Actually, this town has more than enough room for the two of us
He/him or they/them, doesn't matter too much
Marxist-Leninist ☭
Interested in Marxism-Leninism? Check out my "Read Theory, Darn it!" introductory reading list!
Ah, the good 'ol "facts and data don't matter, actually, because I said so" special. The fact that Socialism was better than Capitalism is today isn't just in some studies, but repeated over and over again. It's thoroughly well-documented.
Further, you have no real proof of anything. Why on Earth would the sharp increase in poverty, prostitution, drug abuse, crime, wealth inequality, homelessness, and starvation occur because of the previously stable system? The dissolution of the USSR was driven instead by numerous complex factors:
Countries like the PRC have taken to heart what happened in the USSR. As an example, the PRC shifted to a more classically Marxist economy, focusing on public ownership of only the large firms and key industries, and relying on markets to develop out of private ownership. This keeps them in touch with the global economy without giving the bourgeoisie control of key industries, and thus the bourgeoisie has no power over the economy or the state.
Further yet, your casual queerphobia, assertion that I am both somehow lumpen and bourgeois, the incorrect claim that I'm a college student, and more baseless insults really just adds to the fact that you have no counter to the hard data, so you resort to personal attacks.
The fact is, under Socialism, necessities were taken care of, and luxuries were shorter in supply. Luxuries increased for those who could afford them after Capitalism came, while many of those who couldn't enjoyed their new "freedom" starving to death. You insult them.
Unsurprisingly, you defend the fascist Bukele here. Entirely unsurprising, the anticommunism from you suddenly clicks when we see what makes you cheer.
Cops systemically.
Communism is to be desired, though it's understandable that you'd be opposed if your major exposure is through western education and western documentaries.
I really don't think I do deserve it, honestly. Despite your repeated insults, from the very beginning, no less, I replied patiently and honestly to everything and ignored the insults on the off-chance you turned your attitude around. Nevertheless, your insults still end up helping me rhetorically, as it's useful for onlookers to see. Oh well.
Sadly, I find book recommendations usually work better for leftists than libs. I wonder why...
The vast majority of post-Soviet citizens believe they are worse off now than under Socialism, which makes sense because the reintroduction of Capitalism resulted in skyrocketing rates of poverty, prostitution, drug abuse, homelessness, and an estimated 7 million excess deaths around the world.
Don't know why you're calling me a lumpen, tbh.
If you want to disengage with someone, the polite way is to just write "disengage," not to try to throw in a last second snide remark.
It's heartbreaking to read.
This is going to sound incredibly facetious, but I've had multiple dozens of people directly thank me for reaching them. I can't reach everyone, of course, but I know for a fact that I do reach many people, so your assertion that because I can't seem to reach you that I must not be able to reach anyone is just not true.
I could absolutely be better at reaching people, of course I could, but I also know that different strategies work for different people, and some people simply don't want to be reached to begin with.
I don't see how that's the case, but okay!
Communism is absolutely better 👍
In an ideal world, the Red Scare would not have existed, and we could discuss the genuine merits and struggles faced internally and externally in AES without that clouding discussion. Its why I prefer talking with comrades about the shortcomings in AES, as I know they aren't doing it to undermine the achievements but to legitimately identify problems to solve.
I think, despite all of the struggles, that I do an okay job with engaging people open to listening.
Thanks! 🫡
If the person is nervous about legitimate abuses in AES, then I do my best to make sure those abuses are accurately highlighted. Here's an example of me doing just that. I'm not going to pivot the conversation to a different area just to highlight unrelated flaws, though, that's off-topic and rhetorically bad. Surely you can see that, right?
Like, yes, Stalin outlawing gay marriage was bad, indisputably. Bolsheviks that were pro-gay marriage like Kollontai should have been listened to. I don't need to insert that or other critiques into every comment, though.
Seems like it, sadly.
I know that based on the hard data I've seen, the people I have spoken to, the history and critique I have read, that a good amount of what you have said is disconnected from reality, and closer to what the US State Department claims is the truth. I understand that you may have anecdotal experiences shaping your opinions, but I also know that it isn't simple nostalgia like the Wikipedia entry suggests, but coincides with the massive increase in poverty and the difficulty of life in a Capitalist world after the dissolution of Socialism.
What would the person you're looking for, so to speak, do that I'm not?
You'll find me critical of AES all the time, but I won't cede ground for what I know to be false just for optics. I take a rigorous approach to rhetoric, I cede no ground that isn't rooted in fact, and I do my best to encourage accurate critique. When you see me defending AES and seemingly not critiquing them as much, it's usually in the context of someone repeating the same bog-standard state department anticommunist mythos that have existed for decades, and thus should be treated as such.
Go ahead and ask me for critiques of AES, and I can do so, but I won't lie about them either.
What, specifically, is not a necessary component of Communism? The version of AES that exists in your mind, full of anticommunist prejudice and red scare mythos clouding your judgement, or the version that exists in real life, with far more nuanced issues applicable to all of Socialism, past, present, and future alike?
Further, the Kim family does not have all of the power in the DPRK. A critical examination of the structure and history of the DPRK proves that isn't true. That's like saying the Bush and Kennedy familys have all of the power in the US.
On the "One Drop Rule" and Other Mistakes in Determining Mode of Production
Among many who have not engaged with Marxist theory, there can be confusion regarding the determination of systems as Socialist, Capitalist, and so forth. Are markets Capitalism? Is public ownership Socialism? Is a worker cooperative in a Capitalist country a fragment of Socialism? These questions are answered by studying Dialectical and Historical Materialism, and I will attempt to help clarify those questions here.
The idea that Socialism means only and exclusively full ownership in public hands is wrong, and anti-Marxist. To take such a stance means either Capitalism and Feudalism have never existed either, the sort of “one-drop” rule, or that Socialism itself is a unique Mode of Production that needs to be judged based on “purity” while the rest do not, a conception that has roots in idealism rather than Materialism.
Modes of Production should be defined in a manner that is consistent. If we hold this definition for Socialism, then either it means a portion of the economy can be
Casual Lenin W, on the Anniversary of his Death
For good fun, here are a few of Lenin's most important contributions to Marxist theory, I highly recommend all of them (but Imperialism especially).
Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (must read for any Leftist wanting to understand modern Capitalism, Anarchists included!)
Kramer Watches Parenti
Dr. Michael Parenti 1986 Lecture "Yellow Parenti"
Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism
But that expropriation of the Third World—has been going on for 400 years—brings us to another revelation—namely, that the Third World is not poor. You don't go to poor countries to make money. There are very few poor countries in this world. Most countries are rich! The Philippines are rich! Brazil is rich! Mexico is rich! Chile is rich—only the people are poor. But there's billions to be made there, to be carved out, and to be taken—there's been billions for 400 years! The Capitalist European and North American powers have carved out and taken the timber, the flax, the hemp, the cocoa, the rum, the tin, the copper, the iron, the rubber, the bauxite, the slaves, and the cheap labour. They have taken out of these coun
☭ Workers of the World, Unite! ☭
Interested in Marxism-Leninism? Check out my "Read Theory, Darn it!" introductory reading list!
Parenti Hands
Dr. Michael Parenti 1986 Lecture "Yellow Parenti"
Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism
But that expropriation of the Third World—has been going on for 400 years—brings us to another revelation—namely, that the Third World is not poor. You don't go to poor countries to make money. There are very few poor countries in this world. Most countries are rich! The Philippines are rich! Brazil is rich! Mexico is rich! Chile is rich—only the people are poor. But there's billions to be made there, to be carved out, and to be taken—there's been billions for 400 years! The Capitalist European and North American powers have carved out and taken the timber, the flax, the hemp, the cocoa, the rum, the tin, the copper, the iron, the rubber, the bauxite, the slaves, and the cheap labour. They have taken out of these coun
PragerUrine
"More than 80% of all combat during the Second World War took place on the Eastern Front."
For a fantastic look into the history of fascism and Communism as bitter enemies, Blackshirts and Reds by Dr. Michael Parenti.
The Greatest Lie about the Red Scare is that it Ended
Check out my "Read Theory, Darn it!" introductory reading list!
Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of "Brainwashing"
I’ve become very skeptical of the concept of “brainwashing.” Over the past few months this skepticism has boiled over into open and explicit disagreement with even well-meaning pushers within the Marxist-Leninist corner. I often find it difficult to explain concisely why it is…
The theory that large segments of populations are manipulated through indoctrination holds little water, and serves to stem real revolutionary efforts to change the minds of people. Roderic Day makes the case in this essay I consider to be required reading for any self-respecting leftist that instead of brainwashing, propaganda instead works by providing a narrative that is easy to "go along with" as tacit benefactors of present systems. Propaganda does not need to hold under scrutiny to be effective, because it serves as justification, it "licenses" the populace to adopt stances that align with state interests.
Because these narratives are easy to go along with and stem cognitive dissonance, this means that we can convince others, primarily through focusing on positives in the primary and debunking negatives in the secondary. We can convince the proletariat of the benefits of adopting Socialist stances and subvert that way, rather than focusing on debunking atrocity propagan
"Tankies"
Tankies don’t usually believe that Stalin or Mao “did nothing wrong,” although many do use that phrase for effect (this is the internet, remember). We believe that Stalin and Mao were committed socialists who, despite their mistakes, did much more for humanity than most of the…
In current discourse on Lemmy, there is much fearmongering about “tankies,” yet this term is frequently ill-defined and moreover used as a thought terminating cliché. Roderic Day goes over the term, and offers contextualization and explanation for those who uphold and defend Actually Existing Socialism, in this short 8 minute article. My favorite paragraph is as follows:
“Anyway, the basic point is that socialist revolution is neither easy (as the Trotskyists and ultraleftists would have it) nor impossible (as the liberals and conservatives would have it), but hard. It will require dedication and sacrifice and it won’t be won in a day. Tankies are those people who think the millions of communists who fought and died for socialism in the twentieth century weren’t evil, dupes, or wasting their time, but people to whom we owe a great deal and who can still teach us a lot.”
If you consider yourself a Socialist, you have a duty to try to better understand and contextualize historical Soci
On my view, the core Marxist insight is the following: Feudal lords were the masters of feudalism. Capitalists, however, aren’t the masters of capitalism. They are merely the high priests of capitalism. The master of capitalism is Capital itself.
There are many strains of Socialist thought. Why should Socialists adopt a Marxist line today? This question is answered concisely in this article by Roderic Day.
The most foundational problem to liberal economics is that it’s an incredibly static system of analysis, that starts off by assuming…
This article goes over why Marxists advocate for Public ownership of the Means of Production specifically, and not cooperative, communal, or otherwise similarly "worker owned" structures.
What is Socialism?
Socialism, as most Marxists agree, is an economic system based in public ownership over the means of production rather than private…
A common point of conflict among leftists is understanding what constitutes Socialism. This article explains common errors among Leftists in analyzing what a system needs to look like to be considered Socialist. If an economy has 10% in the Private Sector, is it Capitalist? What about 51%? Does the direction matter?
The short answer, proven in the article, is that it is determined by which class is in power, what the driving force of an economy is. Does the Private Sector drive the public, or does the public sector drive the Private? This can be accomplished by including heavy industry and inftastructure in the Public Sector, making the Private Sector reliant on socialized production and thus subservient to it, and maintaining Proletarian supremacy over the Private Sector.
The presense of Private Property and even billionaires does not mean Private Property drives the direction of the economy, and as Engels elaborates in Principles of Communism, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat
Read Theory, Darn it! An Introductory Reading List for Marxism-Leninism
"Without Revolutionary theory, there can be no Revolutionary Movement."
— Vladimir Lenin^[What is to be Done? | Audiobook]
It's time to read theory, comrades! As Lenin says, "Despair is typical of those who do not understand the causes of evil, see no way out, and are incapable of struggle." Marxism-Leninism is broken into 3 major components, as noted by Lenin in his pamphlet The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism: | Audiobook
As such, I created the following list to take you from no knowledge whatsoever of Leftist theory, and leave you with a strong understanding of the critical fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism in an order that
Michael Parenti Lecture (1986)
Also known affectionately as "Yellow Parenti."