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/
Face the facts, NIGGERS, your race are a failed race because you're a feckless, unruly, uncivilized horde of feral proto humans. You never figured out how to live in a society bigger than one or two squabbling families. Starting thousands of years ago, everyone else on this planet without exception did they invented religion, the idea of law, and the ideas of property and respect for the value of human life. This enabled tribes to coalesce into bigger groups and become organized. The rest is history, or rather civilization. But your lot never did this, did they?
Charles Johnson
Abstract thought and problem solving have never been the black man's strengths, have they? Did they invent a long lived and intellectually coherent religion? Nope. Did they ever build a city? Nope. Did they even invent bricks? Nope (the reason there's no Stonehenge in Africa is because it took more than 20 people to move the slabs of rock clearly a non starter in Africa, where assembling more than 20 niggers normally results in a war). Did they till the land? Nope. Did they domesticate an animal for their use? Nope. Did they invent a written language? Nope. Did they invent the wheel? Mainly, nope.
Xavier Howard
Whats your solution to the economic calculation problem posed by von Mises?
Ian Rogers
Were they curious enough about what lay out across the sea to sail upon it? Nope. And blacks are the only "humans" on this planet of which all this is true. Eskimos are more technically advanced than blacks were, despite the handicap of having no raw materials to work with other than dead fish and snow. Indians managed to domesticate the elephant. Why couldn't niggers? So why do you fail everywhere even today? Let me offer you jigaboos a hypothesis. It's because feral behavior innate savagery, murderous violence if annoyed, predisposition to rape many women and thus fecklessly father many children conferred valuable survival advantages on individuals in the backward, Paleolithic milieu of Africa.
Charles Foster
But they don't help your kind in a civilized society. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the last few hundred years have not been long enough for these behaviors to have been domesticated out of you all. So you're all still at it. Let me illustrate this for you by analogy. Technically, an American pit bull terrier and an English golden retriever are exactly the same species. They can produce offspring, if crossbred. The former was bred to exhibit certain characteristics wanton aggression, propensity to fight, physical strength, powerful bite, and so on. The latter was bred to retrieve birds shot and killed by its masters, and to do this, it has to have a docile, placid, non aggressive nature; otherwise it would treat what it found as its own kill and refuse to hand it over.
Brandon White
Now imagine that your small children, aged maybe two or three years old, are going to be locked in a room with five or six of those dogs, and the dogs haven't been fed for a week. Which breed would you rather lock in there with your children? Hungry pit bulls, or hungry golden retrievers? Or do you figure that, even though they look differently, they're all the same species really, so of course the pit bulls certainly won't act any differently? Exactly! All this PC crap we hear spouted in the media about how "there's no such thing as race" is just that crap. A dog has four legs and a tail; a cat also has four legs and a tail, but that doesn't make it a dog. The superficial similarity between cats and dogs and between whites and blacks is just that superficial. If there really were no genetic difference between niggers and humans, then presumably my white woman and I could very easily produce a black baby between us at any time, and any nigger and his ho a white one. But we know what we'd say to them if that ever happened, don't we? :-)
Nathaniel Price
Whenever blacks achieve a certain critical mass numerically in a pre existing non black society, they start to exhibit their natural feral behavior and to turn their environment back into a recognizably African, essentially Stone Age one. Thus, Africa has the jungle; black enclaves have "da 'hood." Native Africans were small wandering herds of marginal animals, one famine away from extinction, and which therefore fought each other savagely for pieces of territory. Large groups of "African Americans" at liberty in the west actually deliberately break themselves down into smaller, tribal hordes, because they feel uneasy in and unaccustomed to a larger society. Negro gangs of twenty to fifty individuals assert their rights to "tag" other people's property through gang violence, but fail to co operate otherwise.
Jeremiah Thompson
For instance, a 15 or 20 strong horde of negroes was recently filmed by a security camera inside a London bank they were robbing. Once they had terrified the cashiers into handing over the money, they then fought each other for it, in the middle of the cashier's hall, like hyenas fighting over an antelope. Having stolen from the bank, they instantly started to steal from each other. The idea of escaping first, then sharing the swag, was just too complex for them to understand, never mind implement. And so it goes on. You cannot fuse blacks into existing large societies or standalone nations because they are just plain not adapted to it. I'm sorry for you niggers and for your savagery, and I'm sorry you were born a violent black aboriginal savage in a civilized society, but I'm more sorry for the white societies that are having to tolerate all your crime while we try to absorb you. This is why all black nations fail economically and sink into corruption, civil war, and permanent dependence on the white man's generosity.
Nicholas Williams
And presumably this is also why you pathetically allowed yourselves to be enslaved: you're savage enough still to be angry about it long after it ended, but you were too backward to stop it at the time. No black Spartacus, is there, niggers? Why no slave uprisings among blacks? Slaves repeatedly rose against the Romans even they knew they'd be crucified for it, when captured. White slaves, that is. They cared enough about their stolen liberty that they were prepared to risk even that. So what's different about the negro? Why did you all sit there, enslaving each other even in America, and still enslaving each other even today in Africa, until a kindly but misguided white benefactor set you free? Is it because, as slaves, you were fed, watered, and housed, and that you as a race had no ambition beyond that if it entailed doing any work or taking any risks? What are you lazy, cowardly, stupid, or all of the above? And you're still bleating about slavery now. If slavery is the root of all your problems, why did Australia prosper?
Juan Rogers
...
Juan Martinez
England used Australia as a dumping ground when her prisons overflowed. Within a hundred years, a nation manufactured from convicts in irons had its own autonomous elected government, and barely a hundred years on from then, Australia is now a major economic power in the Pacific. And at no time have they niggerwhined for handouts from the mother country in fact, if anything, it's mostly been the other way around. You know what? It's because Australia is white. Oh yes it is. Just imagine if there had been a Black Australia. Look how few aborigines were able to live in Australia's climate, and now look at how many whites can. If President Monroe had sent his niggers there, they'd be niggerwhining about how Bwana dumped de po' black folks on a desert island in the middle of nowhere, so they never had a chance. Every week there'd be news of a new famine or civil war in Australia. The Africoons would be slaughtering the Aborigines, or the other way around, or whatever.
The collecting tin would come out regularly, but the money would be stolen and spent on Kalashnikov s, and Black Australia would still owe Whitey billions which we'd be expected to just forget. If all those unfortunate convicts we sent out there had been black, Australia today would just be yet another Liberia a crappy failed nation of murderous warring niggers, with one hand held permanently out for money in the general direction of Bwana. And you know it. So quit whining and thank the white man you live in America, not in Africa.
Cameron Butler
Can I buy you a taco Mexibro?
John Rogers
Nice. But it only proves that in theory it might be possible to do the calculation. In practice we dont have those means yet if we ever get them. Maybe with quantum computing
Levi Thompson
...
Angel Hernandez
*revisionism intensifies*
John Gutierrez
Nice meme.
Colton Campbell
back in the summer of 72' i learned communists make excellent compost.
I was driving home after a long day at the office and at a busy intersection, a bunch of coons, chinks and pasty fat kids were blocking the road with communist propaganda signs and an arm-link fence. this was the 4th time in 3 months. it was time to do something about it.
I got out, walked to the back of my car, and tore my license plate straight off. I then got back in, put on my driving shades, and hit the gas. the shrieks of terror and the thumping of their now-dead bodies colliding with my vehicle were the stuff of nightmares. apparently the sight of so many of their members being killed in the line of duty scared off the rest of those filthy stalinists, because before i knew it, anyone whose head was not splattered against the bumper of my car was now running for the hills, screaming all the way.
I had no idea if anyone had called the police in the ensuing panic yet, so i rightfully decided to book it. as i was running to the back of my car to try and reaffix the license plate in case any potential cops on the way home took notice, i thought to myself, "i can't walk away from something this big without some kind of souvenir." At first i thought id take one of their signs, but that would be too big to hide. Then i saw it: a severed hand, torn straight from the arm of some red cunt. At this point, i decided i'd do something interesting with it. You see, i had a small chili plant i kept on my windowsill that i felt hadn't received any type of nutrition for a long time, and seeing how worthless communists inherently are, i decided it was time that one of them was given a purpose in life. I wrapped the hand in some tissues, and when i got home, i lifted the pepper with all the dirt out of the pot and placed the hand at the bottom. to this day, those are the damn best tasting peppers ive ever had.
Camden Morris
Get out, commie. REEEEEEEEEEE
Anthony Cruz
There is no ethical work under crapitalism.
Parker Torres
Ahoy Comrade! A spectre is haunting Sup Forums!
Leo Jenkins
Communists suck dick tho...
Xavier Nguyen
...
Luke Johnson
erm
Nathan Cook
...
Carson Morris
>he thinks getting his surplus value back is a thing that is even possible in reality My sides You get NOTHING
Ayden Lee
...
Gavin Bailey
sage
Daniel Cooper
Surplus value is a central concept in Karl Marx's critique of political economy. Marx did not himself invent the term: he developed the concept. "Surplus value" is a translation of the German word "Mehrwert", which simply means value added (sales revenue less the cost of materials used up). Conventionally, value-added is equal to the sum of gross wage income and gross profit income. However, Marx's use of this concept is different, because for Marx, the Mehrwert refers to the yield, profit or return on production capital invested, i.e. the amount of the increase in the value of capital. Hence, Marx's use of Mehrwert has always been translated as "surplus value", distinguishing it from "value-added". According to Marx's theory, surplus value is equal to the new value created by workers in excess of their own labor-cost, which is appropriated by the capitalist as profit when products are sold.
Ethan Lewis
not an argument
Xavier Jones
...
Carson Russell
...
Blake Walker
...
Joseph Robinson
we aren't debating nigger
John Cook
Then why do you live in the USA? Just go...
Blake Campbell
Why do communist believe there an objective value of labor? The value of labor is subjective to the individual. Take the labor it took me type the post out. It's worthless because all the commies are too indoctrinated.
not an argument...I am sorry that you are so insecure in your abilities to defend your own beliefs that you would like to sage the thread... triggered much?
Nathaniel Adams
I need to save you from your own destruction and exploitation
Thomas Miller
not an argument
Nicholas Smith
not an argument... why are you so insecure in regard to your race?
Jack Davis
>give me your redpills /leftypol/ Specifically, the work you do is always worth more than what you are paid, because the capitalist can sell whatever it is you produce for more than you were paid in wages. The productive forces of our society are controlled by a tiny elite instead of by the people, so what ends up happening is that millions of proles sweat their lives away while the porky bastards windsurf in Hawaii. To put it in terms you might be more familiar with, capitalists are the ultimate welfare queens. >my stance on hatred of jews and niggers will never change. To say that your position on any topic will never change is to declare yourself to be beyond reason. That said, those "jews" and "evil niggers" are your natural allies regardless of what you think about them, because they are being exploited just like you are. The leftist position on racism is as much about pragmatism as it is about a commitment to equality.
The basic gist is that capitalism is inherintly broken. Companies want to make as much money as possible which means paying works the smallest amount possible. Eventually workers can't afford to buy things, meaning the whole system collapses. Currently with automation we are going to see a huge loss of jobs that will make the concept of full employment obsolete - so who is going to buy things? Communism isn't some grand fucking conspiracy about race or western civilisation - its just a question of economics.
Alexander Ramirez
Who decides what my needs are?
Who has need for a fast internet connection?
Who has need for a dedicated graphics card?
Who has need for a post-2010 smartphone?
Who has need for a second pair of fancy shoes to go out in the evening?
Who has need for Doritos, Oreos or Jelly Belly jelly beans?
Luke Wilson
...
Charles Fisher
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/
----------------------------------------- Da sdages of gommunism.
>Sdage one Bourgers aren't allowed to vode :DDD but otherwise da system is digtadorshib of gommies. Everything is stole by digtadors and digtadors rule all.
>Sdade two Withering All beeple who aren't digtador glass starve. XDDD Once glass disabears and we steal everything more beeple wither away. Bolice begome unnecessary as beeple are dead lol :DDDDD Central blanning begomes unnecessary begause sgarcity caused starving. Money is all ours.
>Sdage three Gommunism. No beeple. No food. My money. Much benis.
Gabriel Ross
not an argument
Owen Cooper
what did you say you homo? i don't speak nigger
Adrian Scott
>Specifically, the work you do is always worth more than what you are paid, because the capitalist can sell whatever it is you produce for more than you were paid in wages.
Wrong. The worth to the owner is the net worth. And the profit margin of virtually any company is a fraction of what they pay in salaries. Far more is paid to the workers than is kept by the owner, often 2-5x more is paid to workers, for pretty much any company.
>Currently with automation we are going to see a huge loss of jobs
If we will see a "huge loss of jobs" due to automation, then that implies the problem of an aging population disappears, and that we should not take in unskilled immigrants because it wil ljust make the unemployment problem worse.
Landon Hill
Surplus value is hilariously flawed. The working class already consumes 99% of all consumer goods. This is a fact of reality.
If the workers tired to take over the means of production will will give them NO material benefit whatsoever. They're ALREADY CONSUMING WHAT THEY PRODUCE.
There's no refuting this.
Communism is bullshit desu
Joseph Diaz
>The productive forces of our society are controlled by a tiny elite instead of by the people I disagree with this premise. The workers and capitalist come to an agreement of the value of the workers' labor. If the workers are unsatified with the arrangement, they don't have to work. At that point, the capitalist either has to make consessions to the workers or risk having his factory come to a grinding hault and losing profits. It seems that it is logical for the capitalist to come to an arrangement that is satisifactory for everyone involved. Maybe in the 1840s people were worked like slaves, but today, workers have rights.
Jordan Long
so you are insecure with both your sexuality and your race?
(2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.[3][4] Therefore, an obscurantist is someone who actively opposes enlightenment and the consequent social reform, a type of anti-intellectual.
Noah Lopez
I don't even need to defend my beliefs. Capitalism is here to stay and you know it. Communism is never gonna happen, there's roadblocks at every turn for your rotten ideology. You don't represent the working class and you never will. You guys even concede that capitalism will never go away most of the time on these cancer threads. You know you'll fail, everyone knows you'll fail, and if you're about to win, we'll make you fail and you know it, pls never give up. It's entertaining.
Lincoln Cruz
Didn't we destroy you on the automation argument like 5 fucking times yesterday and you absolutely couldn't respond?
Lol just fucking kill yourself you jobless loser.
Charles Hughes
lol bread lines
Camden Ward
>mocking perfectly fair and actually serious questions with fucking nonsense The basic failing of Marxism is it doesn't understand that value is relative
Caleb Allen
Fug u gommie X-DDD No stebbing on benis!
Wyatt Richardson
>Didn't we destroy you on the automation argument like 5 fucking times yesterday and you absolutely couldn't respond?
Probably yes.
The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn't help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn't help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn't remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.
Blake Walker
...
Andrew Scott
what did you just said to me you little shit
Nathan Turner
not an argument
Carter Torres
not an argument
Easton Foster
Get fucked, commie faggots.
Ryan Phillips
The bourgeoisie are the class which owns the means of production but does not use them you can think of the means of production as anything 'used' to generate profit e.g. a factory, a shop, a car, machinery, etc if you own means of production but are self-employed, and do not employ anyone else, then you are not bourgeois if you do not literally own means of production but in effect control it, you are bourgeois (e.g. CEOs who do not literally own their companies, but as they run the company they 'own' it in the sense that they decide what is done with it, they decide their own wages, etc) a good litmus test: ''1. do you work for a wage? 2. do you get to decide your wage? 3. do you get to decide anyone else's wage?'' if yes to 1 but not to 2 or 3, you are not bourgeois if yes to 1 and 2 but not to 3, you are petit-bourgeois if yes to all three, you are in effect bourgeois if you do not work for a wage at all, but rather own the means of production directly, then you are absolutely bourgeois
If you own a small shop that you run for a living making 50k USD a year you are petite bourgois. If you are a heart surgeon making 150k USD a year but you work for a hospital and you aren't in charge of hiring of firing anyone you are fully proletarian. Labour aristocracy maybe but still proletarian. It is not a question of income, but a question of ones relationship to the means of production.
Luis Cruz
not an argument
Zachary Gutierrez
like they had during the great depression in the United States? or even with the homeless crisis now?
Anthony Wright
not an argument
Aiden Collins
Wait is that image real? Shouldn't they be smarter than 80% of whites to even be equal?
(2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.[3][4] Therefore, an obscurantist is someone who actively opposes enlightenment and the consequent social reform, a type of anti-intellectual.
The communist derides the capitalist for not being more compassionate, more humane, acknowledging values other than money. At the same time the communist wants poor people to transform themselves into an inhuman, robotic, profit-maximising machine, to engage in an endless blood bath of millions for the sake of increasing their own stock of material goods. The qualities of callousness, exploitation and a lack of humanist values which they decry in capitalists, they do everything they can to grow and promote in the poor so they can get a violent death machine on their side.
Henry Reyes
>Doesn't present an argument >States "not an argument" when this is pointed out
James Reed
an old meme but fitting
Adam Reyes
...
Brayden Myers
Gtfo commie trash
Nolan Richardson
not an argument
Lucas Bennett
...
Jayden Harris
not an argument
Gabriel Cooper
...
Nolan Cruz
not an argument
Chase Anderson
not an argument
Lucas Mitchell
not an argument
Christian Allen
not an argument
Gavin Sullivan
>Chile pro capitalism
come on, faggot, our country is the evidence of how capitalism is full of shit and fail. Kys.
(2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.[3][4] Therefore, an obscurantist is someone who actively opposes enlightenment and the consequent social reform, a type of anti-intellectual.
Lincoln Bailey
Ok Allende, go back to hell now
Nathaniel Wood
exactly... Pinochet was an IMF shill and a tool for American Imperialism in South America
Zachary Gonzalez
Wrong
Not an argument
Matthew Adams
Not an argument
Charles Johnson
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism (2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.[3][4] Therefore, an obscurantist is someone who actively opposes enlightenment and the consequent social reform, a type of anti-intellectual.
Matthew Fisher
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism (2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.[3][4] Therefore, an obscurantist is someone who actively opposes enlightenment and the consequent social reform, a type of anti-intellectual.
Not an argument.
Zachary King
>Pinochet >not a tool Allende was dumb as fuck, but the only reason to idolize Pinochet is because you're an underage edgy fag, he fucked up our country badly for the sake of USA. I don't even give a fuck about the commies he killed, but damn, we're still dealing with the messes he caused only so Lucía could buy tons and tons of shoes.
