"to each according to his needs"

The standard marxists/marxian thinking on racial disputes is that they stem from a level of racial inequality which in turn stems from wealth or class inequality. The point is that if you work to eliminate class inequality you are also actively working to eliminate all other forms of inequality which stem from a class-based bourgois dominated system. I suppose if it still happened it would be seen as something coming from some remnants of a class-based society needing to be dealt with. How you'd deal with it would depend on how violent the regime is willing to be in pursuit of their ideals, I suppose

>How you'd deal with it
I dont really understand. I thought the people 'dealing with it' were the community themselves. Is there some higher authority that can make the community do what it wants?

You seem to be thinking of a sort of communalistic socialism. I was refering more to the historical examples of socialist regimes that have existed (USSR, Cuba etc.). In these historical examples yes there were centralized political structures that could force people to do what they wanted. I'm not saying the kind of socialist commune you're alluding to couldn't exist (may already), I'm just saying it's not a form of socialism that humanity has had a lot of experience with, so it's hard to say conclusively

Ideally there would be more opportunities to find something meaningful

What solution(s) would you have in mind personally

idealists like this are just dumb. dont waste your time thinking about them at all

My solution really would be focused on eliminating the class-system and have essentially the same anti-discrimination laws we already have now, except not being constantly undercut by the fact that we live in a perpetual state of class struggle in which everyone just fend for themselves. To answer your question more directly I don't think in a sucessfully established socialist state racism would even exist (except as a residue of what that society had been in the past, as aforementioned), certainy not in the form which it exists today

Thanks

such a cute image. where from?

>a yuppie genuinely needs more than a bum to even survive
>marxism would not only be essentially capitalist but also its regression to its mythical ancient bestiality

This is why your should NEVER invert Hegel.

What would compel one to spend 16 hours gaming and browsing Yea Forums in a human society?

This is why you should not have opinions before learning about what you want to have opinions on.

Gunsmith Cats.

Of course, the bourgeoisie must pay for our neet lives otherwise revolution is impossible, glory to Bolshevik power ;)

>The essence of pure evil.

Attached: my gril alissa.jpg (417x598, 42K)

"Needs" are subjective, so Marxism could never work. And it hasn't.

Sky is blue, so you're retarded.

i need a boyfriend auuuuuuuuuuuu

Don't worry, we intellectuals are setting up what you real needs are and are sending it to the politburo. If you disagree with what we think you want, you are consumed by capitalist false consciousness.

Define a need beyond basic sustenance and shelter.

It's subjective, obviously. I couldn't have made it clearer that I agree with "needs are subjective" when I compared it to motherfucking "sky is blue", could I?

It's summer, so excuse my missing your facetiousness. "Reality is objective" is genuine rebuttal used by leftists when encountering the postmodern, and subjectivity or relativism.

that is a problem, predetermining who gets what and why without a system that recognizes individual merit, or rather seems to extort it.

>Does this include my 16 hours per day gaming and Yea Forums browsing habit
Yes, but you won´t get money according to your "needs"

Way to deny a basic human right, bootlicker cunt.

Its just evolution, if your abilities aren´t needed, you die off. capitalistic society is just a transformation of this survival-principle. I think even communism would duplicate it.

If we're being serious, as long as user or user's parents are producing value, he won't die off.

You likely wouldn't be depressed (caused by social atomization) or autistic (caused my aluminium in your heavily processed food) in a well run communist society

>to each according to he sneeds

Attached: Sneed's_feed_and_seed.png (640x480, 222K)

lmao he's got depression and autism squared away

Everything gets what they want from the pool of social product, only it will be restricted by quotas in a lower stage.
Communism is moneyless.
Communists don't believe in "human right".

Everyone*

So his parents are securing his "human rights"?

>Communism is moneyless.
Based retard

You've missed my meaning.

And you missed mine. Your socalled human rights are connected to his value in society

? I wasn't be genuine with human rights comment.

Then stop trolling, this board is for serious discussion!

4u

Attached: 1527387187135.jpg (852x1136, 110K)

You wouldn't need video games under socialism because your life wouldn't be unbearable without them.

That's capitalism minus compensation.

From each according to his Chucks to each according to his Sneeds

BASED Marx and can we give a big FUCK OFF and SHUT THE FUCK UP to the basic bitches and butterflies that haven’t read him and think capitalism is NEATO and HELLA ALRIGHT since it’s all they’ve ever known, and their intellectual capacity doesn’t reach any further

Attached: 47BBEDCB-6A4C-4ECE-9A70-1BABFB0B8A37.png (356x475, 194K)

and those who only learned about the evils of "capitalism" in their gender studies, or poly-sci studies, without exposure to criticism against socialism.

Just look at the difference between demand and need that marx theorized about:
"Money, which is the external, universal means of power (...) to turn imagination into reality and reality into mere imagination, similarly turns real human and natural powers into purely abstract representations, and therefore imperfections and tormenting phantoms, juast as it turns real imperfections and phantoms -truly impotent powers which exist only in the individuals fancy - into real essential powers and abilities"

You're fundamentally broke so purged.

The majority wins all the time.

What if I have no abilities?

Holy fuck! It's Alex Jones' retarded communist cousin

Attached: maxresdefault (3).jpg (1280x720, 123K)

Then you have no needs

Attached: bugs.jpg (249x478, 26K)

>racial inequality
Cool

>which in turn stems from wealth or class inequality
Ehhhhhhhh

Baseless projection from a brainlet capitalist, imagine my shock
Let me know when you have something substantive to say, like maybe try making those esoteric “criticisms of socialism” yourself? Dazzle us, I dare you.

Capitalist conformists legitimately think that they’re the ones with the outside the box perspective, and SOCIALISTS are the ones who conform without exposing themselves to other ideologies. You see this all the time. It truly boggles the mind how straight retarded a great many people are.

socialists comment on capitalist being conformist
creates societies based on collectives, with anti individual, anti personal laws

It's actually capitalism which alienates individuals from their real individuality according to marxists.
Also, existing socialist regimes were just slightly modified state capitalist regimes.

The only thing that lasted more than a couple months and could in any way be deemed a "society created by socialists" actually introduced several "pro-individual laws" compared to the ones they found already in place, e.g. legal abortion, free market reforms.

restrict private property, allow the state to monopolize means of production, which gives state control of economy, and the individual will flourish. Am I missing something? Where has this gone right? Is China a beacon of socialist success?

>Is China a beacon of socialist success?
Unironically yes.
"the essence of socialism is the advancement of the productive forces"

Attached: e37.jpg (580x397, 75K)

>China
>Socialism
>Private property is the only way an individual can individually make use of a certain good
By what you're saying you're just not equipped to understand what you're talking about.
Read more, think more, then you might be able to have a substantial discussion.

If you really want an answer, i'll give you one. Before, i will say that i am in favor of mono-ethnicity.
Okay. So, in primitive communism, there was communism inside the tribe, but the different tribes were fighting and sometime killing each other. There was antagonisms between the different tribes.
Capitalism is a mode of production which is slowly transforming humans into commodities. A commodity doesn't have an history, a culture, a background. Each commodities are interchangeable. Capitalism is destroying cultural identities. At some point in the future, there won't be any identity left, and all humans will be made of the same interchangeable commodities. Then the final crisis of the Capital will happen. Human will realize that they were living in a fake society, the society of the commercial exchange. They will wake up, and want to live in a society based around human relationship, like in the primitive tribe again. However, this time, there won't be any antagonism left, since, the Capital will have destroyed any past identities. All human will constitute one unique tribe, and will share the production, without compete with other group, since there won't be other groups.

That's basically Marx premomition for superior communism. I don't necessarily agree, and it could take centuries to come to this point. Capitalism can also fall before this.