Communism

against all odds Butterfly makes a good post

Hi butterfly

Ok. Here's a non-authoritarian capitalist.

Attached: 513qozEITLL._SY445_.jpg (287x445, 35K)

Attached: DO NOT TALK TO BUTTERFAGGOT.jpg (474x347, 17K)

The German Ideology
The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy
Comments on James Mill, Éléments D’économie Politique
The Value-Form
Wage Labour and Capital
Value, Price and Profit
Capital Volume I

amazon.com/Why-Socialism-Works-Harrison-Lievesley/dp/1521531218/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

Nonsense. Capitalism requires a state, laws and authority to enforce its inequitable nature.
Destroying capitalism and the state is the only way.

dont you have like two dozen cats to attend to?

Or how to misinterpret Nietzsche

>capitalism is when da government do stuff

Attached: 1516227787523.jpg (248x247, 6K)

How many communist states have achieved communism?

How many libertarian socialist and anarchist ones have?

wow very insightful posts very smart and thought provoking

when you have no point so you play the epic sarcasm card

over 18 - gulag archipelago
under 18 - animal farm

I've only been on this board 2 days and I fucking hate you tripfag. Leave, or at least post anonymously like literally everyone else on this website

>communism
>early socialist and anarchist thinkers.
But why? None of them believed in historical materialism like Marx.

>camwhore

>CONFORM! CONFORM! My autism can’t take it!
Do you have meds?

I consider Marx and Stirner early socialists. They both critique the overly utopian sorts, but the OP is asking for literature to understand communism.
Even the earliest capitalists were utopians.

>fictional works by a monarchist

no

>>fictional works by a monarchist
yes

its a terrible way to understand anything

he was an anti-semitic romanovaboo who collaborated the CIA to promote fascist conspiracy theories to undermine what he saw as satanic bolshevik jews

hes /pol/ in a nutshell and as such is obviously a complete fucking retard who is wrong about everything and has to make shit up and get money from billionaires to remain relevant

go back to youtube faggot. we don't need more newfaggots like you

I get your point but Marx wasn't an utopian at all and his take on this communist/socialist societies are way different from the rest. He is balls deep in the dialectics.

>new to Yea Forums means new to Yea Forums
nice try, buddy. with reading comprehension that low you can't have been here too long, either
>*smack* *smack*
>...
>*smack* *smuck* *SMACK*
>... John could you please chew a little quie-
>WUHZ'AT YA SAY MIZ, YUH WUNT MUH TUH CONFOOM? CAYUN'T *smack* YOWA AWWTIM TAYKID?
>no it's just it's a little distrac-
>DOOO YAA HAVYA MEDS WELL DO YA??

Marx - Capital, Value, Price and Profit, Wage Labour and Capital
The German Ideology, Grundrisse,
Engels - Origin of the Family, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
Lenin - State and Revolution , What is be Done
Mao - Combat Liberalism
Luxemburg - Reform or Revolution
Kropotkin - Conquest of Bread, Mutual Aid
Stirner - Ego and its Own
Bookchin - Post-Scarcity Anarchism
Parenti - Blackshirts and Reds
Cockshott - Towards a New Socialism
Fisher - Capitalist Realism

Can’t wait for you to meet Rei.

Attached: 81872585-162F-48FC-927D-261FB3BAA50E.jpg (480x360, 13K)

Again I insist you to leave. We don't need more newfags from /pol/ or any other board, its already gotten so bad, I can't recognise this board already

Butterfly, I have a question for you: how do you reconcile Nietzsche with communism? One of the main pillars of his philosophy is antiegalitarianism. I know communism isn't egalitarian, but there can't be a Übermensch in a society without clases, the Übermensch itself is a concept that could only arise in a society with an aristocracy with abounding spare time.

And I mean true communism, not the Soviet socialist dictatorship type.

Butterfly, this is the first time I've seen you. Why do these faggots hate you, and why do you choose to abstain from anonymity? I understand wanting to stand out, but I feel like that could further encourage using names (thereby eliminating one of the greatest features of this site).

Well, at least if one reads them in that order, then, having read Marx, Engels, and Lenin, one should already be able to recognize Mao, Kropotkin, Bookchin, Parenti, and Cockshott as what they are (worthless garbage).

Also, I don't understand the use of reading Ego and its Own after having read chapter 3 of The German Ideology.

There are exactly two possible uses of "da government" right now: (1) making sure the capitalist mode of production runs smoothly by performing functions that non-state capitalist units are, as we historically learned, poor at handling (e.g. making the providers of labour-power not die by the time they're 45, fighting for the international interests of domestic capital, dealing with the resistance of the working class, etc.), or (2) effectuating revolutionary oppression of reactionary classes and the world-wide reorganization of production on a co-operative basis. All governments are currently going the first route.

>Why do these faggots hate you
you explained why you retard

Butterfly and :3 should be shot out of a cannon into the sea.

Real butterfly didn't use a trip code

Marx/Engels: The Manifesto
Lenin: What is to be done?
Halliday: Mao, The Unknown Story
Service: Stalin, a biography
The Black Book of Communism
The Gulag Archipelago

Start with Adam Smith and realize he'd be disgusted by what actually became of his ideas.

>canards
>pseudoscience
>conspiracy theories
>it was da milloonares!
>muh porky
imagine being this much of a simpleton

Anarchism is a fucking meme moron

Attached: smith on landlords.jpg (960x812, 64K)

you can believe this without being a commie. read George

Where would he be on the political spectrum if he was around today and adapted to the actualities of capitalism?

Attached: b40988278e01f4142d9273723a863318.jpg (474x267, 40K)

Prove to me that the dicatatorship of the proletariat is an unnecessary step in the process of implementing socialism

Step 1: Make everyone Christian
Step 2: Demonstrate that libertarian socialism logically follows from the teachings of Jesus
Step 3: Utopian socialist give away of the means of production
Step 4: End of profit as a concept

>female intelligence shines through once again

>make everyone
Sounds like the authoritarian state to me.

read the assemblywomen

Attached: greek assemblywomen.jpg (867x1000, 375K)

>Prove to me an alternate reality is in fact our reality
Weird goal post. I can only prove to you that this phony "dictatorship of the working class" hasn't done anything but ruin our chances. I cannot believe slaughtering socialists as fast as Hitler is the road to socialism.

Is that some Simone Weil spiel?

You better not be Catholic

Friedrich was under the impression that there will always be underlings, inferiors. I think, with technological and sociological advances, we just might not leave terribly lowly people behind like that.
And Nietzsche didn't even see them as laborers or slaves. We'd have automation in place of slavery. There's your abounding spare time. He describes the Üb as a cross between an aristocrat and an anarchist. I can see it. There's no need to be cruel to fellow humans. We wont let deformities continue to be bred. Military man with terrible digestive problems was all about toughness, but there is a kinder side of humanity that the Üb will probably adopt, at least for a time. I think it reconciles just fine.

>Elects a game show host for president
>Recommends a comedy as gospel

He represented the interests of a class that fought for capturing the mass of surplus-value as their profit against the old landed nobility that strove to capture it as their rent. No wonder he would say that.

On the contrary, as a commie you CAN'T believe this. You can only believe it either as bougie intellectual living in a time where landed nobility exists, or as a retarded anarchoid who is so devoid of any understanding that to make an argument he has to resort to empty liberal principles that say what is an eternal "robbery" and what isn't, or who has the eternal "right" to reap where.

The Revolution Shrugged by Ayn Bronstein

I assume you've read Lenin, so can you please refute his criticisms of anarchism in The State and Revolution?

>implying buttertranny reads

Dear brainlet-mosquito. Have you ever read much about 1700-1900's Russia? Have you ever read about peasant life, old cultural values, and the institution of serfdom (not to mention the abolishment of serfdom)? You sit here talking about communism, but you take the term out of context and try to apply it to a western liberal society, or to understand it from such a perspective. It is still gruesome, but it is quite coherent if you were to study the society where it took root.

I had thought about automation as a source for free labour, but this brings some problems, as well. For instance, with the Hedonistic tendencies of humanity, having androids would make humanity a pleasure seeking stupid beast. If you look at the development of technology, it has always been done in order to bring comfort and reduce pain. A trait that defines the Übermensch is his affirmation of suffering as inherent to life and a means to power. If you take suffering away then no human would want to gain that power, for they are weak and they prefer instant satisfaction. So their spare time would go to waste. I believe most humans born in that future would rather ‘live’ a virtual reality than ours.

What is there to refute? He betrayed the revolution, killed socialists, established state authoritarian capitalism and paved the way for Stalin and Beria, and set the socialists movement back a hundred years. Exactly where his thinking betrays us isn’t important to me at this criticle stage in history. Can you cut to the chase and justify him and his ideas to me? Old /tankypol/ never could engage me on this. Can you?

One can always do with more studying, but yes, I have read some. Herzen’s My Past & Thoughts goes into some wonderful details. Some of it made me cry. Good stuff, I recommend. I’ve read some Hobsbawm on the era and another book specifically about the European Spring, t name a few.

Last part first. We are living in that age now. Most “westerners” or “advanced” cultures prefer living in a virtual world. This is decadence we need to resist. Or we die.
Again, I think Nietzsche’s obsession with hardness comes from his military background and his infirmity. The varieties of people world round will go off in their directions, as they e always done. Some will found religious communes and rot their minds out, others will go about an idle existence and die climbing mountains or jumping from buildings. Others will practice Epicureanism as it is the most agreeable way of life. Some will want to till their own land, pushing themselves, work as leisure activity. Rewilding the world and getting to know each other will still be a challenge.

Do you think we should accelerate Capitalism in order to have that technology (e.g. an advanced A.I.) and then establish communism?

You only need to read this

动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 劉曉波动态网自由门

They have great songs:

youtube.com/watch?v=x2YlbiyiuMc

That’s been pretty disastrous so far. Still the technology is here and more in the way. I don’t advocate Luddite primitivism, but I understand where they’re coming from and I think we ought to live with technology as we advance it. The market doesn’t drive innovation properly. How about letting our survival instinct drive it for a while.

My favorite
m.youtube.com/watch?v=FzdmDTiSFN4

Just read the Manifesto (really READ it), and you'll be an expert. You can argue with any neo marxist and win.

Attached: 1559474589888.jpg (391x358, 43K)

Regardless of what he was, he'd be called a commie. That's how the rich shut down all discussion of anything that goes against their immediate interests.

this unironically. bear in mind that his wife was totally brainwashed fool

0/10

>I can't recognise this board already
maybe because youre a nigger, and believe in communism, an ideology that has been proven, with thousands of arguments, to be shitty as shit

you just got angry because i mentioned his wife. and that's a fact.

You’re mad because she blew the lid off his cover and so you smear her as insane. That’s the fact.

i see you havent read anything but london (and thats THE fact)

apex lel

I don't really think our survival instinct needs an AI, but it's true that innovation won't thrive in an oligarchic society that much. Tension between nations has usually worked better, even wars.
How should we establish communism? Dialectical materialism seems true. However, I don't think we are right now capable of restructuring society in a natural way making it feasible. Revolution is dangerous, for it may lead to tirany, such as the USSR.
Honestly, Ancient Athens is my preferred society, it gave us so much art, which is the thing I value most. I know we won't get that back, though. So at this point, we might as well try Communism. I think my fear for art is what's holding me back, probably my misanthropy, too.
It shouldn't be worse than the dystopian shit we are living in. At least the Imperialism of the 19th century gave us Romanticism as a byproduct, but what has humanity produced since the postwar era? Absolutely nothing. Fuck.

Sorry but we tried real Communism more than once and somehow it always failed, probably due to the ideology itself being full of contradictions and a mere utopian fuss.

Marx didn't want what the USSR accomplished. I doubt we are capable of doing the real thing right now let alone a century ago.

I'm not going to sit here and attempt to justify Lenin to you, as I have shit to do and it's not what I was talking about. But since I see that you haven't read any Lenin here's the passage I was referring to- perhaps you can read it and we can discuss your specific disagreements

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch04.htm#s2

You haven't even seen some of the stupider shit they've said, they've learned not to share their opinion on anything but communism thank god.

>I have shit to do
>I demand you respond you my idiotic demand so I can insult you

States are still too powerful, so I don’t recommend a power struggle, at least directly. I think we just need to avail ourselves of all the technology available to us in order to restructure the economy to something more suitable, and no I don’t mean bitcoin!
As the economy begins to teeter out of control we chip away at the vulnerable places. Breaking people out of private prisons, putting the homeless into the empty homes, local intranets, even local elections could do some good. A bunch of stuff.

I’ll see if I can squeeze it in.

put your trip back on

The thing is that we can't hope to succeed doing that what you said, it would require a complet change of mindset in the population, the will of the nowadays proletarian is just too feeble, the society is atomized, the identity of a lot of people is based on their compsumtion habits, the kind of effort you support couldn't be done because people don't care due to the lack of class consciousness neither have the constancy to do it. Think about the societies were a revolution was tried, they were agrarian collectivist societies.

The things I’m suggesting are about healing those rifts. And people will have to care if we end up waiting for the economy to tank. Offering a duel income for the hours they work would be incentive enough for some. Organization is all this needs.

Coward post.

Wasn’t me.
He’s responding to a cowardly post.
Is this the same user?

After reading some I have come away unconvinced. Slippery nonsense and misrepresentation, but for Proudhon.
It boils down to the same old thing we hear all the time. The people need a state to beat the bourgeoisie and that establishing just a rigid a class system as they, they will someday melt their state and class away when the time is right.
New flash. It never happened. Bakunin was right.
Read any Bookchin? Might be worth our time.

>It never happened
if that's your argument you should be dismissing all of socialism, anarchism included, not just Leninism

>Organization is all this needs
And that's why it isn't possible there's a lack of trust, a lack of bonds between individuals more meaningfull than: "I like this group of products", I could give a far better and more complete explanation in Spanish

The plan wasn’t to establish an authoritarian states that then collapses and becomes oligarchic capitalism... what a nightmare mirror you claim to live in.

No, that’s enough. You see where the weakness is, where the challenge lies. We do it or we won’t make it out of this century.

>The Black Book of Communism
>The Gulag Archipelago

Man I almost took you seriously for a second.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Münster_rebellion

ITT teenagers who don’t know that they’re unwitting Christian millenarians.