He was right bros...

[Anonymous No.19481475]

about everything... I never thought I'd wind up a communist

[Anonymous No.19481497]

>>19481475
Based Marx poster

[Anonymous No.19481512]

what would communism even be like in a postindustrial country? what means of production are there to be seized? in the united states there’s only 20 million employed in the production of actual things plus another 2 million in agriculture

[Anonymous No.19481541]

>>19481475
Oh yeah? Then explain this

[Anonymous No.19481545]

>>19481475
>He was right bros...
>about everything...
he was wrong about the revolution happening in Germany

[Anonymous No.19481546]

>>19481541
Imagine people quoting you and that's the quote. Sad.

[Anonymous No.19481548]

>>19481475
Even if communism is achieved, how would you sustain it? What if we get communism but then a year later capitalism comes back?

[Anonymous No.19481561]

anyone with an iq over 70 can see he is right. but those in power can only maintain their wealth and power if they convince everyone he was wrong

[Anonymous No.19481564]

>>19481548
>but then a year later capitalism comes back?
I want you to explain what you think capitalism is right now

[Anonymous No.19481574]

>>19481546
The two fundamental drivers of human history according to marxists are diamat and class warfare. These can't seem to account for animal rights or really much desu.

[Anonymous No.19481577]

>>19481564
Everyone likes to define it differently but my understanding of capitalism is that it's private ownership of capital achieved via private property laws.

[Anonymous No.19481621]

>>19481512
>what would communism even be like in a postindustrial country?
the various apparatuses of the service economy?

[Anonymous No.19481625]

>>19481546
Said the Marxist shill

[Anonymous No.19481665]

>>19481625
yes, this is a marx thread brother

[Anonymous No.19481671]

>>19481665
Well when are we getting a working marxist genetics or linguistics or anything?

[Anonymous No.19481708]

>>19481665
Marx brothers thread?

[Anonymous No.19481729]

>>19481475
Class conflicts are real, Marxist state is biologically impossible however. Capitalism attests to the social hierarchy

[Anonymous No.19481749]

>>19481729
Yucky liberal. Out. Yucky.

[Anonymous No.19481825]

>>19481729
As long as a large enough middle class exists class conflict doesn't mean anything.

[Anonymous No.19481833]

>>19481729
>Class conflicts are real
Nonsense, think of a business enterprise like of a sport team; the interest of players and a coach coincides even if you may think that the guy is oppressing them, and may even fire them.
In fact, there is more conflict (competition) between players (workers) themselves than between a coach and a player.

[Anonymous No.19482187]

>>19481512
Read Patnaik. Global financial capital has outgrown the nation-state which makes the idea of reviving growth with state spending unpalatable in the metropolitan core. You would need an international workers movement that can synchronize a whole negation of neoliberal capitalism, or absent that, movements aimed at seizing state power and then "delinking" from neoliberal globalization with a variety of measures:

https://monthlyreview.org/2016/01/01/capitalism-and-its-current-crisis/
https://monthlyreview.org/2019/07/01/neoliberal-capitalism-at-a-dead-end/

Anyhow, look who just won the Honduran elections. Hillary Clinton helped orchestrate a coup d'etat against her husband 12 years ago.

https://youtu.be/0pakO9iXA5c

[Anonymous No.19482203]

>>19481833
>Nonsense, think of a business enterprise like of a sport team
Like Manchester City FC. With sports run now on a strictly capitalist basis, there's no room for the smaller clubs anymore which have been declaring bankruptcy one after another. There's a kind of myth of competitiveness but it's really now between a few clubs owned by oligarchs with enormous resources to spend to keep it that way.

[Anonymous No.19482228]

>>19482203
>declaring bankruptcy one after another
Bigger clubs attract better players by paying them more. Sportsmen (lol) can earn millions because of that.

[Anonymous No.19482450]

>>19481512
>what would communism even be like in a postindustrial country?
there wouldn't be "postindustrial countries" in a communist society as it would strive to spread production equally around the globe as much as possible.
>what means of production are there to be seized?
farms, quarries, factories, offices, hospitals, pizza ovens, and so on. have you ever been outside?
>>19481548
how would it come back? there needs to be a reason and it needs to be so strong that it leads to an overthrow of the entire social order. what's the reason?

[Anonymous No.19482501]

>>19481475
Explain why even socialist hasn't happened yet, let alone communism.

I actually like his look on the economy and wage creation, but much of that you can read in Adam Smith, since Marx agreed that Capital creates way more wealth that other economic structures, it just doesn't distribute it well. Basically commies need to wait out the moment when they think the peak of wealth is reached and then start operating.

Marx really though that by early 20th century, the whole wealth of resources, tech ect. would reach its peak. Well it didn't

[Anonymous No.19482524]

>>19482450
>how would it come back? there needs to be a reason and it needs to be so strong that it leads to an overthrow of the entire social order. what's the reason?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_roader

[Anonymous No.19482542]

There will be people in this thread who will say slavs have nostalgia for communism.

First of all that nostalgia is basically the same one boomers in the US have for their young party years, just like how some spanish boomers would have nostalgia for France time or the people who go "Benito made the trains run on time". It's cultural and individual life nostalgia, not nostalgia for the economic system. Maybe the really old almost 100 y/o would have nostalgia for the system because they were born in slav farmer mudhut and had their kids in an apartment, but that isn't enough, human progress can't stop just at going from agrarian to industrialists.

Anyone who knows English and is good with computers millenial in a slav big city can access the middle-class via an office job or an IT job(high middle-class) and live the consumerist lifestyle like in their favorite TV shows on a lesser scale than their USA counterparts. As for the poor in slav countires, they are literally fascist football hooligans or old people who are dying out. People in the province can self-sustain themselfs so they aren't that affected, they even like the fact that no commie is gonna take their little farmland.

[Anonymous No.19482605]

>>19481561
Only people with an IQ lower than 70 and higher than 150 can see that he was right. You're just a midwit and nonmarxist.

[Anonymous No.19482638]

>>19481475
Oh hey a retard

[Anonymous No.19482650]

>humans are good faith actors

Lol, the more prevalent marxism becomes the greater the pay off is to engage in capitalistic activity under their nose

[Anonymous No.19482670]

>>19482501
communism is the proletarian movement, it's happening all the time.
>>19482524
>to pull the Revolution in a capitalist direction
so this concept doesn't even apply to a communist society but to the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. and under a proletarian dictatorship capitalism can't "come back" because it has never disappeared in the firs place
>>19482650
who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.19482738]

>>19481561
>anyone with an iq over 70 can see he is right.
lol You 80 iq commies from leftypol/reddit and your delusions. You simpletons can't even understand the need for incentives in an economic system.

[Anonymous No.19482742]

ITT: marxist subhumans from other sides pretend they're not morons, losers and shills.

[Anonymous No.19482761]

>>19482738
>He who does not work shall not eat

[Anonymous No.19482766]

>>19481475
check out the revolutionary left podcast

[Anonymous No.19482774]

>>19481574
>>19481625
Hey guys, I apparently wrote the post you're responding to last night but I was drunk and don't recall what I meant. Apologies.

[Anonymous No.19482776]

true

[Anonymous No.19482943]

>>19482761
Why should a worker do any more than the bare minimum? Leftypol users are the dumbest subhumans on the planet.

[Anonymous No.19483100]

>>19482943
>Why should a worker do any more than the bare minimum?
because he has needs that go beyond the bare existential minimum and the things needed to fulfill those needs don't fall from the sky
>Leftypol users are the dumbest subhumans on the planet.
that's quite true but also irrelevant

[Anonymous No.19483102]

>>19481475

Retards always do

[Anonymous No.19483103]

>>19481621

My devops guys use theirbown laptops and work from home. wgat should they seize?

[Anonymous No.19483105]

Not this thread again...

[Anonymous No.19483117]

>>19483100
But he'd get no rewards for the extra work in a communist society, which demands equity between proles. Likewise, there'd be little incentive to study and go to university. No one would be interested in spending a decade more in school for some minor social perks and extra rations.

[Anonymous No.19483156]

>>19481574
>The two fundamental drivers of human history according to marxists are diamat and class warfare
Wrong, Marx himself explicitly considers this position reductive.

[Anonymous No.19483158]

>>19482943
>Why should a worker do any more than the bare minimum?
Yes, why should he?

[Anonymous No.19483161]

>>19483117
>But he'd get no rewards for the extra work in a communist society
yes he would. in a communist society, its members are working for satisfying their needs, not for capital, so extra work = extra means of satisfying needs. this is the reward.
>which demands equity between proles
there are no proles in a communist society because there's no class. and there's no equality either except in the sense of lack of class. Lenin:
>If Mr. Tugan is quite unable to think, he is at least able to read; were he to take the well-known work of one of the founders of scientific socialism, Frederick Engels, directed against Dühring, he would find there a special section explaining the absurdity of imagining that economic equality means anything else than the abolition of classes.

>Likewise, there'd be little incentive to study
wrong again. learning things and developing as a human is enjoyable and natural to humans as long as it isn't hindered by other factors. and another incentive for it is that it lets you do more interesting and fulfilling jobs than those that are available for the relatively uneducated.

[Anonymous No.19483162]

>>19482776
He was one of, if not the best shitposter of his time.

[Anonymous No.19483176]

>>19483156
So then why accept marxism if he doesn't say material historicism is accurate.

[Anonymous No.19483366]

>>19483176
Because it is a very useful tool regardless.

[Anonymous No.19483379]

He was wrong about everything. He's completely irrelevant, a massive failure that is only thought of as something but that by equal massive failures today.

[Anonymous No.19483393]

>>19481574
marx only says that class conflict is the key to understanding history, he doesn't claim it to be the decisive factor

[Anonymous No.19483411]

>>19481475

you should build a wall to prevent yourself from escaping to capitalist countries

[Anonymous No.19483527]

>>19483411
>Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things.

Marx & Engels, The German Ideology.
I will reword it in a way that makes sense to you: a man calling himself a woman is not a woman the same way a state capitalist nation calling itself communist isn't.

[Anonymous No.19483533]

>>19483527
It is also important to note how hillariously wrong the anglo translation is. "a state of affairs". anglos are on so many levels of false consciousness and falsification it's insane.

[Anonymous No.19483747]

>>19481833
The difference between a worker and a sports player is that the worker generates profit for someone else and gets a fraction of the value that he generated, while the sports player competes for his and his team's interests. Furthermore, players are passionate about the sport that they compete in, while workers often hate theirs.

[Anonymous No.19483754]

>>19483747
*their jobs.

[Anonymous No.19484382]

>>19482450
Same way capitalism returned to formerly communists states like Russia or China. Either the system fails and people realize capitalism is better or people start hating the system and pick capitalism. Like come on, you can't tell me you wanna implement communism and not even consider how capitalism could return. You're just gonna hope it will all work out? This is hardcore reality we're talking about, not imaginary dream-like utopian politics.

[Anonymous No.19484407]

>>19483393
You can modify it in any way. So linguistics cannot be understood by class concept properly or how does this pan out for japhetic theory?

[Anonymous No.19484579]

>>19482605

I grew up poor and am now wealthy. Seethe harder, shitwit.

t. IQ 155

[Anonymous No.19484583]

>>19483103
you're in devops but can't conceive that there is such a thing as a digital apparatus? I guess that's why you have devop people doing those things for you, dumbfuck lmao

[Anonymous No.19484612]

>>19481833
think of your post like a sports team; the interests of everyone coincides with boomers not posting their drivel even if you think what you're doling is some sort of wisdom
In fact, it's not, and it has nothing to do with sports ball.

>retarded boomer gives out retarded analogies

[Anonymous No.19484635]

>>19482501
>USSR, Cuba, CPC, DPRK, Vietnam
>B-B-BUT THEY HAVE A CAPITALIST MODE OF PRODUCTION
Yes. Read Marx (and Engels).
>What we have to deal with here [in analyzing the programme of the workers' party] is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it comes.

>And the modern state, again, is only the organisation that bourgeois society takes on in order to support the general external conditions of the capitalist mode of production against the encroachments as well of the workers as of individual capitalists. The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine, the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage-workers — proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done away with. It is rather brought to a head. But, brought to a head, it topples over. State ownership of the productive forces is not the solution of the conflict, but concealed within it are the technical conditions that form the elements of that solution.
>This solution can only consist in the practical recognition of the social nature of the modern forces of production, and therefore in the harmonising of the modes of production, appropriation, and exchange with the socialised character of the means of production And this can only come about by society openly and directly taking possession of the productive forces which have outgrown all control except that of society as a whole. The social character of the means of production and of the products today reacts against the producers, periodically disrupts all production and exchange, acts only like a law of nature working blindly, forcibly, destructively. But with the taking over by society of the productive forces, the social character of the means of production and of the products will be utilised by the producers with a perfect understanding of its nature, and instead of being a source of disturbance and periodical collapse, will become the most powerful lever of production itself.

[Anonymous No.19484653]

>>19482650
China overtook America as the wealthiest country in the world right under the nose of the West. What does this mean?

[Anonymous No.19484681]

>>19483411
lmfao you dumb cunt

[Anonymous No.19484717]

>>19481475
There has never been a man so beautifully, so disastrously wrong as Marx. If you can read and comprehend even the first chapter of Wealth of Nations you will understand just how unpragmatic Marx really is.

[Anonymous No.19484743]

>>19484717
Ok lolbert, show us what you got then.

[Anonymous No.19484810]

>>19481475
Time to take the next step

[Anonymous No.19484818]

>>19484382
>Same way capitalism returned to formerly communists states like Russia or China.
capitalism has never left those states so it couldn't return to them
>Like come on, you can't tell me you wanna implement communism and not even consider how capitalism could return.
I have considered it and I concluded that there's no reason for why it would return, just like now there's no reason feudalism would return. if you can present some, then I'm all ears

[Anonymous No.19484833]

>>19484818
Do you even have any clear conception of how a communist civilization would be structured?

[Anonymous No.19484834]

>>19481475
Based. Everyone who actually reads comminust lit becomes commie

[Anonymous No.19484899]

>>19484833
do you have a clear conception of what exactly you're asking about? I don't have a blueprint of a future society, if that's what you mean, because history doesn't proceed according to blueprints of individuals. however I do know the general features of a communist society that it will necessarily be driven to have as a negation of capitalism. but this never satisfies the kind of people who ask the kind of question you're asking, so I don't see a point in even going into it.

[Anonymous No.19484991]

>>19484583

>devop people doing those things for you

Ive worked hard my entire life so I didnt end up like you

[Anonymous No.19484996]

>>19484899
Yeah I'm asking how decisions will be made, how labor will be organized and divided, etc. Questions for which the answers are clear in historical civilizations.

[Anonymous No.19485015]

Materialism is wrong, so that makes him wrong about something.

[Anonymous No.19485026]

>>19481475
no one in this thread can possibly believe the future of the economic system is that everything will be common property... do they?

[Anonymous No.19485095]

>>19484991
It's embarrassing that you thought I'd be impressed by a certificate from fucking google lmfao

[Anonymous No.19485128]

>>19481475
Marxists typically have a blood lust due to their resentment of those who have more than they do. This is true whether they are conscious of it or not. Instead of looking at their more successful neighbor and finding inspiration in their success, the Marxist curses them because their neighbor's success reveals his inadequacies. Thus the Marxist protects his ego.

[Anonymous No.19485141]

>>19485095
Is that a Bell's palsy?

[Anonymous No.19485226]

>>19484612
Oh c'mon kiddo; professional sport is a hard job. Sportsmen are about the only people doing hard physical labor in a modern, capitalist economy. Read it again.
They also often to hate it; after Martina Navratilova has ended her career and was asked if she is going to play tennis for pleasure now she answered that she doesn't intend to come close to a tennis court ever again.
Shilling gommunism on 4chan is certainly an easier occupation.

[Anonymous No.19485281]

>>19484612
btw, chances are that you need to check what an "analogy" even is. Professional sport being a job is not an "analogy", it's the definition.

[Anonymous No.19485282]

>>19481475
>about everything
>thought there would be a successful revolution in germany and britain
>>19481512
how did covid not show every country that they needs their own manufacturing base and how do you rebuild it after purposefully destroying it over decades?
>>19482943
>Why should a worker do any more than the bare minimum?
how is that different from workers now?

[Anonymous No.19485346]

>>19484996
no, the answers to those questions can't be clear because the questions are laughably imprecise. and if I give you answers at this level of specificity, you'll prove this yourself by rejecting the answers and only asking further questions. and even if they were precise, there's still a difference between answering them about the past which we can thoroughly examine and about the future, which we can't thoroughly examine, only predict in very rough terms.
>>19485026
it will. the level of development of the means of production no longer corresponds to their division into separate and competing islands of property, and this will only get worse as they keep growing more and more interconnected and co-dependent. people are already dependent on some supply chains in China in almost the same way a peasant was dependent on his own field and animals. taking over of property by society will merely signify adjusting the form of property so that it finally matches the content.

>>19485282
>thought there would be a successful revolution in germany and britain
there will be a successful revolution in Germany and Britain though
>how did covid not show every country that they needs their own manufacturing base
yes, it showed that the political needs of the capitalist state are no longer realistic. that the system of states is no longer compatible with the growing globalized productive powers of society. yet another sign of what's to come

[Anonymous No.19485688]

>>19485226
You've said nothing, again. Doubling down on your boomerism was not the play.
>>19485281
>think of a business enterprise like of a sport team
Are you retarded or just senile?

[Anonymous No.19485756]

>>19485688
Which words among "job", "team", "manager" and "business owner" (which apply to workers and sportsmen alike) you also don't understand? (we already know that gommies don't understand the word "economics", but that's given).
You fucking idiot are wasting my time.

[Anonymous No.19485766]

>>19485346
So you cant even vaguely describe how le classless stateless society is going to be structured but you're nevertheless certain it will emerge