Holy shit. how is it possible for a marxist to read this and remain a marxist? is it even possible?

>implying the vanguard bolsheviks should have relinquished power while the disgusting crypto capitalists still lied in wait throughout russia ready to snuff out the light of the communist revolution

Added to the purge list.

well as the Memerson himself says "people should aim at the highest point they can see", so what's wrong with aiming for a perfect utopian society?

The oldest political meme ever.

NO TRUE SCOTSMAN

>be me
>marxist
>shits only marxist if no one dies brah
>win every argument with this line of thinking
feels good lads

Everyone note this. It's a crypto capitalist in action, sowing seeds of dissent against the pure revolution of Lenin. This is why the party couldn't dissolve itself. Pigs like this would quickly retake control of the country and oppress the proles with their selfish ways. We must remain strong and vigilant to stand against such horrid counter revolutionaries.

>so what's wrong with aiming for a perfect utopian society?
utopia is the biggest meme of all time. read pic related

>implying utopia doesn't go back to Plato's Rememelic

>citing a literal retard who had to use discourse to get his shitty points across
undergrad pls go

read this book by an actual libertarian Marxist who opposed Stalinism.

Serge>>>>>SolyenitSHIT

One such social formation is going to overtake liberal capitalism.

Stalinism was a project to turn feudal Czarist Russia into a spearhead for a global project of worker liberation. This is essentially impossible. Capitalism must first devour itself as a result of its culminating contradictions. Communism will begin to emerge when our means of production become too advanced for Capitalism to organize.

Even if the most basic intentions of the soviet project were possible, Stalin's theory was absolute shit.

Wew. Try this on for size:

"No Scotsman puts honey in his porridge"
"My neighbor Mr. Chan puts honey in his porridge."
"Mr. Chan is Chinese and therefore not an example of a Scotsman."

It would be a "no true scotsman" fallacy if there was no mass of scholarly argumentation to indicate that the USSR veered away from Marxian theory almost from its genesis.

Lenin murdered millions of innocent russian farmers and their families because they weren't 'down with the cause'. Are you seriously this retarded?

apolitical fag here. why do marxists have such a disgusting aura to them? every time i read the phrase marxist or libertarian i think of some disgusting soy ridden smelly disgusting piece of shit stinky larping whigger who smells really bad. are they tainted with this image for life? i mean ofc there are some of those people on the right but I usually associate dominance and power with right wing political terminology whereas whenever the word marxist is mentioned i immediately imagine very stinky skinnyfat disgusting sweaty greasy early 20s virgins who haven't had any characteristic developments since middle school. is this perception uncommon?

>Capitalism must first devour itself as a result of its culminating contradictions
You literally just described why the first communist state eventually collapsed. Capitalism is more adaptive than Communism not to say that it is a very flexible system or anything, just that it is more so than Communism. Because of this Capitalism will always outpace Communism. There is no "perfect" ideological system, just as there is no "perfect" form of government. It's just that some work better than others. Shame that you've fallen for the most memey one.

>"had to use" discourse
It's the art of his work to put it into dialogue context man. His ideas were just as legit as anyone's and in an interesting format why hate?

>innocent
>obvious crypto capitalists seeking to exploit the workers
Kill the capitalists while they're weak, that way you prevent a pervasive, oppressive system from developing. But keep supporting the enemies of true communism, capitalist dog.

Ok, even if that is true, you still have those pesky figures the likes of which include Mao and Pol Pot. But lemme guess...they were crypto-capitalists too right?

idk i never read him just felt like shitposting

Peterson is the disenfranchised liberal personified.

Autism meme ideologies for basement dwelling, social leach sperglords

Thanks for proving our point for us retard.

True heroes of the Revolution. Speaking ill of their brave attempts to safeguard Communism is divisive machinations of a capitalist.

You're the idiot buying into obvious capitalist propaganda. But keep shilling your half baked """socialism"""

A communist state cannot exist without being preceded by a violent revolution against the Upper classes. The rich will never willingly relinquish or cease trying to attain power and they must be either forced into servitude or violently killed. Anything else allows them potential to reamass wealth and power. Anyone against a violent revolution is either a capitalist themselves or a stooge shilling for a crypto-capitalist.

why do you think socialism is better than capitalism?

because you barely improve yourself. to aim at a perfect utopian society when you yourself are incapable of maintaining a clean room is ludicrous .

you don't think social progress could cause enough people to voluntarily support communism and move to an island of say 1000 people?

isn't it as ludicrous as saying that i'll never tell a lie or never say anything that makes me weak?

There has never been a point in history where the powerful have willingly relinquished their power without force or the threat of force compelling them to.

>ctrl f culture of critique

ITT: bluepilled jewish puppets.

Because I have eyes to see the crimes it commits and a brain to realize the solution

Nice folktale book written by a fascist

what crimes does capitalism commit that socialism does not commit?

Oppression and exploitation of the lower classes by the deceptive rich and powerful.

but with the technology we have, shouldn't we be able to one day progress to something successful? isn't the sameness promoted in cities like Los Angeles and Seattle proof enough that people can wholly agree (at least outwardly) on one political agenda?

I saw the title of the latter video and laughed.

>against the Upper classes. The rich will never willingly relinquish or cease trying to attain power

What constitues "the Upper classes"? Is there an economic number you put on this to classify people? Is it tied to race? Is it tied to family history? Political status? How do you define "Upper Class"? Furthermore, how do you ensure this vague definition remains static? Why can't it be malleable?

In a hypothetical situation, if someone makes $2.00/day while most other people make $1.00/day, does that make the former 'rich'? And if so, should they be systematically 'removed' to benefit the $1.00/day earners?

And assuming you could achieve a classless society, does the same logic apply to those who set policy? If the policy is set by the proletariat, doesn't that make them bourgeoisie and therefore open to eradication?

The idea of a classless society is a myth.

didn't that happen to Brazil with their last president that was ousted?

Any marxist worth his salt studies history and history is quite clear on power structures and how they change.

The Machine is too big to succumb to any kind of revolution. There have been instances where workers bounded together in the past to some avail but they haven't made a dent in the past century. Deep in the subconscious, the average human being is aware of the futility of any kind of revolt in the modern age. These people grow up to play the game. They get a job and have a family and they live their lives with their heads in the grass. This is where your average marxist/white nationalist comes in. These people are undersirables in every sense of the word. The opposite sex does not want to mate with them and the same sex does not want to befriend them. So what they do is find a scapegoat to blame for all their misfortune. They spend years consuming media that reaffirms their political views to the point of seeing everything through that lens. This is where the stuntedness of their characteristic developments come in. They are so busy consuming the same shit they don't even try to better themselves in order to find a mate and play the game (which is just as effective as pointless protests on the streets or dialogue on forums) and end up wasting their lives trying so hard to convince themselves that there's nothing wrong with them.

or say with pic related in Venezuela?

This kind of mealy-mouthed, smug pseudo-intellectualism in a "checkmate, communists :^)" is typical of the upper classes and enemies of the revolution. The only metric that matters is people who support and people who obstruct the revolution. Anyone who impedes it gets tied to the post and executed like the rabid dog they are.

Typical commie bullshit response

Good b8 comrade.

reminder that striving to become upperclass in the modern capitalistic society is an infinitely more dignifying, noble, and comfortable lifestyle than being a citizen in a country where marxist is implemented as marxists deem fit (i.e. 'real communism')

prove me the fuck wrong commies

I've literally been spitting out buzzwords and bullshitting this entire time. I'm not even communist.

...

I never said Stalin was a crypto-capitalist. From my limited research, he seemed genuinely invested in the project of communism. After establishing the vanguard, he promptly went completely psychotically paranoid. This didn't help the fact that his project was doomed from the beginning.

>you still have those pesky figures the likes of which include Mao and Pol Pot.

Okay Pol Pot didn't even have the support of the USSR, of Vietnam, or of the socialists who rebelled in Cambodia.

Mao is tricky. I really can't say much about the cultural revolution other than that it was atrocious. Was Mao a "true communist"? Probably. At least he most likely believed himself to be.

I still don't really get why these atrocities somehow damage the legitimacy of Marx's thought.

Marxism = material account of history w/ emphasis on relationship of workers to means of production
Communism = workers own the means of production
Capitalism = non-worker entity (or entities) controls the means of production
State capitalism = non-worker entity that controls the means of production is the state

Marxism =/= communism =/= state capitalism => capitalism

"""Communist""" Russia was state capitalist, and therefore capitalist, and therefore not communist. This is distinct from the "no true Scotsman" fallacy because we're working from definitions.

All of you people are a bunch of repressed irrational fascists. Going against the natural flow of history towards ***TRUE LIBERTY*** is positively retarded. All these reactionarybros swinging their dicks around to impress eachoter is kind of pathetic. This hungry meme is also stupid, it's not communism's fault if the US kept stealing supplies of food from Mao. This is why they are so fat now, GG US you killed millions. JK no millions died, that is reactionary thoughtchild

are you retarded? maybe in marx's fantasy world we could have a communist utopia, in real life obviously not. i don't believe a communist utopia would be good anyway unless you like having no freedom.

Disingenuous """marxists""" like this are the second to be lined up and shot for the lies they spread about the revolution.

>If I just pretend theorists never outline their terms I can win the argument by making them mean whatever I want
Spoken like a true amerifat
If you want to seem credible you should at least take the basic step of opening the motherfucking Wikipedia article

>The opposite sex does not want to mate with them and the same sex does not want to befriend them. So what they do is find a scapegoat to blame for all their misfortune.

Wtf? All the Marxists I know have not been socially culled.

> The opposite sex does not want to mate with them and the same sex does not want to befriend them.

Oh good lord. You must be well adjusted.

>end up wasting their lives trying so hard to convince themselves that there's nothing wrong with them.

So I should conform myself to the object of my disdain in order to be comfortable? Got it. I guess we're all a bunch of smelly NEETs who are simply trying to project our self loathing onto the system of global capitalism.

This is weak.

You haven't read Marx. He never outlines a utopian scenario. He simply attempted to predict what would come as a result of the inevitable shedding of capitalism.

Capitalism will not keep its grip on our rapidly advancing means of production. What do you suppose will take its place?

Btw, we have this shitty fifth-grade anti-communist circlejerk thread every week. Read some Engels.

I like how you ask lots of questions to avoid from saying anything at all then conclude your substanceless nothing retard garbage as if you said anything of worth. I'll bite though.

1. Upper class is anybody in the top 1% and anybody who actively enables and protects them
2. Shitty example, earning twice as much as someone isn't the disparity we're talking about in the real world. But using your shit example, say in a village of 100 people you earned 2 dollars/day and everybody else earned 2 cents/day, that's a good start to comprehending the disparity. And yes the 2 dollar/day guy should be destroyed.
3. Yes it does. Your second question is just retarded.

The funny thing is that people like you think commies are the utopians while you're the autistic idiot who thinks that any disparity at all means it's not a "true utopia".

Stop trying to make "it wasn't real communism" a meme, because it is a legitimate argument.

All of those things sound more like fascists 2bh. Everyone I know who went fascist was generally unpopular to begin with.

I shat up this thread talking out my ass and now I've got people following in my footsteps shilling for communism in this thread. It is a meme. It always will be a meme. It always has been a meme. It's disingenuous to state that what avowed, devoted, dedicated communists were doing wasn't actual communism because it doesn't meet whatever arbitrary criteria you've identified as *true* communism.

True. Communism/marxism has no lower classes, it only has one class which is the equivalent to the lower class of capitalist societies.

Fascists and Communists are two sides of the same coin. Replace whatever ethnic group the fascists shill for with proletariat/general class rhetoric and their talking points are ridiculously similar to each other that they just become a mildly different strain.

of* oh and the upper class which are the rulers/party members.

So any idea executed poorly makes it bad? Guess it's time to be cynical and hate everything because I don't have the balls to believe in anything.

>shoving words in my mouth
>buying into the biggest political meme in history, the revolution of '89
baka all leftists need to be guillotined

Yes because Stalin and the subsequent leaders of the USSR strayed very far from the origins of the thought. Even Lenin bastardized it

You've got it wrong, they are 2 coins and one is made of plastic. Fascist ideology drew heavily from commie ideology and never the other way around. Wealth disparity is also more significant than race. T b h race becomes more important the poorer you get, there's a reason for this.

To spread disinformation like that is to support fascists.

Unironically choke on a bullet capitalist shill

>Fascist ideology drew heavily from commie ideology and never the other way around
true

I'm fairly socialist ya mook

Not really, i'm saying that fascism is as much of a failed ideology as communism. It's not that fascism draws from communism, it's that they both spring from the same fount, the one that originated in the leftist revolution of 1789. It's precisely because of this that it's always disingenuous to describe Fascism as a right wing ideology.

"""socialists""" like you are the definition of crypto capitlalist and deserve to starve to death for splintering the focus of the revolution

national socialist?

How is that shoving words into your mouth when it is in effect what you meant by it? Also, that doesn't mean much coming from a political eunuch.

Youre going to make that assumption based on one comment. We have no place for hyperbolics in the revolution! OUT REEE

please nationalism is for children

>how am i assuming your position and making a strawman when i assume your position and dictate your own views to you

What kind of socialism are you talking about?

Again i'm the chucklefuck shitting up this thread by RPing a dedicated stalinist. The funniest part is I keep admitting it yet y'all keep taking the bait.

Because it's fiction

Looks like all you guys just got sorted xDDDDD

i've got all the cointel i need without your subpar attempts shitting up my shitting up this thread tyvm

...

>thotsky
>socialism
nice one :^)

user is trying to make you humiliate yourself further and it's working quite well. Just saying.

Yes and you're wrong.
Fascism DOES draw from communism/socialism and never the other way around, stop fucking lying.
Your last point isn't wrong, fascism is extremism of the center. Which makes me wonder how you can know that and not realize how fascism draws from the left?

Humiliate implies that I can feel shame. I'm literally just doing this while I make/eat some food. This bullshit is fun for me

Again drawing from the left =! drawing from communism. It's not a simple Left->Communism->fascism

It's more like a family tree in which the persons of communism and fascism both descend from the left.

Doesn't matter, it's for other anons to enjoy.

I'm glad everyone is having fun then This is a good vibes zone :)))

You said communism is shit because the people who failed at it were communists.
I said does this mean any idea executed poorly is shit.
You cry about how i'm putting words in your mouth, strawman, assuming your position etc.

It's a simple question but hey if you can't win just cry foul.

They don't read it because opposition to their ideology has to be censored to them. Marxism is the left version of Nazism, just replace "bourgeoisie" and "Jew."

I said
>It is a meme. It always will be a meme. It always has been a meme. It's disingenuous to state that what avowed, devoted, dedicated communists were doing wasn't actual communism because it doesn't meet whatever arbitrary criteria you've identified as *true* communism.
With "it" referring to "x wasn't real communism". From that you somehow drew "communism is shit because the people who failed at it were communists" which is a value statement located nowhere within the post you're replying to. So, yes, you are shoving words in my mouth. I was referring to an argument of rhetoric and you took that as an indictment of the ideology as a whole.