[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 102 KB, 1200x1796, the-communist-manifesto-56.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677493 No.16677493[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

LOL

yeah bro just let us take over your society because it will eventually lead to emancipating the workers, we are totally selfless---- we are becoming tyrannical dictators to HELP YOU

what are you an actual downs syndrome patient? how do people believe in this

>> No.16677497

>>16677493
Fpbp

>> No.16677531

False flag. OP is a commie acting dumb trying to get people to prove him wrong

>> No.16677553

>>16677531
no I want you to tell me how acting like a servile toerag to Lenin or Mao means you're emancipated, please explain

please explain in detail how 'workers owning the means of production' functions

>> No.16677595

>>16677553
If only there were books written on this

>> No.16677602

>>16677553
You do understand a dictatorship of the proletariat means a dictatorship of the proletariat AS A CLASS, not the dictatorship of an individual or group them right?

>> No.16677614

>>16677602
Yeah how does that work exactly, does every prole vote on every single decision made by every factory, every interaction between industries, every decision made on a governmental level? Who decides who gets to work where on a given day, does everyone vote on where every person works?

>> No.16677627

>>16677614
Not on every decision, but all the proletariat should be involved in politics and the running of their work place. But the day to day should be ran by elected, re-callable representatives.

>> No.16677628

OP is retarded but the biggest hurdle for marxism is the fact that the average proletariat is a completely useless moron

>> No.16677645

>>16677627
>the day to day should be ran by elected, re-callable representatives.
OH NO NO NO NO
IS THAT A STATE BROS?
I THOUGHT THIS WAS STATELESS
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>>16677628
that's exactly right how is your Communist utopia going to function with complete fucking retards like me, are you going to kill us? That's a lot of people you're planning to kill

>> No.16677652

>>16677645
No?

>> No.16677683

>>16677645
>that's exactly right how is your Communist utopia going to function with complete fucking retards like me, are you going to kill us? That's a lot of people you're planning to kill
Reeducation work camps may be necessary like the kind they had in anarchist Catalonia. With good conditions of course. It'll be more moral than the prison industrial complex in the U.S.

>> No.16677684

Congrats OP you figured it out

>> No.16677693

>>16677683
do the workers vote on whether there will be such camps and who goes in them?

>> No.16677700

>>16677693
Are you talking about in Communism, or in socialism? Socialism is not a stateless society, communism is.

>> No.16677715

>>16677493
You don't understand the dictatorship of the proletariat.
>That force, however, plays yet another role in history, a revolutionary role; that, in the words of Marx, it is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one, that it is the instrument with the aid of which social movement forces its way through and shatters the dead, fossilised political forms
—Friedrich Engels, Anti-Duhring, 1877

>A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois?
—Friedrich Engels, On Authority, 1872

>[The workers] must work to ensure that the immediate revolutionary excitement is not suddenly suppressed after the victory. On the contrary, it must be sustained as long as possible. Far from opposing the so-called excesses – instances of popular vengeance against hated individuals or against public buildings with which hateful memories are associated – the workers’ party must not only tolerate these actions but must even give them direction.
—Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League", 1850

>[...] Dictatorship does not necessarily mean the abolition of democracy for the class that exercises the dictatorship over other classes; but it does mean the abolition of democracy (or very material restriction, which is also a form of abolition) for the class over which, or against which, the dictatorship is exercised.
—Vladimir Lenin

Soviet democracy granted voting rights to the majority of the populace who elected the local soviets, who elected the regional soviets and so on until electing the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union. Capitalists were disenfranchised in the Russian soviet model. However, according to Lenin in a developed country it would be possible to dispense with the disenfranchisement of capitalists within the democratic proletarian dictatorship as the proletariat would be guaranteed of an overwhelming majority.

>> No.16677720

>>16677693
Of course. All of society should have a say in who is taken out of it.

>> No.16677729

>>16677700
but Socialism(the part where the tyrannical dictatorship decides everything) definitely leads to Communism(the part where the workers decide everything) right? That's how it works?

LMAO you imbecile you fucking buffoon, if you aren't just gunning for a spot in the Socialist upper class I cannot even believe how dumb and naive you are

>> No.16677733

>>16677720
What if they vote to exterminate Jews?
>>16677715
Fuck off, explain concisely how it works, how they vote on everything

>> No.16677754

>>16677733
Why would they hate the Jews in a society where they could gain no power via capital accumulation?

>> No.16677767

>>16677729
Socialism is the dictatorship of the proletariat. This is done through the state, as the Communist Party must be majority-worker, and I would go as far as to say anything under at least 65% proletarian is not enough. So yes, in socialism, the workers do decide policy and the capitalist class are suppressed.

>> No.16677780
File: 10 KB, 251x242, dddd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677780

>>16677767
>dictatorship of the proletariat.
>This is done through the state,

>> No.16677786

It just shifts licking capitalist boots to licking academic boots or just self imploding/corruption since proles can barely lead themselves

>> No.16677791

>>16677780
Well yeah, otherwise it wouldn't be a dictatorship of the proletariat. There will be no "dictatorship of the proletariat" in communism because there won't be any proletariat, because communism is a classless society.

>> No.16677795

>>16677791
sounds like a dictatorship of the state to me

>> No.16677805

>>16677786
A child must be held by the hand to walk at first but eventually with patience he will learn.

>> No.16677813

>>16677805
Based, that's why I think we should have Kings to help the peasants learn how to walk

>> No.16677817

>>16677795
The state isn't an independent entity. It exists to defend the interests of the class that is in power. In socialism, that is the proletariat.

>> No.16677818
File: 20 KB, 324x499, 410LLPptI3L._SX322_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677818

>>16677780
>>16677795
The state is a tool used by the workers to build towards a socialist society and continue to fight against the bourgeoisie. If you get rid of the state too soon your revolution is doomed to failure, the national and international bourgeoisie will simply slit your throat. There's a reason there hasn't been an anarchist revolution that lasted more than a few months.

>> No.16677825
File: 42 KB, 720x720, 92363191_2287562531346381_7618085262165278720_o.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677825

>>16677733
>explain concisely how it works, how they vote on everything
See now you get to the juicy part, Marx wrote very little about this, there are multiple different Marxists that give their own spin to this. The most historically successful school of marxist thought was Marxism-Leninism, I recommend you pick up the State and Revolution by Lenin.

>> No.16677836

>>16677825
>The most historically successful school of marxist thought was Marxism-Leninism, I recommend you pick up the State and Revolution by Lenin.
>the most successful version of socialism no longer exists
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>> No.16677843

>>16677817
>>16677818
How do the proles make the state do what they want? Do they vote on it lmao
>>16677825
>Lenin
Based so it's just some asshole doing whatever he wants and claiming it's 'for the workers'

>> No.16677852

>>16677493
>"take over your society"

the majority of society is made up of workers aka the proletariat. So yeah, the majority should rule.

>> No.16677860

>>16677852
and how do they rule exactly. I'm sure you couldn't have meant that a small group of people will rule who will decide what is best for the workers. It would be silly if that's what you meant

>> No.16677864
File: 1001 KB, 1080x754, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677864

>>16677836
China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam are all marxist-leninist states.

>>16677843
>Based so it's just some asshole doing whatever he wants and claiming it's 'for the workers'
No
Marxism–Leninism supports the creation of a one-party state led by a communist party as a means to develop socialism and then communism. The political structure of the Marxist–Leninist state involves the rule of a communist vanguard party over a revolutionary socialist state that represents the will and rule of the proletariat. Through the policy of democratic centralism, the communist party is the supreme political institution of the Marxist–Leninist state.

In Marxism–Leninism, elections are held for all positions within the legislative structure, municipal councils, national legislatures and presidencies. In most Marxist–Leninist states, this has taken the form of directly electing representatives to fill positions, although in some states such as People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia this system also included indirect elections such as deputies being elected by deputies as the next lower level of government. Marxism–Leninism asserts that society is united upon common interests represented through the communist party and other institutions of the Marxist–Leninist state.

>> No.16677865

>>16677493
These shitposts would be a lot more interesting if the posters had read any political theory whatsoever. I feel kinda bad for the people giving thought out replies to this, although it is nice to see.

>> No.16677871

>>16677843
They vote on it and participate in it, in normal functioning.

>> No.16677875

>>16677852
Like a democracy, yeah?
>>16677825
Seems like a bug eyed bougie to me telling the proles what to do.

>> No.16677891

>>16677864
>a one-party state led by a communist party
right an asshole doing what he wants and calling it for the workers
>>16677865
>thought out replies
You mean the 20 posts not explaining the very simple question of how the workers vote on what the state does?

>> No.16677904

>>16677864
>China, Laos, Vietnam
All market economies
>Cuba
Tiny and irrelevant island with no consumer goods. Their achievement consists of them not starving as much as all the other failed commie states.

>> No.16677908

>>16677891
Democratic centralism is a practice in which political decisions reached by voting processes are binding upon all members of the political party. Although mainly associated with Leninism, wherein the party's political vanguard composed of professional revolutionaries practised democratic centralism to elect leaders and officers as well as to determine policy through free discussion, then decisively realised through united action, democratic centralism has also been practised by social democratic parties.
The leader of the party is just a mouthpiece of the party.

>> No.16677923

>>16677891
The reason Communists support a one party state is because it represents one class.

>> No.16677925

>>16677908
>wherein the party's political vanguard composed of professional revolutionaries practised democratic centralism
Ok I see a small group of assholes decides what to do instead of one

>> No.16677930

>>16677891
The general secretary could not do whatever he pleased, for instance Stalin attempted to resign about 4 times and was refused.
>>16677904
There's a difference between having a socialist economy and having a communist government who is attempting to build towards socialism. It's also impossible to have a socialist society without a degree of economic and industrial development, so countries like China adopt capitalist practices to lift the country to a stage where socialism is possible.

>> No.16677935

>>16677923
very ambiguous sentence, you surely didn't mean to imply that if there is only one party there is only one class in society?

>> No.16677941

>>16677930
Kings also couldn't do whatever they pleased, what is your point

>> No.16677946

>>16677935
No, there are still capitalists and there is still class conflict in a socialist society. There is one party because it represents the workers, hence why its a dictatorship of the proletariat.

>> No.16677950
File: 533 KB, 648x960, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16677950

>>16677904
>All market economies
The Chinese government's understanding of private ownership is rooted in classical Marxism. Since China adopted socialism when it was a semi-feudal and semi-colonial country, it is in the primary stage of socialism, because of this, certain policies and system characteristics—such as commodity production for the market, the existence of a private sector and the reliance of the profit motive in enterprise management—were changed. These changes were allowed as long as they improve productivity and modernize the means of production and thus further develop socialism.

The Chinese Communist Party still considers private ownership to be non-socialist. However, according to party theorists the existence and growth of private ownership does not necessarily undermine socialism and promote capitalism in China.It is argued that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels never proposed the immediate abolishment of private ownership. According to Engel's book Principles of Communism, the proletariat can only abolish private ownership when the necessary conditions have been met. In the phase before the abolishment of private ownership, Engels proposed progressive taxation, high inheritance taxes and compulsory bond purchases to restrict private property while using the competitive powers of state-owned enterprises to expand the public sector.Marx and Engels proposed similar measures in The Communist Manifesto in regards to advanced countries, but since China was economically undeveloped party theorists called for flexibility regarding the party's handling of private property. According to party theorist Liu Shuiyuan, the New Economic Policy program initiated by Soviet authorities in the aftermath of the war communism program is a good example of flexibility by socialist authorities.

Party theorist Li Xuai said that private ownership inevitably involves capitalist exploitation. However, Li regards private property and exploitation as necessary in the primary stage of socialism, claiming that capitalism in its primary stage uses remnants of the old society to build itself. Sun Liancheng and Lin Huiyong said that Marx and Engels—in their interpretation of The Communist Manifesto—criticized private ownership when it was owned solely by the bourgeoisie, but not individual ownership in which everyone owns the means of production and hence cannot be exploited by others. Individual ownership is considered consistent with socialism since Marx wrote that post-capitalist society would entail the rebuilding of "associated social individual ownership".

>> No.16677957

>>16677946
>it represents the workers, h
How does that work again? Do they just say 'i represent the workers' or do the workers somehow actually determine the decisions the state makes?

>> No.16677958

>>16677930
>the most successful socialist countries haven't even achieved socialism yet
Doesn't seem very successful at being socialist to me lad lmao. It sounds like the only way socialist countries can be successful is to become capitalist counties and proooomise that they'll eveeentually become socialist.
As if the only problem with the USSR was that it started off too poor.

>> No.16677967

>>16677958
It's inevitable for uhhhh reasons. Just trust us bro

>> No.16677969

>>16677957
the proletariat becomes a voting-machine wherein their labor is simply spending eight hours a day participating in their new collective dictatorship by checking off little boxes next to questions they hardly understand

>> No.16677970

>>16677950
>most of China's economy is capitalist
>the workers vote on nothing the Party does
>this will totally lead to a stateless classless society
It is actually hilarious how dumb you people are, I mean:

>However, Li regards private property and exploitation as necessary in the primary stage of socialism
Imagine that lmao

>> No.16677991

>>16677925
The chinese communist party has 91,914,000 members

>> No.16677994

>>16677991
Oh do those 91 million people all vote on what the CCP does

>> No.16677999

>>16677991
So 1 in 14 people are a member. I also imagine being a member and following along party lines in your opinions is good for your social credit score.

>> No.16678006

>>16677957
The party is made up of workers. A Communist Party that has not gone full revisionist should be majority proletarian.

>> No.16678012

>>16678006
And the proles won't divide into their own hierarchies and special interest groups?

>> No.16678020

>>16678006
>majority proletarian
Yeah but the majority of the proles won't be in it, or making relevant decisions will they?

>> No.16678034

>>16677958
The soviets turned an agrarian, technologically backwards country into a world superpower capable of space travel. Literally their biggest problem was Gorbachev existing and being allowed to have government positions.

>> No.16678036

>>16678020
>>16678012
>>16677999
>>16677994
>>16677967
>>16677941
lmao at all this autist energy. read a book dumbass.

>> No.16678043

>>16678036
lol at you being incapable of even trying to make an argument
Read a book yourself

>> No.16678044

>>16677493
but the CORPORATIONS maaaaaan.....

>> No.16678047

>>16678012
The problem with just asking me questions is that in 20 minutes we've gone from basic things to Maoism, while skipping almost all of Marx, Lenin and Stalin. I'll answer your questions but bear in mind we're entering a contentious and complicated area here.

In Maoism, yes, there is contradictions and struggles among sections of the proletariat, and between the proletariat and peasantry if there is one in that nation.

>>16678020
The proletariat elect people who are re-callable to represent them in the party.

>> No.16678048

>>16678034
Russia was already a great power in the 19th century retard, they industrialized just like everyone else during the 20th

>> No.16678061

>>16678047
How does this election process work and do the proles themselves vote on how the election process works or does someone else decide that?

>> No.16678063

>>16677994
The fucking president of the country lived in a cave in his teens after his dad got imprisoned and still managed to go to college and move up through the party due to his ability/work ethic/intellect/etc. If that doesn't show that anyone can succeed via merit, or that their party doesn't adequately represent the people, I don't know what does.

>> No.16678065

>>16677645
where do these representatives come from? Where does the capital to start up a factory come from? Who organizes these elections?

>> No.16678066

>>16678048
Russia was an agrarian shithole

>> No.16678075

>>16678061
It depends on the kind of state.

>> No.16678076

>>16678063
You sound like Ayn Rand praising Warren Buffet lmao, 'oh look this peasant rose to become a member of the elite'. Again, do all those proles vote on what matters or not?
>>16678066
Yeah and it fought off France at the peak of its power, weird isn't that. Maybe it wasn't such a shithole, idk...maybe youve been brainwashed by propaganda?

>> No.16678078

>>16677864
not even china calls itself communist anymore

>> No.16678082

>>16678075
Describe a single way it works in any socialist state, how do the people vote in a way that means they are actually deciding what happens

>> No.16678084
File: 183 KB, 771x804, aaf (1).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16678084

>>16678036
>Y-you think you can criticize socialism without reading the books I wasted my life studying?!

>> No.16678095

>>16678048
>>16678076
It never had a second industrial revolution, it was very behind the other western powers at the time. They also used outdated farming practices. The Soviets focused a lot of their efforts into industrializing the country up to 20th century standards.

>> No.16678108

>>16678078
Because it isn't communist, it practices 'socialism with chinese characteristics'. The USSR didn't call themselves communist either, they were trying to move towards communism.

>> No.16678111

>>16678082
well, see you get a red envelope and then you find the highest ranking corrupt official you know and then you bribe him hongbao and hope you aren't caught by a higher ranking official, the system works.

>> No.16678112

>>16678082
In China under Mao, people in areas or within their workplaces voted for a person to represent them in the CPC. But Maoist China also practiced something called "mass line", which is where the people's thoughts and opinions are gathered, and synthesized through marxism into a plan. This plan is then taken to the masses, and if they reject it, the process is repeated, if they approve, its implemented. There is also arguably the most democratic movement called Cultural Revolution, but I won't go into that.

>> No.16678117

>>16678108
just goes to show tankies are dumb lol

>> No.16678125

>>16678112
oh man we've got a live one

friendly reminder that Mao is the biggest mass murder of the modern world

>> No.16678132

>>16678125
Good.

>> No.16678134

>>16678112
>voted for a person to represent them in the CPC.
like congress?
>where the people's thoughts and opinions are gathered, and synthesized through marxism into a plan
What the fuck is this lol, who is 'synthesizing' their thoughts? Who decides what to do?

I am going to abandon my thread soon because, once again nobody can explain how voting works in commie world and how the proles have any real say in anything

>> No.16678136

Market socialism is the only kind of socialism that can work.
Change my mind tankies.

>> No.16678137

>>16678117
You can't turn communist in an instant, that's utopian thinking.

>> No.16678138

>>16678132
being killed by your government isn't very democratic

>> No.16678143

>>16678137
what do you think communism is at all lmao.

>> No.16678151

>>16678137
refer to the OP>>16677493
>we are becoming tyrannical dictators to HELP YOU

cannot believe you people fall for this. you're not even dumb, what is wrong with you

>> No.16678156

>>16678134
>like congress?
It was a congress yes.

>who is 'synthesizing' their thoughts?
Proletarians trained in Marxism.

>once again nobody can explain how voting works in commie world and how the proles have any real say in anything
I've literally just explained it to you. The dumb thing is as well, you're not considering that Marxists don't all think the same thing, or live in the same social conditions. Marxism is built through practice, its not of commandments given to us by Marx we must dogmatically follow.

>>16678138
It is if the people mandated it.

>> No.16678174

>>16678156
>Proletarians trained in Marxism.
Yeah which ones? Do all the proles vote on who gets to be these people, or how the process of 'synthesizing according to marxism' works?

>> No.16678192
File: 2.27 MB, 1400x2070, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16678192

>>16678143
Read Socialism Utopian and Scientific by Engels.
Scientific socialism refers to a method for understanding and predicting social, economic and material phenomena by examining their historical trends through the use of the scientific method in order to derive probable outcomes and probable future developments. It is in contrast to what later socialists referred to as Utopian socialism—a method based on establishing seemingly rational propositions for organizing society and convincing others of their rationality and/or desirability. It also contrasts with classical liberal notions of natural law, which are grounded in metaphysical notions of morality rather than a dynamic materialist or physicalist conception of the world.

Scientific socialists view social and political developments as being largely determined by economic conditions as opposed to ideas in contrast to Utopian socialists and classical liberals and thus believe that social relations and notions of morality are context-based relative to their specific stage of economic development. Therefore, as economic systems both socialism and capitalism are not social constructs that can be established at any time based on the subjective will and desires of the population, but instead are products of social evolution. An example of this was the advent of agriculture which enabled human communities to produce a surplus—this change in material and economic development led to a change in social relations and rendered the old form of social organization based on subsistence-living obsolete and a hindrance to further material progress. Changing economic conditions necessitated a change in social organization.

>>16678151
What's tyrannical, bruh? You have a complete caricature in your head.
https://youtu.be/nl59t---30g

>> No.16678212

>>16678156
>It is if the people mandated it.
nah, not modern democracy

>> No.16678222

>>16678192
>Scientific socialists view social and political developments as being largely determined by economic conditions
Which is retarded since economic conditions are often determined by political developments

>> No.16678229

OP is right but not in the way he thinks. Power currupts and so anyone who says they are for the people are actually just for themselves

>> No.16678233

>>16678174
I know where you're going with this. Let me just tell you, if people get elected who are clearly pro-capitalist, anti-worker and revisionist, and refuse to change after multiple times of being criticized, and then refuse to give up office, the proletariat are fully within their right to forcibly remove them, with arms if its necessary.

>> No.16678238

>>16678192
Oh you mean the book that was funded off the profit of a capitalistic factory? sure

>Scientific socialists view social and political developments as being largely determined by economic conditions as opposed to ideas
Literally retarded
It's not the 1800s anymore

>> No.16678240

>>16678233
>clearly pro-capitalist, anti-worker and revisionist,
Clearly according to who? how does the press work in a communist society? How does information circulate?

>> No.16678241

>>16678192
>Scientific socialists

Yikes.

>> No.16678254

>>16677754
The Jews will find a way

>> No.16678258

>>16678240
According to the workers. This is what the Cultural Revolution was. Of course, there's the two-line struggle.

>> No.16678259

>>16678192
Why should we care about the organizational structure of a country that purposefully starved the people it was supposed to serve in the Holodomor?
Also
>scientific socialism
>scientifically studying history
Not a thing. You can't do randomized controlled experiments on history. History is a humanity with its own methods distinct from that of the scientific method. Marx and Lenin can't into science.

>> No.16678272
File: 38 KB, 650x705, 1564209610030.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16678272

>>16678222
>>16678238
>>16678241
>>16678259
>what are the material conditions

>> No.16678282

>>16677493
>manifesto
>not kapital

>> No.16678292

>>16678272
Wow dude! So you're telling me... WOW, WAIT, SHIT, LET ME THINK ABOUT THIS
So...
History is influenced by the material resources people have available to them?!
Damn. That must mean you can now do randomized controlled experiments on history.

>> No.16678301

>>16678282
im not shitting on Marx' description of capitalism, I am shitting on the idea of communism

>> No.16678314
File: 108 KB, 502x526, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16678314

>>16678292
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Outlook_on_Development

>> No.16678324

>>16678292
Let me ask you, have you ever actually seen a debate between two Marxists? Do you actually understand how complicated Marxism is?

http://www.bannedthought.net/International/RIM/AWTW/1996-22/on_the_maoist_conception_22_eng.htm
Read that and tell me how much of that you get. Because it seems like you think Marxism is just "Marx said rich people bad and then Lenin agreed and then Lenin and then Lenin and Stalin did naughty thing".

>> No.16678365

>>16678314
>key word search "experiment"
>0 results
It's not science
>>16678324
It's actually expected that a non-scientific discipline would have very little area of agreement. Physicists can all agree that Newtonian mechanics applies on the every day scale but will argue about things on the cutting edge of research. The fact that you all can't agree is actually a point against you.

>> No.16678385

>>16678365
>Physicists can all agree that Newtonian mechanics applies on the every day scale but will argue about things on the cutting edge of research
Much like Marxists. The main ongoing struggle within Marxism today is on the nature of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. There are Trotskyists, Leftcoms ect hanging around, but no-one (who is actually doing anything anyway) pays any attention to them.

>> No.16678431

>>16678385
>Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
all garbage, why devote your life to following it?

>> No.16678460

>>16678431
How is it "all garbage"? I doubt you even know what MLM is.

>> No.16678486

>>16678385
>There are Trotskyists, Leftcoms ect hanging around, but no-one (who is actually doing anything anyway) pays any attention to them.
>there's perfect consensus when you ignore the shit ton of people who disagree with me
I'm starting to see that MLs view science much like they view democracy: It's technically democracy even if you only allow one party to hold power in practice.

>> No.16678490
File: 944 KB, 1454x1939, Fidel_Castro_in_Washington.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16678490

Fidel Castro was the CHADEST dictator
>Today we might remember Fidel Castro as an old man, but he was one of the most impressive people in the world back then. He forcefully deposed a brutal dictator with a band of rag-tag rebels. He turned Cuba into the Western world’s first Marxist country. He beat the Americans in an armed invasion by personally commanding the battle in a tank. He survived CIA coups and assassination attempts. He outlived two Kennedy brothers behind those attempts. He was smart, charming, and funny. He was 6'3, strong, and an athlete who sported the frame of an American football player. He looked like he could beat up any other word leader. He was full of bravado, confidence, and masculinity and smoked cigars like a baller.
So, he survived many assassination attempts and outlived his fucking killers. Fucked a woman who was sent to kill him. Fucked two different women every day. Defeated the US. How can other dictators even compare with CHADstro?

>> No.16678502

>>16678490
do you think of him as your daddy

>> No.16678611

>>16677493
Go make a thread on /leftypol/ and talk with marxists directly if you value good discussion.

>> No.16678616

>>16678048
It was also the fastest growing economy in the world at the start of WW1

>> No.16678665

>>16678611
There are plenty of Marxists here, and leftypol just bans you for nothing. I confess that I made this thread solely to shitfling though, you are right. It is a bad impulse and the mods should ban me for a few days, I have been rampantly shitposting in general lately without contributing anything of value

>> No.16678705

>>16678665
I don't think /leftypol/ bans you if your honest in your OP and say you aren't a marxist and you just read the communist manifesto and don't understand how it can be considered democratic when there is a dictatorship of the proletariat. The mods are pretty chill as long as you are chill.

>> No.16678805

>>16678460
a Ponzi scheme, hun.

>> No.16678823

>>16678385
>Newtonian mechanics
Outdated, quantum mechanics ended the newtonian mechanics paradigm.

>> No.16679477

Wait are there unironic communists on /lit/? lmao

>> No.16679485

>>16679477
if there are unironic nazis, it makes sense there are unironic commies, too.

>> No.16679549

>>16679485
Eh, I can see how certain people would benefit from nazism but I can't see the same for communism.

>> No.16679558

>>16677493
I don't comment on communist manifesto threads.

>> No.16679672

>>16677493
>we are becoming tyrannical dictators to HELP YOU
Nice in a zombie Capitalism era where people are forced to stay in their house, again. At least dicatorship of the proletariat surely wouldn't do something so stupid and deceitful, in order to force the sheeple to keep their head down.

>> No.16679705

>>16679549
Retards benefit from communism, bringing everyone else down to their level

>> No.16679761

>>16677767
what makes marxists believe even for a minute that being a worker means you have good intentions and is morally good?

>> No.16679776

>>16677864
>China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam are all marxist-leninist states
two of those adopted free market capitalism
cuba is a complete shithole and has now realized capitalism is good

>> No.16679799

>>16679761
because they believe workers are idiots

>> No.16679812

>>16677930
>so countries like China adopt capitalist practices to lift the country
oh so captalism enriches countries
why not adopt anarcho capitalism and become the richest land on the universe?

>> No.16679823

>>16679776
wrong

>> No.16679842

>>16679761
I doesn't inherently. Lots of workers are bad people. However, because of their role in production and because of their class conflict with the capitalists, the proletariat as a mass are the basis for revolution and socialism.

>> No.16680191

>>16678095
>It never had a second industrial revolution
Maybe that's why they were successful until
>The Soviets focused a lot of their efforts into industrializing the country up to 20th century standards.
See, that's how they themselves paved the way to capitalist dictatorship. Which wasn't possible without industrialization.
Also
>They also used outdated farming practices
Which worked very well for centuries. Murdering all the farmers and taking their property didn't help either.

>> No.16680207
File: 80 KB, 800x600, external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16680207

>>16677493
the bible for broke ass niggas

>> No.16680312

Reminder to all in this thread that Capitalism died in 2008. It's zombie Capitalism since.

>> No.16680358

>>16677754
>he doesn't know

>> No.16680380

>16678192
>defending the Chinese system
lq bait

>> No.16680387

>>16680312
>Capitalism died in 2008
>keynesianism killed capitalism
Anarchocapitalism is growing, people are hearing on the streets about austrian economics
Youre in for a big surprise in the next decades

>> No.16680416

>>16680312
It wasn't alive in 2008, too regulated. It has never been tried except maybe in the industrial age and even then it's a stretch