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 achieve 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. marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/
I cannot wait to institute global communism so I can just start randomly executing thousands of people for no reason. Who's with me? I became a Communist to kill people.
Thomas King
...
Ryder Bell
and i'll be Stalin then, useful idiots are plentiful.
• questioned Murphy’s requirement that planning requires pre-knowledge of all possible prices, • argued that the domain of prices to which planning is applied is in principle finite rather than infinite and that thus Cantor’s arguments are inapplicable, or at worst prices are countable, and Cantor’s arguments are applicable but irrelevant because there is no concievable requirement that this domain be closed under diagonalisation, • argued that planning over finite prices is tractable, • shown that diagonalisation is not applicable to prices or commodities, and • discussed how infinite structures of predominantly zero values may be given finite representations. In conclusion we have shown that Murphy’s arguments are ill founded. The computational feasibility of economic planning at a detailed level is an issue that must be investigated in its own right, and cannot be settled by appeal to Cantor. We have presented specific arguments that suggest that detailed planning is indeed feasible
Benjamin Williams
>when your socialist computer science teachers can't even begin to explain socialism
What a train wreck of an ideology.
Luke Baker
LOL, I already emailed them and turns out they can't defend socialism. Get BTFO.
Cooper Phillips
Hello gomrades! XDDDD Dis general is for disgussion of margsism-lebonnism, da ideology of revolutionary socialism and gommunism.
Gommunism is da next stage of guckery following real society.
Wat exagtly is gommunism according to gommies:
>Gommunism is a stage of guckery in which the produgtive infrustrugture runs away from gommie country, and no goods are produced and beeple starve. XDDDD >Gommunism in full form is obressive, statist society dat follows maxim "gib gib gib!" :DDDD >To achieve gommunism we must replace broduction with murderous obressive rulers liek me, fug working glass beeple. XDDDD Struggle while I liquidate you all lol. When capitalists run away we win and I kill you all. Eventually the functions of state cease and state becomes murderous and indistinguishable from other gommies. Da state withers away liek da people. gommies.gom/fug/ gommies.gom/starve/
Got any more commie professors I can BTFO through email, comrade?
Logan Campbell
...
Christopher Diaz
Damnit man, whats with you always posting real big text heavy jpegs, cant you give a condensed down version so we dont have to navigate through the angsty economics talk to get to what normally is quite a simple question/argument?
Like, i do other stuff while I browse Sup Forums and dont feel like spending 15 mins unpacking what some dude is trying to say when I can be doing more productive stuff. Just condense it down and i might be able to refute it.
Logan Bailey
>get BTFO >autistically ignores and posts spam B R A V O C O M M I E S
Wyatt Nguyen
>Just condense it down and i might be able to refute it.
Alright.
How do you know whether a good is worth more than its costs in a true communist society? How do you know the final product is worth more than its raw materials to society?
Adam Diaz
>communist general >tl;dr I thought commies are persuading me to turn into commie? how can i be commie if i am not convinced?
Joseph Perry
>e-mails two university professors that are probably very busy
>expect them to give him a fucking lesson and adress every single point in full detail
Are you right in the head?
Grayson Allen
Why don't you refute it then?
Grayson Young
it's just laziness they are on 4pol; we are not on their board the burden of proof lies entirely with them and they can't defend orthodox marxism
Isaiah Fisher
>they are too busy to answer emails about the paper they wrote Answering about the paper they wrote and their position they are defending is kind of their responsibility, you fucking retard. Assuming they had any real capability of defending a thesis, it would be a number 1 priority.
Aiden Fisher
kek
Alexander Ortiz
>you can't defend your theories >the professors you link can't defend their theories Who am I supposed to contact here? You ignore my posts, your professors ignore my posts, even in youtube comments my questions get ignored.
Seems like your ideology literally can't defend itself. What an absolute train wreck.
Bentley Smith
Thanks.
So as you know, in a communist society, the amount of 'resources' you are given depends on the phrase 'to each according to his needs', that is each person gets a different amount of resources depending on their circumstances and needs (Just think about it on a basic level, someone that works in Agriculture might need a bigger house and more calorie rich food than someone that lives in a city doing an office job simply because the job requires more energy and more storage space). In socialism, labour is the base currency.
With that explained, you understand resources are not unlimited, they are allocated based on the labour you do. Freedom of choice is still a thing, you are given an arbitrary amount of resources equal to you contribution and need, some resources are worth more than others because they cost more labour to produce (hence why everything will still have different prices).
Thus, supply and demand is still a thing, if there is more demand for a product and not enough supplies the 'cost' of the product will go up. Even if the cost of the good cant be put up (staple products), the state can still manage and see which products are in demand and which ones aren't. Thus the state can see which products they need to make more of or less of.
Its how all socialist nations have worked thus far and works pretty good. Sometimes goods that actually cost more to produce are still made, but only as a way to keep people employed and thus in the socialist system, this is what happened in the latter days of the USSR.
William Walker
Lad i gotta work and study at the same time, time is precious to me.
I don't really care about anyone outside Australians, because weather your a socialist or not really wont affect me in any way.
Brayden Hall
>you are given an arbitrary amount of resources equal to you contribution and need >arbitrary >equal Your mind is fucking incomprehensible. >equal to contribution AND need Two fucking paradoxes in a single fucking phrase. You are mentally fucking ill.
>some resources are worth more than others because they cost more labour to produce And how do you measure the value of that labor? Magic? Seems like the only thing I cared about you explaining you didn't explain.
Anyway, you didn't comprehensively answer my question. Try again. How do you know whether a good is worth more than its costs in a true communist society?
Alexander Kelly
>Two fucking paradoxes in a single fucking phrase. You are mentally fucking ill.
Can see what your thinking, maybe a bad choice of words on my behalf (I study some maths but the wording we use isn't easy for the public to understand), anyway ill explain.
Okay, lets imagine its a mathematical formula, you put in say a few values and you get a few values out, yup its not arbitrary. What im getting at is that this 'system' to help distribute resources works a lot like chaos theory, while you might put in very similar numbers into the equation the output of the equation will be vastly different each time, thus for these types of equations the answer is seemingly arbitrary because its very hard to plot and has no pattern (thus basically random, its actually one of the ways computers generate random numbers).
>contribution AND need
Don't get this one, again a easy example, say two people do the exact same work and contribution, one is 21 years old and one is 85 years old, chances are the 21 year old NEEDS more resources to sustain him than his 85 year old counterpart.
Will get to part 2 in a sec
Lucas Torres
>Le chaos theory communism >21yo needs more than 85yo? Are you secretly fucking with me? Are you a troll just pretending to be a commie to waste my time? Or are commies this silly?
Jordan Ramirez
>dude let's turn the whole economy into the heterogony of ends
Tyler Watson
By the way, you wrote all of that and you didn't answer the only thing I want you to answer. You are literally talking with yourself at this point. Way too fucking autistic.
Cameron Martinez
>And how do you measure the value of that labor?
You didn't mention you wanted to know how to measure it anywhere but w/e.
Example, two farmers. One grows Potatoes in the north and one grows Bananas in the south, there's a big city in the north about 50km from the potato farm and 1000km from the banana farm.
The potato farmer simply puts his potatoes in the back of his truck and drives the hour to the market in the city. However, the banana farmer needs to put the bananas in his truck, drive to the train station, load the bananas onto a train, train has to travel the 1000km to the city then the bananas need to be transported to the market.
The cost of the labour is based off how long it takes to grow the crop, how long it takes to transport, the complexity of the transport (the resources and labour used to create and upkeep the form of transport), the cost of the fuel to transport the goods (based on the labour costs of getting the fuel out of the ground), the cost of the manual labour to move the goods ect.
Normally, its estimated for obvious reasons, but if you wanted to you could go and calculate it exactly.
Calculating the labour costs like above and thus figuring out if the time and resources taken to make whatever it is your making is more than people are willing to spend.
Like in essence, currency still exists, its just managed and created in a way that you cant accumulate more than your fair share.
Joshua Price
>Le chaos theory communism
Was just explaining why calculating labour is close to arbitrary because you said it was a contradiction. Its close to arbitrary because the number can change radically given different inputs.
>21yo needs more than 85yo
Are you fucking with me? Are you saying an 85 year old needs the same physical resources as a 21 year old?
Take a chill pill man, hence why i said 'Will get to part 2 in a sec'.
Its not easy to explain very complicated Marxist ideas to a monkey that hasn't read it before, I gotta make up examples that normal people can understand without having to comprehend Marxist theory.
Asher Nelson
>The cost of the labour is based off how long it takes to grow the crop, how long it takes to transport, the complexity of the transport (the resources and labour used to create and upkeep the form of transport), the cost of the fuel to transport the goods (based on the labour costs of getting the fuel out of the ground), the cost of the manual labour to move the goods ect.
Meaning, your definition of cost is heterogeneous and intangible.
>Normally, its estimated for obvious reasons, but if you wanted to you could go and calculate it exactly. Normally its estimated? Are you fucking retarded? How can you even being to estimate those costs? It's just random measurements with no link with each other, that can drastically vary even in the production of the exact same goods.
>Calculating the labour costs like above So, labor value= costs? Why? How does that make any sense at all?
>Like in essence, currency still exists Meaning, it's not a true communist society. And WHY THE FUCK would currency exist after you attempted to define costs without markets and currency?
I think you are one of those people who are too stupid to realize how stupid you are.
Jason Cooper
>what is illness
Alexander Evans
>labor time is currency >unable to accumulate your labor time >most expensive purchases would be capital ie labor time saving devices >using capital would decrease your labor income
Alexander Myers
>The cost of the labour Say what? Labour has no value comrade. It is the measure of value.
Brandon Lewis
Answer my fucking question you autistic fuck. You haven't done that since your first comment. How do you know whether a good is worth more than its costs?
Julian Sullivan
I suspect the "worth" you are talking about is subjective.
Kayden Long
Yes, go on. And how do you objectively measure that?
Joshua Butler
You don't objectively measure something subjective. You don't in communism, you don't in capitalism.
>inb4 But prices in a market Prices give you an idea of value (socially necessary labour time), not of this subjective worth you are thinking about.
Josiah James
>hohohoh i believe i have a MEM for this occasion heheheh they will be amazed at my wast selection of mems!!
Jonathan Allen
>Prices give you an objective number for social value >not of this subjective value you are thinking about Uh... yes it is.
You admit that a communist economy is impossible, Correct? No possible way of economizing without any measurable concept of value. Communists can only produce chaotically and inevitably impoverish themselves.
Brody Bell
I'm going to bed after this, its late here, If anyone wants to find me (including monkey man) Ill be in the same thread at the same time tomorrow for more mental gymnastics and economic discussion.
>heterogeneous and intangible
No its not, why would it be, I literally just explained how you could do it.
> that can drastically vary even in the production of the exact same goods.
Hence why you would estimate it.
>labor value = costs?
Its like heaps of things, if something is time consuming to make, even if it doesn't require a whole lot of resources to make it the cost is still high (take for example a Swiss handmade watch).
>And WHY THE FUCK would currency exist after you attempted to define costs without markets and currency?
Reread what i wrote above, supply and demand still exist as a way to see what people need and dont need, therefore a 'market' still exists. Currency exists but in a different form, again, its just a form that stops people for accumulating it without doing the work.
The problem is (and which is always the case) when you read and hear Marxist theory you hear the very top level stuff like 'currency wouldn't exist in a Marxist society', this is a simplification of a very complicated underlying economical structure. Some form of currency will exist where things need to be traded.
Ill try and dig up where exactly lots of it is outlined, pretty sure its in Lenin's early works on economics but might take a while.
If I actually found it would you read it?
Connor Lopez
Being a Communist is akin to being a manchild. You're old enough to do better, but too autistic not to.
Only solution is to kill yourselves. Sorry fags. :(
Daniel Perez
So, resuming, you wrote 6 posts trying to answer mu question, and you couldn't do it.
>Reread what i wrote above, supply and demand still exist as a way to see what people need and dont need, therefore a 'market' still exists. Meaning now it's not true communism.
>If I actually found it would you read it? You are not going to find an answer to what I'm asking you because It's a compact explanation of how communism is impossible. So, I'm not going to read it because you are not going to write it down. That's why you wrote 6 posts of pure bullshit without answering my question. If you could answer it you would have already done it.
Nicholas Price
>Uh... yes it is. No. Prices are in fine determined by value, which is not subjective.
>You admit that a communist economy is impossible, Correct? Certainly not.
>No possible way of economizing without any measurable concept of value. Feudalism didn't use value. Antique slave societies didn't use value. Value as a way to regulate the economy is specific to capitalism.
Jacob Parker
>you can't turn subjective judgment into objective numbers in capitalism >yes you can >No. prices are a objective number, which is not subjective, it would prove me wrong so it can't be Commies are true geniuses.
>Feudalism didn't use value. Antique slave societies didn't use value Perhaps that's why they were subsistence living with the constant fear of starvation?
Robert Hughes
>Commies are true geniuses. Or you are a true idiot. Value is NOT "how much people want something". Do you understand?
>Perhaps that's why they were subsistence living with the constant fear of starvation? Capitalism is superior to feudalism, which was superior to antique slavery. You think you are discovering something here?
Jaxson Anderson
>Capitalism is superior to feudalism, which was superior to antique slavery. uh... buddy, you claim your system is as capable of calculating value as feudalism without markets and slaves societies, what does that mean according to the phrase you just wrote?
Dylan Jenkins
I said: >capitalism is superior to feudalism not : >capitalism is superior to feudalism because it has value and value is supreme
>Feudalism didn't use value. Antique slave societies didn't use value. Value as a way to regulate the economy is specific to capitalism.
>marketless feudal systems and slave societies is about the same level of logistical organiztion commies are aiming for
Jackson Adams
>>marketless feudal systems and slave societies is about the same level of logistical organiztion commies are aiming for Is making shit up the best you can do at this point?
Why don't you go afk and read a book for a change?
>>denying shit you wrote yourself Please, do quote me using the terms "logistical organisation".
Easton Harris
It's often a good advice, so I tend to give it often.
Joshua Ortiz
>How can you know whether a good is worth more than its costs without an objective measure of value? >"Uh, we don't need something silly like value to make a modern society, just look at those amazing slavery based nations and feudal systems." So, you are saying that we don't need the concept of value to make a good society, and your examples are backwards subsistence societies that were barely functional? That's your third post without being able to explain yourself. Commies literally too dumb.
Colton Myers
Also, let's analyse the commies here as a whole just for the sake of checking their consistency.
We have OP posting about some computer science teachers that think they can calculate all costs and values in a computer. We have the aussie fag that claims we can just arithmetically add up all the random measurements from the production and magically turn them into costs, and we have you, who claims value itself is pointless to make a good society.
What an absolute shitshow of an ideology. You stooges literally can't figure out what you are even advocating for. You literally can't explain the shit you advocate for on a daily basis for months. I seriously pity commies. Your life must be miserable as fuck.
Easton Cox
>So, you are saying that we don't need the concept of value to make a good society No. I am saying that you don't need value to make a society. Wether it's "good" or not is completely irrelevant. We do not get to chose between "good" and "bad" society. We don't make society; society makes us.
>your examples are backwards subsistence societies You are a smart one, ain't you? Capitalism is the most superior mode of production to date. Of course any historical example of another mode of production will be backward.
Charles Lewis
>This fucking Spaniard
Isaac Nelson
>Wether it's "good" or not is completely irrelevant >it's irrelevant whether communism is better or not because society makes you and stuff You are mentally retarded, right?
Landon Phillips
Will the brazilan commie destroyer make them give up creating these kind of threads?
Ryan Howard
Hi there comrade.
Levi Gutierrez
Even if I ignore that you are incapable of understanding the link between knowing values to allocate resources and prosperty, even if I ignore the fact that you think that going back to collectivist tribal ideals would somehow lead to a more evolved system even though historically you already showed yourself that the path to prosperity is the other way around; you still have to face the fact that all that you wrote says absolutely nothing about communism. You are just barely hanging your beliefs on the fact that they're vaguely possible, that's enough to categorize you as a severely delusional person.
