two visits to Maoist China by the Swedish journalist Jan Myrdal in his books Report from a Chinese Village, China: the revolution continued Return to a Chinese Village, which showcase the common life a village in Shanxi over two decades, underlining the rapid improvement of living conditions under Maoist currencies.

Mao saved the peasants. Deng merely followed up on it.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371604]

>>6371592
>No, the dark enlightenment is ten times more pathetic than your average neckbeard.

being a neckbeard and being a marxist can be two different things

>It is perhaps the pinnacle of all that is an example for how not to live.

Aurini's assesment of your average degenerate is the pinnacle of all that is an example for how not to live.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJCuYvC7gKE

>It is beyond the border of pathetic into something else entirely.
this is a good description of the left.

[Anonymous No.6371608]

>>6371565
> Except they didn't, they didn't have the surplus of resources they have today in order to afford them.
You do realize that China under Cheng was even poorer than Under Mao that followed it?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371614]

>>6371604

Stop defending the dark enlightment you have ten seconds to stop please. I am begging you to stop.

turn your life around. You deserve better than this

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371624]

>>6371614
>Stop defending the dark enlightment you have ten seconds to stop please. I am begging you to stop.
>turn your life around. You deserve better than this

you have 10 seconds to explain why pleb philosophy is desirable at all?
note that the destruction of traditional European culture is not a good thing

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371627]

>>6371624

Excuse me, can you guess which Dark Enlightenment member this is?

[Anonymous No.6371630]

>>6371580
Yes, as the quality of life is measured by such things, more Chinese can afford personal vehicles, appliances, homes, access to education, healthcare, etc, than ever before.

But hey, stay a retarded ideolog ranting about the evil capitalists, no one mentioned how great sweatshops are, but the fact they're better than starving to death while working on the field to make useless pig iron.

>muh fields of pig iron were much superior
>muh famine was the peak of China
>muh cultural revolution
kek

>>6371608
Nope, did you mean Chiang Kai Shek?

He never ruled China though, he ruled large parts of China, yes, but never had complete control over China which was fractured in several de-facto states not to mention the communists, not to mention the war against Japan.

Still I never heard of 20-40 million people starving to death under him though, so there's that.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371634]

>>6371630

>he said sweatshop labor is good again

[Anonymous No.6371643]

>>6371634
How do you even read up on marxism when you don't even have the mental capacity to understand a simple sentence.

>no one mentioned how great sweatshops are, but the fact they're better than starving to death while working on the field to make useless pig iron.
Read it again, maybe you'll comprehend it instead of being retarded and putting words in my mouth. This is ignoring the fact chine isn't just sweatshops, but hey, can't help stupid can you.

Welcome to the filter, fag

[Anonymous No.6371645]

>>6371604
>WAKE UP SHEEPLE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPBe09g3ALw

Oh god, you could have been so much more. Heed the teachings of Leo Strauss before it's too late. No class.

[Anonymous No.6371646]

>>6371630
> He never ruled China though, he ruled large parts of China, yes, but never had complete control over China which was fractured in several de-facto states not to mention the communists, not to mention the war against Japan.
Is this meant to be like an argument for him? That he could not centralize China and let the country vulnerable to Japanese invasion?

> Still I never heard of 20-40 million people starving to death under him though, so there's that.
Indeed, as such is not possible to find out of when Chiang never conducted any censuses nor carried centralized mortality statistics. Literally nobody knows how many people died of starvation during the Northern Expedition or Great Plains war. But if average of 750 000 military deaths per annum for twenty years is preferable to you. Given that Chiang greenlit things like breaking Yellow River Dams, killing perhaps 2 000 000 indirectly, not even a staunch anti-Maoist can consider a very preferable alternative.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371648]

>>6371627
Excuse me, can you guess which communist party member this is?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371653]

>>6371643

Excuse me, can you point to where I said either was preferable :)

>>6371648

Calm down Bryce Laliberte

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371666]

>>6371653

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371676]

>>6371666

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371679]

>>6371676
>modernist.
>socialist
>a woman speaking politically in the social sphere
>tattoos

that is one of your people not mine

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371681]

>>6371666

“This is you.” Explained Ayn Rand to Karl Marx, shoving a picture of a crying baby across the table. “This is you. See how that baby is crying? It’s you. You infant.”

Marx was taken aback, his entire universe shaken by this unapologetic display of logic and reason. The rationality drove him to shuddering, ugly tears.

“Don’t get snot on all of my money.” Rand said (Obviously, as the greatest writer who ever lived, she was SUPER RICH, so much so that it’s in piles fucking everywhere). “Top kek. So pwnt.”

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371683]

>>6371681
funny thing is you're the one who has resorted to shitposting.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371684]

>>6371679

Don't leave the sponge in the sink ;)

[Anonymous No.6371686]

>>6371648
>>6371653
>>6371666
>>6371676
>>6371679
>>6371681
>>6371683
>>6371684
Can you two faggots get a room?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371688]

>>6371683

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371689]

>>6371686

Whomever already fucked Moldbug I'm not one for sloppy seconds

[Anonymous No.6371699]

>>6371646
>Is this meant to be like an argument for him? That he could not centralize China and let the country vulnerable to Japanese invasion?
First of all, he came to power 20 years after China was already attacked by the Japanese, and he did manage to centralize large parts of it. Not really an argument for him, but the fact the Japanese were out of the picture and Soviet presence in Manchuria is what gave the Commies the ability to do this.

>Indeed, as such is not possible to find out of when Chiang never conducted any censuses nor carried centralized mortality statistics.
While that is true, there was only one large scale famine and nowhere to the extent of that during communist times, it wasn't caused by government economic policies either. That's the main difference between them.

>Northern Expedition
Which was before Chiang was in power as the leader of China, however the expedition itself was successful

>But if average of 750 000 military deaths per annum for twenty years is preferable to you.
Very much preferable to over 20 million starving to death during peace time

>Given that Chiang greenlit things like breaking Yellow River Dams, killing perhaps 2 000 000 indirectly, not even a staunch anti-Maoist can consider a very preferable alternative.
Maybe if you inflate the numbers some more. Still a preferable alternative to Mao and dozens of millions killed in peace time, without me needing to bring up their military casualties to argue for him. The breaking of the Yellow river dam, effective or not, was the result of the Japanese advance and an attempt to stop or, at least, delay them. He didn't go out determined to kill the Chinese culture either.

This is without me even wanting to defend the faggot, but only a complete idiot would prefer Mao.

[Anonymous No.6371701]

>>6370835
>Excuse for atrocities
>A nationalist/neo-fascist is actually saying this

Oh lawd

[Anonymous No.6371704]

does the belief that the revolution should be spread to other countries, like fx. Guevara tried to do in Bolivia, have a specific "name" or is it linked to a certain theory? I wanna read more about this particular subject

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371707]

>>6371699

I suppose both are examples why you shouldn't give too much faith to both state and exploitative power :)

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371709]

>>6371701
>>A nationalist/neo-fascist is actually saying this
>implying I'm a nationalist or a neo fascist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola#Politics

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371715]

>>6371704

It's prevalent in various schools of Marxist thought. Particularly, Trotsky's ideas of global revolution

>>6371709

Might as well be. I have no fucking clue what you are but unless you're giving your ass to the dark enlightenment I'm guessing you're virginal

[Anonymous No.6371718]

>>6371689
get over Moldbug. He's just a chubby daddy blogger with a crackling style and an alternate time, not one iota different than Mouffawad Paul.

[Anonymous No.6371725]

>>6371709
>I'm not a fascist because I think the fascists did go far enough!
You've used this one up.

[Anonymous No.6371728]

>>6371707
>tumblr
How appropriate

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371730]

>>6371718

Both are people you shouldn't fucking listen to at all.

The difference is The Dark Enlightenment itself is a failed attempt at influencing anything other than underground NEET communities of edge lords and reactionaries.

I don't get what's so attractive about believing the shit the Dark Enlightenment believes, anyways. It's all shit.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371736]

>>6371728

If you think tumblr is a greater menace than Dark Enlightenment NEETs your probably a Dark Enlightenment NEET

[Anonymous No.6371746]

>>6371736
Nah, I'm just calling you out on being a faggot.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371753]

>>6371746

I'm somewhat a faggot. I'll admit it.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371755]

>>6371715
>Might as well be. I have no fucking clue what you are but unless you're giving your ass to the dark enlightenment I'm guessing you're virginal

>Has different opinion
>shitpost and call a fascist

yep typical leftist

>>6371725
wrong.
fascism is modernism

[Anonymous No.6371760]

Some would undoubtedly call each generation's fascination with Marxism a symbol of hope. They think they'll be the one generation in history able to pull it off and be revered for ages to come. I call it ignorance and insanity. It's been tried over and over again and it always fails because of human nature. I think it's because the people who really try to implement it are exceptional in a dirty way. They can manipulate others and use brute force when their jealousy of exceptional people peaks. Their inadequacy is a false pretext to spread equality for the good of mankind. Funny that the ones who implement any kind of collectivism always end up eating caviar while their subjects starve. Always. Without fail.

[Anonymous No.6371773]

526. The argument between socialism and capitalism comes down to this: to those who, when left to their own devices, naturally rise above the mean, and to those who fall below. The former will be proponents of capitalism, the latter of socialism. The former are talented and hard-working, the latter talentless and lazy. And all this is proved by the failure of socialism, and in particular that of communism: its ultimate manifestation — as if a group of habitual losers at the individual level would be able to create, by pooling together all their weaknesses and failures, a winning combination!
But it is plain that, as they lose on the individual level — as individuals — they will ultimately lose on the group level too. The only reason they temporarily succeeded at a few points in history is because they were facing even greater losers: a complacent and degenerate aristocracy.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371779]

>>6371755

Well, since you're a fan of Evola in 2015, and the Dark Enlightenment, I'll just call you an edge lord.

>>6371760

Just because people think the Dark Enlightenment is filled with dorks doesn't mean the future is full of Cultural Marxist European Destruction Butt Fucking Degeneracy

>>6371773

degeneracy means whatever is convenient

[Anonymous No.6371783]

>>6371760
>human nature
oh boy there we go

[Anonymous No.6371784]

>>6371773
This.

There is no larger shame for a country than falling victim to a successful coup carried out by socialists. How completely corrupt and stupid does your government have to be to be taken over by the dregs of society?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371788]

>>6371784

>the dregs of society

You mean the Dark Enlightenment?

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371791]

>>6371779
Well, since you're a fan of Marx in 2015, and the Cultural Marxism, I'll just call you Jason Unruhe

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371795]

>>6371788
no he means Marxists

[Anonymous No.6371796]

>>6371773
If they're truly left to their own devices then there is no mean. du-uh.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371800]

>>6371791

I'm not even a Maoist, and Unruhe is embarrassing.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371803]

>>6371795

I'm pretty sure he meant Dark Enlightenment edge lords like Fuzz Goblin here

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371805]

>>6371800
Might as well be. I have no fucking clue what you are but unless you're giving your ass to cultural marxists I'm guessing you're virginal

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371810]

>>6371805

Someone's upset

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371815]

>>6371803
no he meant Marxists :^)

[Anonymous No.6371816]

>>6371791
Cultural Marxism is being cucked by a black man.
Maoism is having your new car set on fire.

Which one is worse?

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371819]

>>6371810
not all at
you seem butthurt over the dark enlightenment even though it "can't influence anything"

stay pleb

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371821]

>>6371815

Fuzz-Goblin, is that you?

>>6371819

No I'm just mocking you. That's the worst association you can have.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371823]

>>6371816
Maoism enables SJWs

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371824]

>>6371816
#Enlight #dark #gamer

[Anonymous No.6371826]

>>6371810
Says the guy hoisted on his own retard.

Also, stop saying Dark Enlightenment. It's Buzzwordy Douchespeak.

[Anonymous No.6371829]

>>6371760
>human nature

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371830]

>>6371821
>That's the worst association you can have.

leftism is the worst association you can have

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371834]

>>6371823

Mao Has Degenerated The West And Turned Homosexuality Into The Norm

>>6371826

>Also, stop saying Dark Enlightenment

Moldbug fucking warned us about the pomolib whigprots but we just ignored them and kept listening to degenerate pop and rap music and now look what they’ve done.

>>6371830
redpilled by moldbug

[Anonymous No.6371842]

>>6371823
So that means you pick the street nigga all up in your wife's pizzuss? Damn, I thought you were noble and against materialism, dawg.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371847]

>>6371834
>leftists getting mad because no one likes their pleb philosophy

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371851]

>>6371847

nydwracu? is that you?

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371853]

>>6371842
reported for shitposting

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371856]

>>6371853

Reported for announcing your reports

[Anonymous No.6371862]

>>6371853
I expected more from you. You'd literally let a black man have sex with your lady love than have your Lexus torched. Aristocrat of the Soul my ass.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6371865]

>>6371856
>resorts to shitposting after 3 comments.

yep schools out

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371874]

>>6371865

I expected more from you Nydwracu Rogue Wizard of Combat Linguistics

[Anonymous No.6371883]

>>6371874
I'm curious as to how your accusations are relevant. They can't possibly be proven here and you sound pretty ridiculous.

>>6371788

And I meant Marxists.

[Anonymous No.6371886]

>>6371847
I can't believe someone this pathetic exists. Why do you exist, tripfriend?

[Anonymous No.6371889]

>>6371760
>human nature
How can you tell human nature from human artificiality?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371895]

>>6371883

What accusations? :v)

>And I meant Marxists.

So your populist when it comes to The Dark Enlightenment because you're a group of losers whose goal it is to turn the world around away from degeneracy?

Sounds like you're projecting :P

[Anonymous No.6371906]

>>6370893
>writes "Combat Liberalism"
>Is lumped together with 21st century bourgeois liberals

Nice try, Evola. Nice try.

[Anonymous No.6371912]

>>6371895
You don't even know what you mean when you say Dark Enlightenment. You're parroting a phrase you like. If only you could throw the word syndicalism somewhere in there your pseudoboner might never go limp.

[Shitposter !gUADu79OUM No.6371920]

Just making a name for myself - seems like as good a thread as any to get started

[stalin did notHing wRong !!vvSzmC7V9vd No.6371928]

>>6371816
Lol lol why u taKing about chinks on this stoopid thread

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371931]

>>6371912

I'll explain to you, what the Dark Enlightenment is, then.

It’s probably a lot funnier if you witnessed it in its formation, but basically it stems from the idea of the red pill in the matrix, which is taken by neo to escape from the simulated world he was in, and re-enter reality.

The irony that the matrix is a heavily postmodern film which was part-directed by a transwoman doesn’t seem to occur to the people who started using the analogy first, in some horrendous modern day imitation of the platonic cave allegory. at first it was mainly masculinists who started using it, so far as i can tell, with the red pill apparently being that all women are evil and deceptive, and misandry is Everywhere

Enter the “hero” of our story, “mencius moldbug”, a white middle class american reactionary nerd blogger. and i don’t mean reactionary in an old bolshevik all-capitalists-are-reactionaries way, i mean he literally identifies as a “neo-reactionary”. in one of his more notorious (and verbose) posts, he started using the analogy as a means of critiquing “universalism”, a category which lumps marxism, anarchism, humanism, liberalism, postmodernism and god knows what else all under one ill-defined label. he reserves a special amount of scorn for liberal democracy and for the media, which he calls “the cathedral” and sees as controlled by commies, basically.

Very soon he began to attract a cult following of similarly misguided rightists, who soon became “the dark enlightenment” and are possibly the only political movement in history to print magic: the gathering cards of themselves as a means of promotion. they’re nerds by the way. they also, much like libertarians, have a fondness for overdetailed graphs and political spectrums, and not getting laid.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371955]

>>6371920
>>6371928

General ideology: Reactionary, the techno-commercialist wing. I was redpilled by Moldbug. The tl;dr. version is this: optimize for intelligence, optimize for asabiyyah(As much as possible in a declining civilization) and select for a higher quality population.

Dark enlightenment chart position: Connected to the political philosophy people via Moldbug, Idegoria, Nydwracu, Spandrell, James Donald and the Techno-commercialists via Nick Land.

Trichotomy position: The techno-commercialist branch, with some sympathies to the ethno-nationalist branch(Supporting omniseperatism) and willing to allow theonomists their own country.

[Shitposter !gUADu79OUM No.6371965]

>>6371931
>>6371955
>You will never be an obese Texan sweating in a mid-summer heat, bantering across an IRC with your fellow Dark-Englightenment brethren about whores who've rejected you
Why live.

I don't suppose there's a manifesto for the long and short of it all?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371971]

>>6371965

[Anonymous No.6371976]

>>6371965
don't

http://www.reddit.com/r/askaconservative/wiki/cognac

[Anonymous No.6371982]

>>6371865

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6371984]

>>6371976

>"The Cognac Standard"

lmao

[Shitposter !gUADu79OUM No.6371990]

>Forums that adopt this standard do not have rules. They have something better than rules: a goal, and a culture of behavior. In such an environment, there are no warnings and there is no due process. If you behave like an ass, these people will not want to hear from you again. If you behave well, even if they disagree with you about almost everything, they will want to spend more time in your company.

Man this is fucking painful to read.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372005]

>>6371990

>This standard allows any topic to be discussed as long as it is expressed using the methods above. No idea or fact is off the table, nor is anything too taboo or offensive to be brought out, but it must be presented in the manner of discussion with friends. This enables the greatest amount of discussion with the least amount of misery, and enables a high standard of readership.

[Anonymous No.6372042]

Theres so many goddamn tripfags in the thread, Jesus Christ.

Communist or Fascist, both of you are supposed to be collectivists goddammit. Quit this individualist crap.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372044]

>>6372042

How do you know, you're not the individualist? o_0

[Anonymous No.6372063]

>>6372044
Do you use the word "pwned" IRL conversation? I bet you do.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372066]

>>6372063

Every conversation I'm in I must use the phrase "roflmao", or a bomb inside my ribcage will detonate

[Anonymous No.6372121]

>>6370704
No content. Discuss a fucking text.

>>6370723
>Can Marxist philosophy be separated from Marxist economics?
Thesis 11.
>Is his view of history a necessary conclusion from his methodology?
No. See the debate on the asiatic mode of production; the suspicion that modes of production only exist inside capitalism, etc.

>>6370874
>reminder that the liberty in the libertarianism is a negative liberty, while the liberty in marxism is the deliberate choice of the subject
And that neo-Manchesterite radical liberalism posits a singular subject constructed by the value form, whereas proletarian praxis posits ourselves as the subject.

>>6370935
This. Post content.

>>6371232
>>>/mu/

>>6371342
>Can somebody plz explain the permanent revolution to me? Every time I try to learn about it on Wikipedia, I somehow fail.
One of the problems with ideologies is that they reify and "fix" reality when reality is unfixed. For Bolsheviks the idea of revolution was both a cataclysmic seizure of power, and a real transformation in the mode of production (not that they actually intended this, but it was important to ape in their propaganda). "Permanent" revolution was about transforming the cataclysmic seizure of power into a permanent powerbase for a nomenklatura bourgeois. In the propaganda it was the transformation of an act of overthrow into a claim to be permanently transforming people's material relations. Basically, for Trotsky's faction in the Bolsheviks, this meant a rapid heavy industry line and anti-peasant campaign in the early 1920s.

This shit fight between Trotsky and Bukharin has now become an object of faith that is universally applicable for ortho-trots.

* * *

Next time, the lot of you, please discuss texts. I'd suggest reading Mao's On Contradiction before you post on /lit/ again.

[Anonymous No.6372143]

>>6371232
top song

[Anonymous No.6372147]

Sup bitches? When are you going to acknowledge that there are three factors of production, rather than two?

[Anonymous No.6372154]

Is Marxism mainstream yet?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372161]

>>6372154

Yeah, it actually really is. That an anarchism. Nobody wants to call themselves liberal anymore. At least, someone will describe themselves as Leftists.

The days of Chomsky Honks are over

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372176]

>>6372147

Anywhere I can read more about Henry George? I can't find any of his work anywhere, just references of him.

[Anonymous No.6372203]

>>6372154
It will never be because its tied to a meta-narrative, wanna be me. It can only exist as an unevolved stage of real social proposals, and as such you could say it's pretty mainstream.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372209]

>>6372203

>marxism will never be popular

What is Mutual Aid

[Anonymous No.6372253]

>>6372209
Popular wasn't in any of the two posts. He asked for mainstream, and I recognized that the theory is pretty well known and taken in consideration but as a full fledged system, a stand alone structure and prediction of things to happen, it could never work just like any modernist plan was just smoke and mirrors. No one can predict and control how billions of humans will interact.
I don't see why you call yourself Foucault if you're against post-modernism. Maybe you're like the poster that tries to tie the pics I use to marxism, some kind of weird project that makes a lot of sense just to you and I'm the only dumbass that notices.

[Anonymous No.6372254]

I wish you faggots would read a book once in a while, instead of debating over strawmen and cold war propaganda spooks. You're like those children in high school debating whether being goth or emo is best.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372272]

>>6372253

I'm totally against post-modernism, and I'm an anarchocommunist. I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, except that the idea itself of Mutual Aid is enough to satisfy. The world is complex enough as it is, to imply anything simpler is impossible is a bit of an over exaggeration.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372276]

>>6372272

*not against post-modernism. I forgot the NOT.

[Shitposter !gUADu79OUM No.6372285]

>>6372254
Goth

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372287]

>>6372285

this

[Anonymous No.6372298]

>>6372272
>except that the idea itself of Mutual Aid is enough to satisfy.
You're reading things I'm not saying again. For all that it matters I think society could work without any kind of strong state structure, and the revival of all those narratives that got tramped by Europe is one of the things I really like about postmodernism. A few hundreds of years ago people lived in complex societies without money and it's perfectly plausible that we'll go back to that kind of systems in the next 1000 years. One of the greatest problems Marxism has is that it's a product of its time, a lot of the ideas take for granted the context of the early industrial revolution when the world isn't certain parts of Europe in the 18th century, not even Europe anymore.
That is not to say that M&E should go eat a dick, it's just that their ideas have to be implemented and reinterpreted to make sense. We already do that and I'm sure we would be doing similar things without them because collectivism, communalism and other systems based on social debt existed since forever.

If we're gonna talk about Marx I really prefer to remember historical materialism, that is one really big game changer that doesn't get enough love.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372322]

>>6372298

>If we're gonna talk about Marx I really prefer to remember historical materialism, that is one really big game changer that doesn't get enough love.

Agreed. I'm also not implying Marx himself, and his work, is flawless. It has to be updated for modern times, times are different.

But, what everyone takes away from Marx can still be felt regardless of time, just to various intensities. The ideas presented are timeless, because people are still getting exploited, as are we, as is history.

It depends on what place in the world and what time to which culture, depends on how to implement the work itself. I'm more of a follower of Kropotkin, other anarchists thinkers at the time, and Spanish anarchists, than of Marx. But regardless, much of what he says still stands the test of time, while being a a product of its time.

Marx's work isn't timeless, but what it came from, is. The hunt throughout time for some form of freedom away from any and all exploitation is all that humans can hold onto of their future. To say that any human being, any human being at all, finds comfort in the thought of continued centuries of economic or state domination is a false one. It is the simplicity of what we hold onto, that Marx and Engels were merely an echo of, that is what can make a better world possible. That's what I believe.

[Anonymous No.6372323]

>>6372298
>A few hundreds of years ago people lived in complex societies without money and it's perfectly plausible that we'll go back to that kind of systems in the next 1000 years.

You mean the crushing class societies of feudalism and tributary states?

Fuck off.

Those ways of being aren't coming back, and new ways of being will be cosmopolitian. Now shut up and eat your Pho.

[Anonymous No.6372330]

http://fortune.com/2015/04/07/greece-war-reparations-germany/

The welfare state claims another victim

when will it end bros?

[Anonymous No.6372374]

>>6372322
>It is the simplicity of what we hold onto, that Marx and Engels were merely an echo of, that is what can make a better world possible.
That's a nice line. No one can deny how much Marx influenced the world, even if no one ever did exactly what he wrote. There was a pic doing the rounds where each philosopher was connected to the people he influenced and Marx was the number one spot, above Hegel, Plato and Aristotle. While that sounds impposible if you think it through the fact that people didn't question it shows how he changed the game.

>>6372323
While its not such a great difference if you think about it, no one 50 years ago could had guessed how society evolved, even less 100 and 200 years ago industrialization was barely a thing. I'm not one of those silly heads that talk about oil running out and water and stuff, we'll deal with that when it comes; but I really think that finishing the modernist route would be a much more natural response than living underground, space exploration, or any of the proposed futuristic scenarios (and I'm assuming we all know the market will never self regulate, the state will never open the doors to a stateless society and there is no kingdom of heaven and if there was one that doesn't affect life here and now)

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372425]

>>6372323

>new ways of being will be cosmopolitan

I'd rather have neither feudalism and tributary states nor cosmopolitan promise or metropolitan lies. I'd rather have something never tried before, that's simple, yet strong and full of truth.

[Anonymous No.6372502]

>>6372176
Progress and Poverty is available free online at The Online Library of Liberty. They don't seem to have any other geoist titles, but I haven't looked thoroughly.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6372507]

>>6372502

Thanks! I'll give it a read

[Anonymous No.6372594]

u guis r idiyats

[Anonymous No.6372600]

>>6372594

Says you

[Anonymous No.6372969]

What does /lit/ think of Oscar Wilde's Soul of Man Under Socialism?

[spanish flu 1942 !B0ucqcFQ7M No.6373026]

I admit not being too familiar with Marxism but.,

is he basically a Hegelian that thinks that collective human consciousness is a historical process that ends in Communism?

[Anonymous No.6373029]

>>6373026
No, Marx rejects every metaphysical concept tied to Hegel. That's why his current is usually referred as materialism while Hegel's got renamed idealism.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373032]

>>6373026

He has only the most basic attachment to Hegel.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373038]

>>6372969

Most of what he writes is a pretty good read. He's someone I would rec

[Anonymous No.6373042]

Can cis, straight, thin, able-bodied white men be part of the proletariate?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373059]

>>6373042

yes

[Anonymous No.6373063]

Has Marxism become the new pseudo-religion? /lit/ Marxists can't even relax and poke fun of their own philosophy anymore without whining about /pol/ or Pinochet or some other spook that's supposed to offset millions of Sino-Russian dead

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373067]

>>6373063

Considering how prevalent Nationalism is, you should be thanking us for something new, at least.

[Anonymous No.6373073]

>>6373067
>us
>implying you contributed

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373078]

>>6373073

Aw. I'm contributing to a lot of things. :)

[Anonymous No.6373083]

>>6373063
>Sino-Russia
Just a handful of buttblasted Ukies, friendo.

[Anonymous No.6373092]

>>6373042
what? of course, cis straight people are the definition of proletariat: they have prole, children. Trans and homosexuals can't be proletariat.

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373097]

>>6373092

>Trans and homosexuals can't be proletariat

You are wrong about that.

[Anonymous No.6373098]

>>6373042
It'd be difficult because the "proletariate" doesn't exist. Perhaps you meant proletariat?

The answer is can the proletariat be the proletariat without destroying cis/trans straight/queer non-/white wo/manesses? Anyone with an identity (an ideology) other than a proletarian one is multiplying their false consciousness and avoiding the class consciousness of praxis.

[Anonymous No.6373106]

>>6373092
>what is lumpenization?

[Anonymous No.6373113]

Was it a good thing that the Western Powers won the cold war?

[Anonymous No.6373126]

>>6373097
they can't have prole, how could they be proletariat, a group defined by having children as only income source?

[Anonymous No.6373127]

>>6373097
They're partly write. Trans people and homosexuals can't be proletarian.

Neither, however, can cis people and heterosexuals.

[Anonymous No.6373134]

>>6373113
>Was it a good thing that the Western Powers won the cold war?
Revolutionaries should have one attitude towards bourgeois wars, which is local defeat to produce a revolutionary situation that the forming proletariat can exploit.

[Anonymous No.6373135]

>>6373113
China isn't in the west

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373138]

>>6373126

[Anonymous No.6373141]

>>6373127
>write
*right

[Anonymous No.6373150]

>>6373138
that's no answer, baldy. if you're so smart correct me.

[spanish flu 1942 !B0ucqcFQ7M No.6373178]

>>6373113
they should haven't have knocked communism without trying it.

[Anonymous No.6373189]

>>6373135
>tfw Japan has to start importing Han Chinese to replace their plummeting population
最も苦い復讐!

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373191]

>>6373150

There's more exploitation going on than just workers rights, or income. Providing everyone with free income, does not stop inter-community violence.

For example, trans women, especially black trans women, are mostly, violently harassed, and or killed. You could say "WELL DUR JUST NOT DO THAT!." And you'd be making a vast generalization of a complex issue.

Besides the point, hatred towards anyone outside of strict heterosexuality is curious, it's allowed others to investigate where that comes from further, to try and explain, and better control the situation at hand.

If you think exploitation will suddenly vanish with state enforced equality, you're misunderstanding what lead to exploitation to begin with, to stick, so long ago. There are many ways of describing this that have done it better than I, one example would be the concept of the Other, another, would be the Subaltern.

[Anonymous No.6373204]

>>6373191
Neither of which are adequate concepts because they're ideological.

And there aren't multiple overlaying totalising systems of oppression either.

And Foucault's answer is the avoidance of the formation of the proletariat.

Wages for housework, the analysis of the reproduction of labour provides the key.

[Anonymous No.6373208]

>>6373191
proletariat doesn't mean "exploited people" or "suffering group", it means "the one who produces offspring". Do gay people or transgirls produce offspring? Not voluntarily. So they aren't proletariat.
If anything the main group hating on lgbt groups tends to be proletariat, since high society seems to think that pretending to tolerate them as sick children is the right way to go.

[Anonymous No.6373214]

>>6373208
>proletariat doesn't mean "exploited people" or "suffering group", it means "the one who produces offspring".
It hasn't meant that since Marx used "those who sell their sons to live" as a euphemism for the self-comprehending waged workers. So you're about 170 years out of date.

[Anonymous No.6373217]

>>6373214
Why would it stop meaning that when the term is perfectly functional?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373218]

>>6373204

>Neither of which are adequate concepts because they're ideological.

Wrong. People are attacked, ergo, something must be done.

If you think exploitation can be broken down into an easily digestible three paragraphs you're wrong.

Before you speak on any issue, you have to explore it further.

>>6373208

Aside from sticking to antiquated definitions you stick to antiquated philosophy.

[Anonymous No.6373224]

>>6370929
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhAXGaF_lT4

[Anonymous No.6373235]

WHY IN THE WORLD DO YOU NEED A MARXIST GENERAL

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373240]

>>6373235

I don't know. Why does /pol/ exist.

[Penelope !dgOyi90UNA No.6373247]

>>6373235
to get the revolution on the road in time for the centennial year 2017

[Anonymous No.6373251]

>>6373235
Someone's got to lead the Red Army innit? :^)

[Anonymous No.6373253]

>>6373240
>Why does /pol/ exist.
Presumably because we're all in hell and no ones worked it out yet.

[Anonymous No.6373311]

>All the Mao bashing in this thread

[Anonymous No.6373354]

>>6373311
What else should we do to bourgeois?

[Anonymous No.6373380]

>>6373354
First, I'd suggest learning what the bourgeoisie is. Second, I'd suggest you abandon class essentialism, a reactionary position.

[Anonymous No.6373400]

>>6373380

It would also help to actually learn about Mao and the PRC under Mao outside of liberal prop but that's probably asking too much.

[Anonymous No.6373403]

>>6373380
>class essentialism is reactionary
Leninist, you go too far here. The only container of knowledge of praxis is the class, no other class than my own can know praxis.

>I'd suggest learning what the bourgeoisie is.
Value existed in China? Wages, check.
Mao had control over value, check.
Mao's control over value maximised value, check.
Mao subsisted off surplus value, check.

It is a lay down misere.

[Anonymous No.6373438]

>>6373400
Why did Yen'an end? How is from the class to the class from the class class consciousness? How can a body external to the class contain the understanding only possible through the self-negation of value in a concrete sense? How is value circulation reproducing post-value forms faster than value forms? How is bourgeois nationalism in any way revolutionary in a country where the Shanghai commune?

Why is a party comprised of nationalist bureaucrats, modelled on a party of nationalist intelligentsia, both of which had as their programme the continued reproduction of value in an expanded form, in any way connected with my class's self-liberation?

And why did actual communists in china form a united front with these fucks?

[Anonymous No.6373439]

>>6373403
Oh boy you again.
>The Proletariat are magical good beings that always necessarily make revolution poof into existence! Everyone that wasn't born a factory worker is secretly bourgeoisie, magical evil beings that always necessarily make revolution poof out of existence!
>"Mao had control..."

LOL, read a book. You'll never have even a thousandth of the praxis Mao personally lived.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6373822]

ITT upper middle class first world kids wanting a proletariat revolution

yeah that'd go over well

[Anonymous No.6373825]

>>6373822
I doubt most people on this board are upper middle class.

[Anonymous No.6373852]

>>6373822
we are mostly NEETs

[Anonymous No.6373864]

>>6370880
>And neither of them did terribly.

[Marxist rationalization of genocide intensifies]

[Anonymous No.6373886]

>>6373864
> judging marxist societies on judeo-christian morals
pure ideology

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6373983]

>>6373822

I'm actually working a night shift to afford a shit flat, with a morning job on the other days for keeping up an education, and still I need to be on the campus' financial aid.

Explain to me, how I can't come to the conclusion this is bullshit.

[Evola « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » Kid !vKJYJAzBlI No.6373995]

>>6373983
>Explain to me, how I can't come to the conclusion this is bullshit.

because you think that everyone should be educated or go to a university

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6374002]

>>6373995

So because I think education is necessity (it is), you think I'm saying everyone needs an education? I don't. But we're implying different outcomes.

You think education should be as butt fuckingly difficult as possible because you worship an empire of debauchery. Most men would have standards, not you, you're inspired.

[Anonymous No.6374043]

>>6373439
I like how you denied neither the empirical data nor the Marxist analysis thereof.

Instead you're complaining about material that should be as basic to you as volume 1.

[Anonymous No.6374054]

>>6373886
>Genocide isn't wrong if you belong to any other religion or culture apart from Judeo-Christianity

[Anonymous No.6374395]

>>6370704
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.6374406]

>>6373063
>Implying we marxists don't have fun trivializing it

The best part of marxism is the jokes man

[Anonymous No.6374475]

>>6371288

Are you paid by check, or do you do the check-signing? If you are in class 1, you are prole. Don't fool yourself.

[Anonymous No.6374513]

>>6370880
Holy shit dude....

[Anonymous No.6374529]

>>6374475
You'd be surprised but what you've said is incredibly culturally specific. Many people are paid by cash in some societies, by direct bank deposit in others. etc.

[Anonymous No.6374585]

>>6371805

Aaaand there's the butthurt. Is interesting, really, how ubiquitous anti-feminism is among the sexually unsatisfied.

[Anonymous No.6374598]

>>6374585
If you type like you just did you're definitely sexually unsatisfied

[Anonymous No.6374608]

>>6370704
MarXXX

[Anonymous No.6374636]

>>6371895

Ok so. Foucault. You are just the fucking worst. You have brought shame to this Marxist. Grow up, kid. Stop tripfagging. You've embarrassed all of us here today. Marx would be so disappointed by your stupid bicker-y unenlightened arguing bullshit.

-Will

[Anonymous No.6374778]

Here's a piece of advice for marxists and fascists

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6375220]

>>6374636

>-Will
>-Will
>-Will

>>6374778

*slaps you*

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6375225]

>>6374513

>dude

>>6374054

If you cared about Genocide, what about the genocides accomplished by Capital?

[Anonymous No.6375321]

>>6374043
No one cares about your class mysticism and the hubris you personally derive from it.

>Khrushchev: The difference between the Soviet Union and China is that I rose to power from the peasant class, whereas you came from the privileged Mandarin class.
>Zhou: True. But there is this similarity: each of us is a traitor to his class.

The difference between you and Mao is that Mao had revolutionary praxis, spent his life working to build socialism from China's semi-feudal society, and had lasting successes from that work, whereas you shitpost on 4chan about how you're the only real Marxist and everyone else are deviant bourgeoisie. If only we and all the other workers in your union in the imperial centers would just realize that you -really- understand Capital! The nerve that the Leninists didn't look to you for instruction or we'd be living in Communist Utopia /right now/!

[Anonymous No.6375334]

>>6374778
we are already voluntary egoists like Viper.

[Anonymous No.6376690]

>>6375321
>is that Mao had revolutionary praxis
The bourgeois is incapable of praxis, as proof I point to the ideology of 100 flowers and GLF.

Praxis would not have produced the GLF, because, much more like the attempts during the cultural revolution to cohere the subject, it would have arisen from the people.

>No one cares
Which is strange, because I seem to have brought the issue of praxis to the fore, Leninists aren't currently winning the propaganda terrain on /lit/, and you still haven't addressed how control over value for the purpose of production of surplus value isn't bourgeois.

>[Zhou and Khrushchev as class traitors]
Sadly they were both impotent against Stalinism and reformism. Mikyokan did more than either of them.

>whereas you shitpost on 4chan about how you're the only real Marxist and everyone else are deviant bourgeoisie.
I've never done that mate. Why don't you go home and write a big character poster about how you'd like to kill me?

>If only we and all the other workers in your union in the imperial centers would just realize that you -really- understand Capital! The nerve that the Leninists didn't look to you for instruction or we'd be living in Communist Utopia /right now/!
Did you miss the point where I constantly return to praxis? Your formulation of imperialism, by the way, is anti-Leninist and doesn't deal with the localised nature of wage formation (you ought to know this, it is in Volume 1, where Marx talks about what the wage is).

As far as developing praxis, I'm not the one worshipping class enemies, no matter how much feudalism they primarily accumulated into capitalism, for their ideological contributions.

And it isn't only unions in the "imperial centres" that matter. It is unions wherever human effort is converted to a wage in the context of capital. Which is everywhere. And we, together, are the only ones who can materially work our way out of this situation.

>that the Leninists didn't look to you for instruction
Please do bother to read some of the KAPD/AAUD material sometime in your life. It offers a very different reflection on the "failure" of the German revolution to the anti-class pessimism of Lenin or Frankfurt.

[Anonymous No.6377153]

>>6370704
Haha, Marx. Is that the fag who thought up all that hammer & sickle crap, but never actually held or used the tools in his life? Ah yes, that's the imbecile.

I'm sure it will work this time though. Give it another shot.

[Anonymous No.6377161]

is anyone keeping up with the shit since Dauve's article on the kurds
anarcho butthurt was palpable in the aftermath

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377163]

>>6377153

>Is that the fag who thought up all that hammer & sickle crap
>marx
>hammer & sickle
>marx
>hammer & sickle
>marx
>hammer & sickle
>marx
>hammer & sickle
>marx

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377167]

>>6377161

>left communists

Why should anyone care about Duave?

[Anonymous No.6377180]

With the advancement of automation in the workforce, this is where we're headed.

[Anonymous No.6377196]

>>6377167
Why should anyone care about any of anyones esoteric marxologists?

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377200]

>>6377196

Because they have more merit than leftcoms

[Anonymous No.6377216]

>>6377200
doubtful
cmon bro you're living in the dark age of marxism dudes like kliman and othe MHI hacks get more popularity than decent writers

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377222]

>>6377216

Are you trying to get my goose?

[Anonymous No.6377225]

>>6377222
probably not someone with foucault as their trip ain't gonna have any sympathy for MHI

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377229]

>>6377225

I suppose so?

[Anonymous No.6377231]

>>6377222
i'll fuck you in the ass

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377234]

>>6377231
girl,sexy *sweats*

[Anonymous No.6377242]

>>6377229
Marxist-Humanist Initiative. You know, the humanism bit.
i guess read left coms cuz they're the last sperglords left on the left and that's kinda better than everything else left on the left

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377248]

>>6377242

>that's kinda better than everything else left on the left

Not really?

[Anonymous No.6377271]

>>6377242
>Marxist-Humanist Initiative
Raya's project? Or the failed Nagy Institute?

>Foucault!!8WvUZxvX53M has no idea of the history of humanism in Marxism other than the PCF/Existentialist issues.

Humanism was a worker centred reformist project coming out of the Hungarian revolution which gave legitimacy to QR, Socialisme ou Barbarie, Johnson-Forrest etc.

It called broadly across these currents for a return to praxis centred in the proletarian subject; and, a thorough going micro study of praxes. Compare and contrast to the Wallerstein project of going to the other end of the contradiction in terms of totalisation.

Humanism in this sense implies following closely the norms of praxes, not universal and transcendent norms.

[Anonymous No.6377282]

>>6377248
kinda really really all it takes to depoliticize oneself is to browse the verso new releases
but you're a mao guy whatever ya'll barely write anything
sry the only good maoism died with the xinshichao

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377287]

>>6377282

>mao guy

I'm a Syndicalist, not a Maoist.

[Anonymous No.6377291]

>>6370867
"no u"

- barack obama, president of the united states

[Anonymous No.6377293]

>>6377282
>Verso
There's lower than verso. Lawrence & Wishart for example.

[Anonymous No.6377329]

>>6377293
Raya's. Or at least, the project of her ideological progeny.
>>6377287

>syndicalist praising mao
ugh

>>6377293
yeah but you expect L&W to be stuffy
verso throws loft parties with their zizek monies

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377338]

>>6377329

I'm not even praising Mao.

[Anonymous No.6377346]

>>6377338
>For the record Mao is better than Stalin. And neither of them did terribly. Stalin progressed shit to rival the Western industries, Mao basically turned China from land lord ruled bullshit to something capable of strong capabilities.
>mao is better than stalin
I hope you don't say this sort of thing at your seasol meetings

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377355]

>>6377346

It reads exactly like I meant it to read. If you want to run in a sense of economy and state, you have to sacrifice lives, it's inevitable. Any straightforward approach would end in such a result to leap forward, and it's what they did, and considering, they did a good job leaping forward. Exactly how it was designed.

This happens to be one of the reasons why I'm not an MLM.

[Anonymous No.6377445]

>>6377355
they didn't even do a good job of leaping forward
chinese industry was shit at the relative level until deng sry bro

[Foucault !!8WvUZxvX53M No.6377481]

>>6377445

Still better than what the Land Lords had to offer.

[Anonymous No.6377598]

>>6371232
>English version
Qué asco.

[Anonymous No.6377717]

>>6370880
Bruh mao didnt want to kill people, he just fucked up and couldnt direct shit to end starvation, but possibly made it worse. If you actually believe you need death for productivity u r stupid.
im not defending mao im just saying he didnt go into the great leap forward thinking, "im going to have to starve the population so we can grow".

[Anonymous No.6379087]

>Marxism
>Existing after the concept of marginal utility
>existing now that the foundation of Marxism, labor theory has been fully disproved.

Marxism is a religion at this point.