Hello Comrades. This general is for the discussion of Marxism-Leninism, the ideology of revolutionary socialism and communism.
Communism is the next stage of humanity following the capitalist stage.
What exactly is communism according to Marxist-Leninists:
>Communism is a stage of society in which the productive infrastructure is socially owned, and goods are produced not in order to sell for profit, but in order to meet a social need.
>Communism in it's full form is a stateless, classless society that follows the maxim "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."
>To acheive such a society Marxism-Leninism teaches us that we must replace the capitalist state, which is controlled by the capitalist class, by a socialist state, which is controlled by the working class. Then, a period of class struggle follows in which the capitalist class is liquidated by the working class. When the capitalist class has been completely vanquished, there will be only one class, the working class, and eventually the functions of the state will become indistinguishable from the functions of the society as a whole, and the state as such will 'wither away' as Marx said.
Daily reminder nazism is a more legitimate ideology than communism, less death and more progress
Michael Rogers
>>captcha: private property
Justin Long
Communism is and always will be shit OP BTFO
Isaac Nelson
Daily Reminder Marx won >Turn all your focus on commies >Let a bunch of lolbertarian kikes run the economy >Said kikes ((coincidentally)) want free trade.
Leo Evans
We've won user. We beat the communists, we beat the fascists, and eventually we'll beat the liberals too. We'll tear down the Federal Reserve, rip out the regulations, and open up the floodgates of protectionism, and abundance shall flow forth.
Ayden Reed
...
Camden Jackson
>your ideology wont lead your country to the invention of the grand mac
lmao faggot
Mason Jenkins
SIEG HEIL
Samuel Foster
NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES
>NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES
NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES
>NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES
NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES NIGGERS KIKES FAGS GOOKS COMMIES EAT THE RICH KILL PORKIES
Adrian Rogers
...
Jack Garcia
...
Jace Murphy
RARE FLAG?
Jordan Moore
CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO
>CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO
CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO
>CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO CHING CHONG NIP FUCKING NONG LONG TONG CHAIRMAN MAO DINDU NUFFIN HE A GOOD REVOLUTIONARY PRAISE CHAIRMAN MAO
John Diaz
Post cute nazi girls.
Brayden Anderson
Communism doesn't work
Jaxon Murphy
what's your prediction on America overthrowing the executive branch?
Asher Gomez
Fascist here. Been reading a bit about communism recently: Why should I become a Marxist-Leninist? Convince me.
Nathaniel Walker
When do we start shooting Righties? I'm tired of being like one of the 3 US leftists that know how to fire a gun
Camden Jackson
Do you want to be murdered for having the wrong eye color or do you want to be murdered to questioning the state?
The choice is yours!
This is a shit post btw
Eli Harris
is everyone equal under communism?
Aaron Ross
Sage
Justin Fisher
It's even worse than that senpai. If communism had spread to Japan, we would never have anime today. Thank goo
Parker Scott
>or do you want to be murdered to questioning the state?
Communism is no different in this department. Prior to the war, Germany still had a great deal of free speech whereas Marxist Leninist Russia never had any.
That depends on the definition of equality. The "equality" in communism is essentially that eventually time becomes the primary unit of denomination, because the productive forces of society have been developed to such a level that it's not crazy.
i.e. an hour of your time is as valuable as that of any other person, although your fundamental inequalities in intellect, strength, etc are obvious and maintained.
Not that I'm a commie, but that's the idea.
Carson Howard
Communism would never work because of mans greed. The counties that did use "communism" still had rich people taking advantage of the poor. Still had the "bourgeois" ruling over the "proletariat". I don't think we would ever seen any kind of true Communism. What we need is a society using some form of capitalism and communism.
Colton Bailey
What's ironic is that the literal cultural Marxist Adorno was using marxist analysis to show how this is rooted in capitalism. >Jazz is the false liquidation of art — instead of utopia becoming reality it disappears from the picture. >The aim of jazz is the mechanical reproduction of a regressive moment, a castration symbolism. 'Give up your masculinity, let yourself be castrated,' the eunuchlike sound of the jazz band both mocks and proclaims, 'and you will be rewarded, accepted into a fraternity which shares the mystery of impotence with you, a mystery revealed at the moment of the initiation rite.
They show Miley Cyrus being a slut because it gets dosh, not because of a conspiracy. That's just what capitalism will do if you let it. (That's why you need a strong church, a de-facto arm of power, for example, to rally people semi-mindlessly* against it.)
*I don't mean that the cause itself is mindless, but say - you want her banned from television for being degenerate. You then need a church to instruct people to write to congressmen, etc, complaining. Those people don't care for a nuanced explanation, nor do they require one. Pastor says it's bad, you respect pastor: Write a letter.
Nathaniel Phillips
>an hour of your time is as valuable as that of any other person street sweepers get paid the same as doctors?
where is the incentive to study hard, or to work hard to get a bonus or raise?
Logan Gutierrez
> Be this fag americuck > Grandfathers killed Nazis to help save Europe from the cancer ideology > Believes in the cancer ideology
"Should the Jew, with the aid of his Marxist creed, triumph over the people of this world, his Crown will be the funeral wreath of mankind, and this planet will once again follow its orbit through ether, without any human life on its surface, as it did millions of years ago" -t Hitler
FUCK OFF COMMIES
Josiah Gutierrez
Making something of yourself takes a lot of very hard work. People put in that work to make something of themselves because they hope for the payoff. They work their ass off and sacrifice everything else for a decade to get through medical school so that one day they can own a Ferrari and a big house. The payoff makes it worth it for them to take on the huge risk and responsibility of being a doctor, because when you are a doctor you are taking on a lot of risk and responsibility. If they lived in a system which the payoff for them would be the same whether their only responsibility was sweeping the floor and handling life and death they would take the easy road.
Noah Anderson
so is there any hierarchy? are some people in carge of others?
Isaiah Mitchell
Not being a communist, I can't give a particularly effective answer. Communism is in any-case a long term thing.
I would note however that study is something people often aspire to anyway, even without secondary gain. The real question is of jobs that are simple but unpleasant, which is where the problem becomes more difficult to answer. (Though even then, some kind of mutual interpersonal agreement to deal with shit works in households and could be broadened out.
I believe the general idea is that it's reduced to a triviality to do most forms of labour through improved technology, such that the work week is greatly reduced.
Alexander Perez
...
Elijah Fisher
...
Jace Harris
...
Angel Ross
I think factories would be run democratically, so I would assume there's a pseudo-hierarchy, but a consensual one not based on violence. I can only assume you still have task delegation and such (which in daily work amounts to "manager tells me to do this", but because the manager isn't having his manager breathe down his neck about the 3rd quarter profit margin he's less overbearing and left to focus on co-ordinating efficiently.) within workplaces.
But there would be no social classes, which is the basis of Marxian class-hierarchy (I think.), since that relates to how you interact with the means of production (Do you operate it, own it, or both?)
I think it's worth going into class, though. Since the "Upper/Middle/Lower" 'class' system differs from the Marxist one. Most "middle class" people, and even some "upper class" (as sometimes rich doctors are considered) are actually considered proletariat based on the marxist system.
i. Capitalists, or bourgeoisie, own the means of production and purchase the labor power of others ii. Workers, or proletariat, do not own any means of production or the ability to purchase the labor power of others. Rather, they sell their own labor power. iii. A small, transitional class known as the petite bourgeoisie own sufficient means of production but do not purchase labor power. (Think "Family shop" or perhaps historically, say, a family line of blacksmiths, I think. The actual communist I've spoken to told me it also includes someone who buys the labour power of others, but labours himself - such as a plumber who owns a business, but also goes out and does jobs himself - as contrasted to say, Bill Gates who hasn't been a manager at Microsoft in years*)
Ethan Johnson
no class? so there would be no rulers directing the military, factories, agriculture etc?
Cooper Evans
Spanish commie, why do you do this? Why do you make these threads knowing full well that nobody here will ever change their mind about communism?
All you're really doing is making people hate communism and communism more by reaffirming their belief that all leftists are naive children.
Jason Walker
This is now a bogpill thread
Sebastian Thompson
>democratic republic They called themselves democratic, so clearly democracy is to blame! But it wasn't REAL democracy, so let's try it again, huh? It's not like anyone would call themselves democratic or socialist to fool gullible people.
Cameron Young
Communism is canser and wil only work
Kevin Anderson
I can assume there would be centralized managers if those were needed, but no owners. The workers own them and run them democratically.
And if we're going full utopian, no military. (In transition, I assume the military would retain strong hierarchy as a matter of practicality, but this wouldn't amount to a re-imposition of class structure, since that's all about means of production.
Adrian Brooks
>tankies thinking that they are any better than Sup Forums nazi's
Anarchism is where it's at.
Angel Martin
There will be managers picked from workers by other workers delegating their voting power. Delegates can be repealed instantly the moment workers feel like not delegating. That way management will always know what's happening on the ground and how production process works. What are company's strengths to be capitalized on, and shortcomings to be fixed.
Evan Thomas
so rather than owners, there would be controllers?
we would still be told what to do, and presumably sanctioned in some way if we didn't do it?
Juan Cruz
because reatrds who screw things together know a lot about marketing and financing?
Adam Allen
bumping because workers of the world unite
Anthony Adams
>market socialism >tankies pick one, tankies are state capitalist. Left ideologies support self-determination.
Julian Lopez
>cultural marxist jews
cultural marxism is just liberal identity politics that is dialectically incorrect and counterrevolutionary.
>jews
nope. that's not it.
Levi Allen
Controllers may be fungible with advisers.
Consider thus: You keep the full product of your labour. If you're told "To get the optimum result, do X" and you can't be bothered, leading to reduced efficiency - it's your own results that drop. If your different method yields better results, you'll get more out of it.
By comparison under capitalism, especially if you get a fixed-hourly-rate, even showing efficiency could get your manager to be a dick and use his authority to fuck you over, because the value of what you produce and the value of your labour aren't strongly correlated.
Also, because the workplace was democratically run, a dick manager could be removed in favour of a more effective one.
The people who handle marketing and internal accounting are themselves primarily workers. It's shareholders, stock traders, speculators and so on who make up the main "exploitation" component of modern capitalism. (Or at least, they seem to fit the bill.)
Sebastian White
...
Caleb Baker
Was rereading pic related recently and I thought of you, /commiepol/. I look forward to the day when we too can send tens of millions to die in the gulags.
Jeremiah Hill
...
Jaxson Sullivan
>commie thread >it's only 3 actual commie autists >most of the posts are sage posts from true Sup Forums
Sad!
Jackson Fisher
>because the workplace was democratically run what's to stop the workers voting themselves things that are detrimental to the operation of the factory? raises, time off, more pay if you have kids to feed. things like that?
>shareholders, stock traders, speculators and so on who make up the main "exploitation" component of modern capitalism those three are all the same thing
you know who some of the biggest investors are? pension funds
Levi Wright
...
Angel Wood
how the fuck were they using 1990 dollars in 1928?
Joshua Ortiz
what's this graph even mean? the ratio of 1970 to 1928 gdp? why do I care about htis?
Grayson Perry
>non-STEM untermensch spotted If a person is smart enough to learn materials science, mathematical analysis, analytical geometry and other disciplines taught in the first two years to any engineering student, they can perfectly learn marketing and economics in a week. However, to lawyers and marketologists even algebra is scary.
Noah Barnes
and you need a degree in stem to screw some lawnmowers together?
Aiden Smith
>what's to stop the workers voting themselves things that are detrimental to the operation of the factory? It would only harm themselves. Oversimplifying it: Imagine that I give you tools and resources to do with as you please. You could make them into valuable goods, or you could do nothing. Which is more likely to benefit you? For practical reasons it's not-literally 100% of your labour value that you keep, but that's the gist of it.
I'd stop thinking in terms of pay unless absolutely necessary, since even in socialism some view that abolishing money should be a goal. (Though what it's replaced with as a token of scarcity is a question, and that's a big mess.) The key point is "You keep the value that you add" in short, unlike in capitalism where you add the value to someone else's profit while he pays the market rate for labour. While wages could exist, the way they'd work would be quite different to under the current system and comparison muddies the waters.
The workers could make other detrimental decisions, obviously - producing something nobody wants, but it would take a large degree of irrationality to do so. One possible outcome is that the means of production are much more locally linked instead of manufacturing everything in China as now. (Because there'd be little cost advantage, and most manufacturing is location-neutral.), but now we're navel-gazing
>you know who some of the biggest investors are? pension funds And ruthless they can be. Adam Curtis has a good documentary called "The Mayfair Set" which has an episode about how the pension funds were ruthless asset-strippers in the 1980s.
Soviet Time-Travel magic. (It's just to factor out inflation, so you don't go "Whoa, the German GDP was [infinity] marks in 1924!") It shows rapid growth, as compared to the picture showing the relative failure of the Soviet satellite states compared to similarly backwards capitalist ones. It's an interesting historical note.
Justin Sullivan
>it would take a large degree of irrationality to do so have you met or observed any lefties?
will the army be run democratically also? with no ranks?
so they quadrupled their GDP in 40 years? who cares? it means nothing without seeing what they quadrupled it from
>I'd stop thinking in terms of pay >Though what it's replaced with as a token of scarcity is a question, and that's a big mess DURRRRRRRRRRRRR
wtf? how are goods priced with no money?
Julian Peterson
>have you met or observed any lefties? We're talking about workers here, not lefties. >will the army be run democratically also? with no ranks? Ranks and democracy are not incompatible. (Though after a world revolution, it's highly questionable whether an army - or indeed a state - still exist. The army only needs to exist during a transition period.)
>it means nothing without seeing what they quadrupled it from From nothing. But the image I linked it to also shows various countries who quadrupled it from nothing. The rate of growth is above average, regardless of where they started. (Though it wasn't much further than most of the rest of the dregs of Europe.)
>wtf? how are goods priced with no money? Like I said, it's a navel-gazing clusterfuck.
As one (relatively mundane) example: One could use a currency that expires after a given date, thus preventing capital accumulation. Now, you can say "That's just money by a different name!" but it's strongly different to the money we have today, and provides an abstraction of labour value instead of commodity-value as at present. (i.e. worker that adds $50 value to the product is getting $50 to spend by 2020 or lose under socialism, while worker who adds $50 of value to the product is getting $10 under capitalism.)
You have to remember, I'm no socialist/communist, I'm just running off what I understand of it.
