Authoritarian Marxist here, AMA

Authoritarian Marxist here, AMA.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=TzTGF-5E1wk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Nah.

larp

Have fun spending your life whimpering to effeminate weaklings (mental and physical) about 'class consciousness' and accomplishing nothing. I'm sure the revolution is right around the corner.

is there such a thing as an anti-authoritarian marxist?

>hates oppression
>oppresses

faggot

I'm not going to ask you anything, but I will call you a faggot.

Faggot

Uncle Joe did nothing wrong.

Surely the most Utopian belief is that we're at the end of history now, and nothing will ever change?

A shit one and a reactionary

Because having a strong state willing to lead is oppression?

OPPOSE TAXES
NOT MOSQUES

When are you drinking bleach?

I just want to apologise in advance for all the persecution you will receive here and let you know that some of us want Sup Forums to be an accepting place for people of all faiths.

melt away snowflake

quads confirm communism is a religion

-collectivist
-believes in "general will"
>special snowflake

OK.

What kind of idiocy is this?

Is 100 million dead not enough for you? How many innocent people must die to feed your blood thirst?

Was SJWism a part of your plan?

Things will change, in the "right" direction.

youtube.com/watch?v=TzTGF-5E1wk

-collectivist

Into the trash it goes.

When do you turn 17?

>Surely the most Utopian belief is that we're at the end of history now, and nothing will ever change?

Not all change is for the better. Bad change should be resisted.

>I'm a Marxist

So then, I suppose killing the jews who innately behave in a degenerate manner should be allowed free roam when they say it's for a political goal well gee that sounds like capitalism goy

>Authoritarian Marxist
Well, fuck. I hate your ideology, but I respect you for being honest. Could you try to convince your fellows to do the same?

When will you kill yourself?

>muh Hegelian Dialectic
>literally confirmation bias, the concept

>Not killing

One key word

What does the state's cock taste like?

> Authoritarian Marcist

Isnt that a bit redundant?

Anarchists please gtfo, ty

SJW's are liberal cunts, but it sells. That's why Beyonce, Google, Apple and Starbucks can use the whines of the "great" identity oppressed to get dem big bucks.

Anyone who says differently is either stupid or reactionary.

Living a pretty good life in a first world country under capitalism right now m8, don't really feel the need to end myself.

Then tell me what philosophy you follow, or is it all memes and shitposting?

Fuck off anarchist

WHERE'S YOUR
FUCKING
TRIGGER
DISCIPLINE
NIGGER

Change isn't going to be in your favor anytime in the long foreseeable future.

Don't get me wrong: An attempted Marxist revolution would be an absolute wet dream. I can't think of a better future than a movement attracting and uniting all the frustrated and resentful minorities and leftist whites, only to promptly have their shit pushed in by the US military the moment they become even the faintest threat to the first world.

The revolution is "right", and white

Well will you Marxists pay me reparations for losing my ancestor's land which they bled to save? Oh right, never.

KYS or grow up. No third option.

wew lad, I'm not American so why would their military do anything? I see the right the bear arms thing over there (something I defend) for doing exactly the same thing as a revolution, yet you seem to be doubting this power?

I'm not interested in Slavic politics my friend, Marxism is an improvement for first world countries.

I'd like to also say Capitalism is great.

>Then tell me what philosophy you follow, or is it all memes and shitposting?

Dialectical analysis fits. It is not necessarily correct nor a revolutionary approach. Muh dialectics cunts are intolerable.

No one likes anarchists. Fuck off.

>world revoltion
>slavic politics don't interest me
>only for the 1st world countries

"Authoritarian" "Marxist"

More like -Schizo-

Shh. He has already admitted he's retarded. We shouldn't bully the handicapped.

>forgetting that before Gommunism eastern europe was equal to the western one

>I'd like to also say Capitalism is great.
>Marxist
take note kids, this is the kind of cognitive dissonance one rarely observes outside the world of post-graduate study

some notions are so absurd only educated fools can believe them

Because pretty much all socialists agree socialism must be worldwide. So successful socialism requires attacking or subverting all capitalist nations.

>Authoritarian Marxist here

SHART

Hows college?

EMU

Revolution will occur in first world countries first, according to Marx, then others will follow.

The cognitive dissonance meme strikes again!
>the capitalism isn't better than anything that's come before it
>that we should go back to being peasants rather than workers

It's not about nations, it's about class. I don't want to be ruled by some Saudi Prince 1000000 miles away, or some Yacht club yuppie in the med.

S H A R T
H
A
R
T

>The cognitive dissonance meme strikes again!
>You don't believe the economic apocalypse my magic German predicted will happen
>you must be a modern liberal democrat Fukuyamist

According to Marx, whose works I've read, you're a giant 16yo faggot.

Drop the politics sonny.

>Revolution will occur in first world countries first, according to Marx, then others will follow.
Okay, so where are they? Why haven't they happened yet? Marx was wrong, quit spewing this garbage.

>it's impossible to have technology and scientific progress without paper tokens that represent some nebulous concept of value
money is the problem, that's what you commies never understood

Libertarian mostly. Now I'm on the borders for full on benevekobet dictatorship. Mostly I'm just around for the race things which you cucks deny is a a concept depending on what brand of retard you color yourself as.

LEAF
E
A
F

The race pill is the ultimate pill.

Not to the people who control the weapons. The US is not going to tolerate any sort of Marxist violence in the first world that actually threatens to be a successful a revolution.

The very, very best case scenario for you is the 'revolutionary' government would have severe sanctions imposed against it and be politically blacklisted. Far more likely, the US would order boots on the ground to actively defend the old government.

So this is the end times? No more conflict or fighting? Is this the peace you've been wanting?

I'm for protecting cultures too, especially my own. Capitalism on a global scale is treating everyone as mere proles without any thought or respect to their cultures. Somehow the west has become apologetically weak and white man's guilt has become the norm. I hate this sort of thinking, Europe went around the world uniting it and now we're supposed to feel sorry for this? The worst thing is capitalism over here loves to use this guilt to sell things and to get cheaper labour. It's sickening to not only own the means of production, but to be made to feel ashamed of who you and your people are.

That's a sad way of looking at things, one I hope is not true. Why should the American government police first world countries when they should be helping their own?

>That's a sad way of looking at things, one I hope is not true. Why should the American government police first world countries when they should be helping their own?

Because it stands to benefit from doing do.

Basically this. And unlike 1917, the counter revolutionaries will have far superior fire power and technology.

For any real revolution to succeed in the West, so many various factors would have to come together, which are so unlikely, that the earth losing its orbit tomorrow is more likely.

really makes you think

...

God bless Stalin.
Its a damn shame the Soviets didn't conquer the whole of Europe.
Would have been a utopia had it been one and undivided.

well the recent track record of interventions hasn't really helped the American government out.

It's true, but that'why I'm not a "FULL COMMUNISM NOW" idiot. Any dialectical change is far away, now is not the time to act.

I was raised a Catholic and, whilst I don't believe in a God, the teachings of the Bible are key influences in my life and are a cornerstone of European deontology.

These New Atheists can fuck off.

The vanguard party will without fail degenerate into a bureaucratic class, taking the place of the capitalist
This has been observed in history, it's not an economic theory

Not to mention the lack of marxists willing to wage a grueling guerilla war, and it would be grueling. If the actual system in place is threatened I don't think they'd hesitate in going full crack down and killing friends and family.

It should form a new class asap to manage things post-revolution, however why not take a page out of the American revolution and create a Constitution that limits certain powers? If power is corruptible then spread the power among several branches of government and institutions.

Kys. You've no right to call yourself a Marxist if you haven't tasted Marxism firsthand.

>Not to mention the lack of marxists willing to wage a grueling guerilla war

This is one of the many factors I was alluding to. Obviously I wasn't specific, but most of you are smart enough to deduce what's required for a revolution.

But why are you assuming material conditions will lead to Communism? If anything, they are leading to resurgence of nationalism and a confrontation of the West vs China and the Islamic world.

p.s. I'm a recovering Marxist. I still believe material conditions give birth to ideas.

Right you are, buddy.

The US operates for its elite class. They benefited pretty greatly from Iraq. Syria is more a long-game for them. Libya was cause gaddafi challenged the petrodollar.

>Marxism
a meme
it's not a solution, experience has shown

I don't think there's anything wrong with loving your people, taking pride in your culture and wanting to preserve that. This is natural and right!

It comes down to work and man's ties to produce. In Capitalism man has a vicarious relationship to the things he creates; in first world countries this is even worse as office workers do not see or produce any goods and are instead in charge of spreadsheets of logistics and sales. Produce and labour is the core of human development and society - it is only right that man becomes connected to this process rather alienated from it.

The rise of the trading class caused the creation of the working class, and like the trading class that violently took over from the feudalists the working class will want to take over from the traders.

>according to Marx,
LOL

WHY DO YOU PEOPLE STILL EXIST?

I must add that the trading class are so detached from the world they do not share our cultures; sheiks and suits do not share the same bonds as the people in their countries. Money and hedonism has replaced morality and a decent day's work. It is this complete disconnection from the real world, the world we live in, by our rulers that will cause some form of socialism to take place (whatever form that may be).

Because some of us don't like to be ruled by those who have no connection to their people and see their fellow countryman as something to make profit from rather than kin.

>Because some of us don't like to be ruled by those who have no connection to their people
Yet you support a large government controlling every aspect of your life.

lmao

>see their fellow countryman as something to make profit from
You can make profit from someone and yet still be their friend.

So, when are we sending the Muslims to gulags?

It's at odds with Marxism. Nationalism impedes the development of class consciousness or outright replaces it. A common example is the fusion of a class and national consciousness. Hence why the workers marched off to murder each other in ww1 and ww2.

One major, major problem is that class divisions are natural and just. Why do you think poor whites like it when Trump jokes about not being able to ride in a Rolls Royce? Wouldn't you think the way to pander to them would be to act like them, like all the fake Republicans in their rolled-up sleeves and blue jeans?

They want an aristocrat. They know that any of them would be a bad ruler who would only enrich themselves. They trust Trump - justified or not - because they see him as their better. And they do see him as their countryman, just not their equal.

Marxists wanted to turn all men into brothers, forgetting that some men are fathers.

Oh oh, I know that
Because nation is based on culture
Culture is dictated and changed about the needs of a populations that are mostly dictated by the geography of the environment and the climate of a region
Therefore you cannot expect people say from Siberia and Italy have the same culture and if they do it will soon diverge
So if these populations live under the same rule sooner or later there will be conflict because the overall state policies will benefit the one more than the other, so a fusion is ultimately impossible
This lead to the state separating to a State Union but still the most populous State holds more votes therefore more power and this lead to conflict and eventual break up no matter how flexible the Federal State is (like USA)
This is how large Empires or big Unions always end up collapsing

>Surely the most Utopian belief is that we're at the end of history now, and nothing will ever change?

Really makes you think.

...

>Surely the most Utopian belief is that we're at the end of history now, and nothing will ever change?

Nobody with a brain assumes this, but gommunism doesn't necessarily follow.

wew now lad

>Yet you support a large government controlling every aspect of your life.

No I believe that government should be there like a well ran train service, you don't care about the logistics, how much power it uses, it's maintenance fees, how it' HR works etc, you just care that it arrives - does it's job and provides a service after you pay for a ticket.

On a smaller scale there should be more democracy, with more direct democracy on local politics sort of like how town hall democracy works in America.

This is were things get tricky; I believe Engels was talking about bourgeoisie culture rather than your cockney "knee's up" or great pieces of objectively good music.

Shit like modern art with no basis on the real world, the world the common man lives in, is bourgeoisie culture. It's this rootless and meaningless drivel that divided the normal man from the pretentious.

I'm not American or really following Trump/Hillary so I'm not too sure what he's about. I agree though with the idea of having a greater man to aim for is a good idea though; physically fit, duty bound, educated and altruistic.

Maybe I'm looking for a Rousseau character to be the paragon of virtue we need, because I'm not perfect and I need a hero figure too.

Then what change, and from what philosophical base, are you waiting for? Too many times have I seen the alt-right slag off SJW's about all their beliefs coming from feelings - yet when about their beliefs it's all "common sense" or "We waz Vikings and shit".

Soon lad, soon.

>Then what change, and from what philosophical base, are you waiting for?
Praying to Odin makes more sense than waiting on the prophecy of a nineteenth-century economic prophet, user. He didn't get nearly as many followers killed.

It seems you've built a personal philosophy with many laudable efforts and put Marx in the middle for... aesthetics I guess?

>Then what change, and from what philosophical base, are you waiting for? Too many times have I seen the alt-right slag off SJW's about all their beliefs coming from feelings - yet when about their beliefs it's all "common sense" or "We waz Vikings and shit".

I have no idea, I'm not a fortune teller. But I know this, it won't be pretty. Africa will have 4 billion people alone by the end of the century.

*will have had

To add to this, what I think is likeliest is a world with hot spots of civilizations, surrounded by barbarism. Basically, just like it is now, but on a much higher level.

then what do you believe in? Also what's the the venomous tone m8, I'm not going to be offended or mad because we're both anonymous - there's no face for me to save!

I won't be pretty at all, I'm concerned about the growing numbers in Africa and in Asia. I just don't see how not having some form of institute that sees above the market will deal with these emerging problems.

As you can probably tell I'm a big fan of Rousseau who had similar fears for the world.

It is because then authority takes over common human decency.

Instead what you need it National Socialism with a side of Syndicalism without WW2 on a global scale. Problem is that noone will ever allow it because it destroys investment banking.

Nothing wrong with authority if it is kept in line with a system of checks and balances, with some form of public veto. The government should have the authority to enforce the General Will of the people.

Today government enforces the will of the elite as it is part of the elite class.

>then what do you believe in?
Family. Authority. Legitimacy. And that's not venom, it's irony. You're not seeing that there has always been a way to have an institute above the market - in fact, it was Rousseau and his contemporaries that gave it as much power as it has.

In some nations it was a king. In some it was a senate. Today we give power to the people as a whole, who don't necessarily want it but are easily manipulated by the worst kind of leaders for a country.

Marx, unfortunately, has even less legitimacy than the plutocrats. There has never, ever been a class consciousness that crosses national lines. Not ever. No matter how much time passes, no matter how bestselling the scripture of Marx, workers march off to kill workers because it's your nation - your family - that counts.

I'm asking you for a philosophy you believe in my friend, not vague ideas everyone can agree to family and legitimacy.

I'm agreeing with you here that something greater than the market needs to be put in place and than people are manipulated to vote for the worst representatives of their country.

One example of class consciousness crossing national lines is the The Representation of the People Act 1867 here in UK that came about owing to the American revolution and various threats to the established order on the contentment. Here we can see how revolutionary movements can effect other countries by shocking their rulers (who lack virtue) into showing some virtue or else face the consequences.

It's this type of knock-on effect that I believe will take place at some point, one revolution somewhere that creates enough tension that in order for the old order to survive they must change.

I can't talk about anything non-European because I believe they're at a weird stage in history where they're no quite formed and I think any application of Marxist theory to the Third World needs to be heavily modified if it's to make sense.

>not being a superior Stalinist
C'mon lad

So another commie ok with violence to impose *xir* retarded idea? Why do you think you are worthy of an ama?

Personally, I am all for something akin to National socialism, as long the country is homogeneous.

I'm also for greater state involvement in directing the nation and its beliefs. While I admire America, the fact that people are free to pursue any behavior they want, will eventually lead to its dissolution. Allowing greedy kikes (in the metaphorical sense, not necessarily jews) to shill all sorts of culture, ideology, and products that damages the nation, purely for a shekel, is a sure way to destroy your country eventually.

because your confusion between liberal identity politics and Marxism needs sorting out lad.

(something the left needs to learn to, that's why I'm here anyway. I would much prefer to hang out with a nationalist than a fake leftist)

>I'm asking you for a philosophy you believe in my friend
You're asking for a keyword. Some sort of belief that everyone would be better off if they followed. I don't claim to have one. I just want to honor my ancestors and make a place for my descendants, no matter what keyword you can search us under.

>vague ideas everyone can agree to family and legitimacy.
>Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.
>On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.
>The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.
>Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.
>But, you say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by social.

>I think any application of Marxist theory to the Third World needs to be heavily modified if it's to make sense.
Any application of Marxist theory to the real world needs to be heavily modified to make sense.

>Here we can see how revolutionary movements can effect other countries by shocking their rulers (who lack virtue) into showing some virtue or else face the consequences.
And Jesus did come to the Jehovah's Witnesses in 1917, he was just invisible. All adherents to failed prophecies try to alter the terms after the fact.