Are there any actual unironic literal communists on Yas Forums?
Are there any actual unironic literal communists on Yas Forums?
Lucas Brooks
William Perry
Real communists have never been tried
Chase Watson
literal communists don't have access to public internet
Ian Morales
Real communists need to be tried, convicted and hung.
Kayden Miller
yes
Hudson Price
Hello, communist.
How do you feel about identity politics? Does it get in the way of class struggle, is it a companion for it, or a part of it, or what? Do you think of feminists and liberal SJWs as comrades, useful idiots for your movement, or useful idiots for the enemy?
Gabriel Flores
After you.
Nolan Cruz
> Chinese morality
Means kidnapping people off the streets because they're state-mandated DNA record shows they're a good match as an organ donor for a mid-level party functionary.
Gabriel Perez
Based and Redpilled.
Jonathan Myers
your flag looks like a memeflag
it gets me everytime
Grayson Russell
Identity politics for the most part is a spook. That is not to say that different groups have different burdens, but the most important part of your identity is your class. It's good to acknowledge these differences and take them into account when making decisions, but once they take precedence over class unity, you know it's foul play. And the "politics" part of identity politics is obviously just the rotten neoliberal way to defend the status quo, a diversion to stop real change and pit the working class against one another.
Noah Robinson
>Yas Forums pls help we have no idea wtf we've been doing for the past 100 years
Communism in a nutshell
Dylan Wood
Well, we kinda are a meme country so yeah.
Noah Ross
Redistributing organs where they would be of most use is just good dialectics, comrade. We need to plan our organ economy, else its anarchy will give healthy kidneys to useless slackers, and bad kidneys to dignified party officers.
I am not a communist myself, necessarily. Certainly I have no idea what modern communists think or want, I only know the ideology from history.
Chase Diaz
>Yes, worker, support my campaign to throw your country into chaos so I can be leader and have all the money and uh, fix your situations, haha.
Xavier Walker
>It's gonna totally work this time, bros
Austin Davis
>BTW you'll be working 2 x as hard and for 0.5 x the wage.
Tyler Gray
>Which I'll - sorry comrade, I mean WE'LL - take and distribute to everyone. DEFINITELY. HAHA
Josiah Gray
>Real communists have never been tried
It's tried over and over and over and every time goes womp womp.
Why because it depends on a moral and just human to lead it. Let that sink in for a second.
>Moral and just Human with no self interests whatsoever.
Nicholas Morris
It failed why don't you get it
Tyler Carter
Rare based leaf post
Dominic Smith
Jayden Morris
No because communism died and the zombie of it is faggotry. If you say you’re a communist in 2020, you’re saying you’re a faggot. There is no communism
Dominic Foster
Yes
Logan Stewart
Fun Fact about Dialectical Marxism btw
Did you know if you are a construction worker or minimum wage employee at mcdonalds and you own a single share of a single stock in a single company that nets you one single cent in dividends, you are by Marx's Autistic definition a member of the
"Capitalist Class"
And are to be slaughtered in the revolutionary holocaust with all others "exploiting the workers through ownership of the means of production"???
Food for thought.
Jason Young
Yas Forums is 18+, so I guess not.
Logan Martin
>Yeah workers, read this 19th century document written by a bearded outcast and a factory owner, it should inform you greatly of 21st century contemporary happenings!
When will these red-star morons leave this shit in the dustbin of history
Brody Scott
I see two issues with this. First, its very materialistic. I know communism in general is about materialism, but even among two people of the same material standing, one can be oppressed by how the other treats them. Look at Iran, a supposedly revolutionary and wannabe-communist (?) state, women are treated awfully there. With the absence of class struggle, or when its dulled, this becomes even more obvious, but its always present. The other issue is, you can single out some identity groups, like jews, based on economic class. Jews are over-represented in the jobs where you don't work to make money, rather your money makes money, and you are just a manager for your money, so it can make more money: producers, bankers, rentiers, etc. How would you protect your class struggle from embracing an anti-jewish identitarian look to it, as it has here on Yas Forums?
tl;dr:
>SJWs aren't strictly wrong, and there is an identity struggle parallel and within the classes
>dividing people based on class also creates borders that coincide with some identity borders, making it easy for Augustus/Napoleon/Stalin to hijack the movement again
Tyler Rodriguez
>They're not wrong because of mental gymnastics relating to what proles are
Ayden Long
But all marxist-leninist communists propose socialism to be applied as a transition to communism and that has never worked.
As for alternative visions, their outcomes have been even worse, such as in Cambodia you have the Khmer Rouge enforcing abolition of family and private property on gunpoint; and Bakunin tier Ancoms have always been used as cannon fodder for the stalinists and as soon as they rise into power, they get rid of them first.
So yes, real communism has never been tried as it is impossible because of human nature.
Anthony Brooks
>This isn't a secular cult btw
Nathaniel Allen
You are not a communist if you're '''against''' dividing people by class.
Angel Hernandez
>Unironic communist on Pol
Only Pol pot lovers.
Case closed
Gavin Murphy
Just post a landlord containment thread
Aiden Gutierrez
>burger
>doesn’t understand class interests
I... oh well... you know what... forget it... there is no hope for you
Carter Gray
Communism simply has not, nor ever will work in a sovereign nation. At least fascism has worked in countries before the west decided to fight it. Communism leads to bread lines while fascism leads a wealthy and proud nation.
Asher Reed
I am not against dividing people based on their class, specifically based on if they produce, or if they leech on other people's production. However, I am saying that there are other, equally valid ways to divide people, and that they are very common and people act on them. Class identity is much weaker than ethnic identity right now, in the USA. The Democratic party elections showed as much, it was basically a census on class struggle vs identity politics.
Carson Bell
You sound like a neoliberal weasel. Sure you're totally a communsit except you really care about these other issues.
Go back to supporting the 'revolution' of Bernie Sanders.
Cameron Torres
Lieber tot als rot.
Andrew Brown
If you work to make money, you are working class.
If your money makes money, you are not working class.
The worker in question would have his one single share confiscated, and be a worker. His landlord would have all his property confiscated, and be a worker too. Except an unemployed homeless worker, since he never really worked, his money was just making him money.
Protip: your favorite rockstar is a worker, and his (probably poorer than him) manager is not a worker. Its not about wealth, its about how you source your wealth.
Wyatt Edwards
>>Claims doesn’t understand class interests
> arguments as to why i dont
>> Marxist quotations to show me as wrong
Bro I read fucking Kapital and the Manifesto.
Slogged through that shit more to prove a point then anything else
And you damn well know the REASON you cant debunk anything I said is because i am objectively fucking right.
You may not like.
It may not portray marxism in "light" you wish it was.
But the fact of the matter is Marx defined the Capitalist Class as any who owned the means of production and exploited the workers through their wages to this end.
When you own a share of a companies stock?
You own a part of that Company.
An Portion of their means of production.
And when you get a dividend from them??
You are objectively "exploiting the workers" under the Marxist Definition to your own fucking ends.
If I am wrong on ANY OF THIS
BY ALL MEANS
SHOW ME ONE
SINGLE
SOLITARY
Quote From Marx
That Defines the Capitalist Class as anything but what i just described them as.
Mason Morgan
>marxist-leninist communists propose socialism to be applied as a transition to communism
Socialism = communism
Socialism/communism =/= anarchism
Anarchism = subsistence economy without civilization
There is no „transition phase“ to communism, and communism does not mean that a hippy village found their commune where they are happy growing potatoes
Kayden Robinson
>Real communists have never been tried
Not on a large scale, but on the microscale it is the basis for most european families. Maybe different in North America, where your dad will start collecting rent from you to let you live in the basement.
Also at work in monasteries, where symbolical families of "brothers" live together and share everything according to need.
Trying to make this work in something as big as a country, or even just a city, has so far been horrible and a disaster. Most regimes quit halfway through and just stick to secular modernization and some sort of social republicanism. I'm thinking the next goal should probably be factory scale, rather than state scale. If there is a democratic election of plans and CEOs in some factory, and this happens a thousand times in a thousand places, then we can say we have it figured out and go back to trying it on a state scale.
(factory here meaning big corporation, not just a workshop)
Oliver Anderson
Archon = ruler.
Monarchy = Mono Archon = One ruler.
Anarchy = No Archon = no ruler.
Technically the EU is an anarchy, for example. Its ruled by a council, not an archon.
So communism would also be anarchy. There'd be no ruler, no president or dictator or party chief in the final state of the movement. Thats what the word means.
Austin Ross
>If you work to make money, you are working class.
>>If your money makes money, you are not working class.
Yes user.
But in the case of the costruction worker on the minimum wage employee who just happens to own a fucking share in wallmart giving 30 cents a month in dividends
His money IS MAKING HIM MONEY.
And Under Dialectical Marxism?
That makes him objectively completely and utterly a member of the Exploiting classes of society.
>The worker in question would have his one single share confiscated
Revisionary bullshit.
Please
Quote to me the part of Marx where a Member of the Capitalist Class is no longer considered a member of the Capitalist Class because he doesnt own "a large portion" of the means of production.
Marx breaks down the Capitalist class into subgroups
But he NEVER claims that members are of the Capitalist class (IE the class that owns the means of production) are also "workers"
Its fine if this is YOUR DEFINITION.
And YOUR brand or Revisionary Socialism.
But the idea that this is what Marx said is objectively and demonstrably untrue
As you would know if you had ever read any fucking dialectical theory what so ever.
Blake Reed
Rich = Jews
Communists kill the rich.
Brayden Collins
Look, i‘m not going to explain to you the basics of logic such as abstractions
You have to learn that on your own, or at least try thinking it trough
Tyler Sanchez
>Technically the EU is an anarchy, for example. Its ruled by a council, not an archon.
This really hurts my eyes user
Don’t you find your larping embarrassing?
Gavin Butler
You are strawmanning. I just said that his productive capital (his one share) will be nationalized, just like all other productive capital. Then he will have none, and he will just be a worker. This will be done with all productive capital, making it so all the people are just workers. You don't literally eat the managers, you only kill them "in self defense", as the theory says, if they refuse to relinquish it. If they give it away when you ask, then they stay.
That is literally what the word means, user. It doesn't mean cowboys shooting indians, it doesn't mean black mask and grenades. It means no ruler.
Julian Robinson
>"Look im not going to defend my position i am just going to give off an air as if i know more then you and hope you accept my framming"
LMAO!
Bite a Dick Commie.
No Person has a right to be taken seriously as intellectual actor if they are unable or unwilling to defend their own position.
The Fact of the matter is that if you dont demonstrate your position to be objectively true you most likely CANT demonstrate your position to be objectively true.
As if you could you wouldnt waste your fucking time with this tumblr teir "its not my job to educate you bigot!" faggotry and would just make me look like an ignorant fool by showing me to be wrong IF I was.
Chase Bell
>Socialism = communism
what
Ethan Russell
That's why Stalin had all the kulaks killed right?
Jacob Carter
>You are strawmanning.
I am taking the dialectical ideas of Marx and applying them literally.
And that turns out to show the ideas to be pretty fucking autistic when applied within a modern setting.
Its fine if you DONT take Marx Literally
But this by definition makes you a revisionary and objectively NOT a "Marxist" in the truest sense the word.
You believe in socialism divergent from what Marx wrote and believed.
> I just said that his productive capital (his one share) will be nationalized, just like all other productive capital. Then he will have none, and he will just be a worker. This will be done with all productive capital, making it so all the people are just workers.
This is all post Marx Democratic Socialist (Actual Democratic Socialism mind you, not sanders teir social democracy) Revisionary ideology.
Marx firmly believed the ONLY WAY Socialism let alone Communism would ever be achieved would be through violent revolution and a "revolutionary holocuast' (his words not mine) of the entirety of the Capitalist Class.
Including our good friend the example of the mcdonalds woker.
If that sounds autistic or retarded to you thats fine
But thats BECAUSE Marxism itself is an outdated concept that was derived from social and economic analsis of a world that existed 100 years ago
Not the world of today.
>You don't literally eat the managers, you only kill them "in self defense", as the theory says, if they refuse to relinquish it.
Lol that is NOT what the Theory says.
Please quote to me the passage of Marx where he says "the revolution will only take place if the Capitalist Class resists"
Pro-tip he doesnt.
All that shit comes from Post Marx Revisionary socialists like yourself.
Benjamin Thompson
Its all so tiresome
idpol is idealism, im too tired to explain why
learn what materialism actually means and maybe you can figure it out yourself
Carter Cruz
The kulaks literally refused to have their stuff nationalized, so literally yes. But also Stalin wasn't exactly doing things by the book. He was just being a modernist tzar.
Easton Allen
Based leaf, you get the rake last.
Jaxon Sanchez
>That is literally what the word means
Archia = RULE, AUTHORITY
The eu is executing power, the eu council of ministers even has the power to make laws via majority vote
So take your larp and shove it up your arse
Andrew Flores
The kulaks got themselves killed when they resisted and started setting the fields on fire.
Generally speaking the bourgeoisie are not killed because they are bourgeoisie, but because they do things like this when their power is threatened.
Jackson Lee
thank you leaf, very cool
Christian Brooks
There is no difference between both, marx himself used it in his letters with engels as synonyms
Though there are people around who try to spread that communism is some sort of anarchism and socialism merely a „transition phase“ towards it
That’s total bullshit
And people who are spreading this idea are dangerous because what they actually have in mind is the destruction of human civilization by going back to the roots: decentralised subsistence economy in hippie communities
Oliver Johnson
what are you on about
historical materialism very clearly divides the relations of production
primitive communalism, slave system, feudal system, capitalism, socialism, communism
This is fundamental. Socialism is the classless state, which transitions into the stateless classless society over time. You need a state so long as there are other states, which there will be untill the material conditions are such that forming states are no longer beneficial. It is only under a classless society that the material conditions can change to a configuration that would make that possible, since in a class society the ruling class would never let their mechanisms of power be dismantled.
Isaiah Clark
Marx literally said communism is a community of FREELY ASSOCIATED people. Anarchy in the political sense literally just means FREE ASSOCIATION. Meaning you aren't born into a social contract, you can voluntarily join one to claim its benefits and its duties. Thats what the word means.
Again, you seem to have some Fallout views of what anarchy means, which is incorrect. If this community (city) enforces some car ownership laws I dislike, I should be free to move to another city, and choose to associate with them, following their laws instead. This is anarchy. Not bound to contracts by birth (debt, laws, citizenship), only freely choosing to join them.
Lucas Cook
There are no "actual unironically literal communists" anywhere you fucking moron.
Dylan Bailey
I despise materialism and fatcats and am very heavily pro-worker rights. I'm also a nationalist though and don't believe in some sort of international proletarian revolution because people are not the same at heart, just like every culture is different and should work towards maintaining its cultural being.
Noah Rodriguez
>The kulaks got themselves killed when they resisted and started setting the fields on fire.
>Generally speaking the bourgeoisie are not killed because they are bourgeoisie, but because they do things like this when their power is threatened.
Exactly
Pic related is louis xvi. getting a hair cut
Luke Sullivan
a communist in the broadest sense is just someone who accepts historical materialism and the inevitability of communism
Caleb Turner
What is the purpose of doing it on a state scale?
Caleb Price
Bro, you are posting cringe. That guy was trying to start a counter-revolution with his relatives in Austria. We have the letters.
Nathaniel Campbell
>Look at Iran, a supposedly revolutionary and wannabe-communist (?) state