Thread 17947077

Do you think communism is inevitable? Or is class stratification unavoidable?

Class stratification is inevitable. Humans naturally form groups and hierarchies. Even Egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies had something like this.

>>17947077 (OP)
that depends on who is more stable.
whiteness is gone and dead. so in the future, america and europe is going to emphasize money and good conduct to stratify people respectively.
that or i really don't know how else they will support their own existence. chinese have them beat on 1. nationalism/racial purity, 2. manufacturing output, and now 3. trade.

>>17947077 (OP)
Some form of hierarchy is inevitable (even in a truly communist society), but it need not be on the lines of class.

>>17947077 (OP)
>Do you think communism is inevitable?
Nobody thinks that, apart from homosexual trust-fund babies.

>>17947077 (OP)
>>17947220
Communism isn't supposed to be non-hierarchical, just non-classicist. IE, an ideal Communist state would be one in which any individual, regardless of birth, can rise to any position through ability and hard work. The higher and more important the position, the more resources are made available to that person. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The real problem with Communism is that many humans won't stop at legal or socially approved methods of gaining status and power. Hell most Men will happily break laws if it's necessary to survive, let alone if they think they can get away with it and it will increase their power or resources. Humans are purpose-built by nature to understand the limits of systems and then to break them maximally to their advantage. It's why ALL human systems and ideologies inevitably collapse or fail.

>>17947077 (OP)
I'm open to arguments that it isn't inevitable. But I cannot see class society as anything but a temporary relic that will be swept away. Nor do I think class society is a good thing. Classes have their origin in tribal conflict and defeated peoples. All wage workers and peasants today are essentially defeated people forced into servitude. Sure it may be stable for now, but that can't last forever.

I'm not sure I even understand communism as a concept or that Marx had any idea himself beyond projecting some aspects of what he thought hunter-gatherer society was like onto the future. What does it even mean to eliminate the division between manual and intellectual labor? You're a nuclear physicist for half the work week and a farmer the other half? Or eliminating the division between town and country, what does that actually mean? The state that doesn't exist spreads everyone out evenly? And how would any of it work without a state? How would you plan production/distribution according to social utility without a state?

>>17947543
If you want Marxism boiled down to a set of pragmatic policies, its these:

>abolition of debts
>abolition of all rents
>Athenian democracy i.e full participation in the state through randomly selected citizens instead of elections; the state is reduced to mere administration instead of a minority body of armed men that rule over everyone else
>armed militia instead of police or armies
>complete merger of intellectual and physical work; where this is impossible, it should be counted as inefficiency and technology should be developed to make this obsolete
>abolition of money in favour of labour vouchers

None of this all encompassing and some of these points will need to be sacrificed but this is the marxist "wishlist".

>>17947580
Sounds stupid as hell

>>17947077 (OP)
>fascism is the way

>>17947523
>any individual, regardless of birth, can rise to any position through ability and hard work. The higher and more important the position, the more resources are made available to that person. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
The boomer creed, I can sense firm handshakes and eye contact.

>>17947584
Capitalism sounded stupid as hell before it was implemented. No Tory Lord used to charging around on horseback with a sabre and hunting foxes with a horn trumpet ever wanted to move to the city to trade stocks with Jews and smelly urbanites, but they had to. Times change and men change with them.

>>17947592
Unfortunately a lot of things do not change, even if we allow that men were totally mutable. A massive, complex society without systems of credit, armed enforcers, completely liquid currency etc is retarded. Even if one could get it to function in the rough shape of a workable society, any outside nation better optimized to wield power would wipe it off the map. We don't have the world we do because of evil rich men stroking their chins over mounds of gold, we have it because of the inevitable law of the maximum power principle. And you won't create some complete break with history because 'wouldn't it be cool if....', you have to create something more robust, and more capable of exercising control. There is a reason that the 'communist' countries and the 'capitalist' ones asymptotically approach each other in their form of governance and it isn't a conspiracy of evil. It is the same old law which has govern the evolution of self propagating systems since the first proteins self catalyzed in the primordial goop. Get a fucking clue.

>>17947618
I mean, if you want complete pragmatism, its clear state ownership of industry is better than giving rich people billions of dollars and just hoping they will invest it wisely has failed.

China is kicking the West's arse and will undoubtedly beat it in WW3 and become the world hegemon, if the west doesn't change and move in a socialist direction. The only defence so far the West has is to laim China is "cheating" and "being unfair" by having a state monopoly, which is fucking stupid because why would China play by the arbitrary rules of the US if it doesn't have to.

Now, I don't want China's political system, I don't agree with censorship or the Chinese dictatorship, but economically, we have to nationalize industry and plan the economy if we are going to stand a chance.

>>17947636
>don't agree with censorship or the Chinese dictatorship, but economically, we have to nationalize industry and plan the economy if we are going to stand a chance.
That's just not going to happen.
Reactionaries fail to understand this, but this does not pan out. Ever. All these companies are going to flee to another country altogether and prop up a new tax haven for themselves broad.
It's not gonna work. You created this problem.

>>17947523
I don't care how purpose-built humans are, there's no way today's global superpowers will collapse, at least not the US.

>>17947649

>at least not the US

bronze age collapse 2.0 is what will happen

>>17947636
>China is kicking the West's arse and will undoubtedly beat it in WW3 and become the world hegemon, if the west doesn't change and move in a socialist direction
The only thing I hate more than Chuds and Stormfags are mentally ill tankies like you. Somehow in-spite of both tankies and Stormfags both being two extremes competing for third place in the special olympics, tankies somehow always manage to piss me off more. I think it's because Stormfags co-opted nationalism while you cocksuckers are over here dickriding the Chinese. We will never have a real socialist movement in the west and you're the reason why.

>>17947700
>the reason we won't have a real socialist movement is some autistic Sinophile and not Wall St plus the government funding "intersectionality" and every socialist except the most autistic tankies falling for it.
Leftists will do anything but admit when they've been had.

>>17947588
We've been trapped in the Materialist dichotomy of Communism and Capitalism for so long that anything even remotely Idealist, such as fascism, becomes some incomprehensible and eldritch thing.

>>17947726
Naw, Sinophiles are mentally retarded. They think China is some ideal we should aspire towards even though China has no social welfare programs, an estimated 4 million homeless (same percentage of the overall population as the US), and is an economy that's literally based on leveraging a lower standard of living in order to have a comparative advantage regarding their exports. I know it's a meme to say that China isn't real communism but it's kind of true, to them Communism/Marxism are just alternative ways to simply say that they're a Non-Democratic Republic

>>17947735
That is still a system with better results than anything other Western socialists advocate, certainly better than what my home country's Labour party has become.

>>17947077 (OP)
No, I think the idea that the mode of production after capitalism (if we are even still in 'capitalism' which I doubt) will be Socialism has been throughly disproven by now. I also think Marx's conception of Socialism as classless was nearsighted and limited by his time.
Post-Marx marxists, bound as they are to his original predictions and writings, have spent the better part of one hundred and fifty years composing elaborate justifications to buttress the genius' aging edifice.
While this is a far cry from their scientific pretensions, I do not think they are any worse than libertarians are. Or any such school of thought.
>>17947528
I'm pretty sure I have read an old 19th century anthropology book that specifically proposes class division to be something like that. Neat, isn't it?
>>17947543
I mean. If you want a modern take on resolving this conundrum. You could check out The People's Republic of Walmart.
I'm not much of a socialist myself so maybe the resident thread socialist has something bad to say. But it's a start.

>>17947618

>we have it because of the inevitable law of the maximum power principle
>you have to create something more robust, and more capable of exercising control
>since the first proteins self catalyzed in the primordial goop

what should've been inevitable was the world remaining a backward shithole ruled by warlords, kings, caliphs, emperors, etc... with the occasional war and slave/peasant rebellions.

coincidently this all started changing post-founding of America

also, maximum power principle doesn't apply to the immaterial, it makes sense in thermodynamics the physical reality is the product of immutable axioms that cannot be ignored/modified.

modern capitalism is tied directly to American Democracy(no i don't care what ESLs from the netherlands or the british had, it doesn't count + irrelevant) and the American Democracy was not an inevitable conclusion.

>>17947592

as a creator of 3+ skins for a certain popular fps i assure you this is completely wrong, capitalism is fucking rad

>>17947636

China is on the verge of a 2nd cultural revolution because its on the verge of defaulting on its internal debt because of a lack of revenue due to orangeman tariffs.

>>17947730

>We've been trapped in the Materialist dichotomy of Communism and Capitalism for so long that anything even remotely Idealist, such as fascism, becomes some incomprehensible and eldritch thing.

the coldwar ended 35 years ago, therefore we will be influenced by its legacy for the foreseeable future

yes communism is still bad, just like every other political abomination created in europe

>>17947077 (OP)
For most of history sex was attainable so the current situation is just a quirk of the post-Sexual Revolution conditions. I don't see why sexual socialism aka patriarchy couldn't make s comeback.

>We will never have a real socialist movement in the west and you're the reason why.

real reason it will never happen is because most people that fall into any sort of political movement eventually grow up.

>>17947590

if you do you'll at least get a call back

>>17947588

fyi fascism is socialism implemented in italy, mussolini just reduced the scope of socialism to a nationality/ethnicity which was more or less the same thing back then

>>17947843
>fyi fascism is socialism implemented in italy, mussolini just reduced the scope of socialism to a nationality/ethnicity which was more or less the same thing back then
Original fascism is definitely not socialism.
You're talking about current-day white nationalism, which Hanania calls "DEI for White people"

>>17947220
>Even Egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies had something like this
I highly doubt hunter-gatherers were stratified between virgins and sexhavers

>>17947853
>Hanania
disregarded

>>17947915
He sucks but he's right about this. Nationalism is a lot like socialism.

>>17947843
>fyi fascism is socialism
no it isn't, dumb faggot
it's a militarization of all non-capital class to serve interests of the corporate entities in the country.
it's corporatism. always has been. it didn't have socialist components under hitler nor anyone else.

>Do you think communism is inevitable?
Your pic implies that it is not

>>17947928
Hitler was entriely about racial puriry. He didn't care much about profits. They were a means to an end.

>>17947937
sure. he still put BMW and mercedes over hans' health.

>>17947077 (OP)
Communism is a brief, and unpleasant, transitional stage adopted by some underdeveloped and agricultural countries that rapidly and inevitably gives way to a unashamed kleptocratic corruption. For examples see Russia, the PRC, and North Korea.

>>17947643
>All these companies are going to flee to another country altogether
When has that actually ever happened?

>>17947649
>>17947687
There was tremendous loss of life during the intermediate Bronze Age around 2000 BC. Areas in the Levant where the population shrank from 150k to 15k. Towns and agriculture disappeared. Survivors began practicing a semi-nomadic lifestyle. In Egypt
>Whom can I trust today? One’s brothers have become evil, and friends of today have no compassion. Whom can I trust today? Hearts are greedy, and every man steals his neighbor’s goods. Kindness has vanished and rudeness has descended upon everyone. Whom can I trust today? There are no righteous men, and the land is abandoned over to the lawless. Whom can I trust today? The evil that scourges the earth is without end…Death is in my sight today, a cure of a sick man, like going outside after confinement…Death is in my sight today, like a man’s longing to see home after he has spent many years in captivity…
In Akkad
>…out of the mountains those who do not resemble other people, who are not reckoned as part of the Land, the Gutians, an unbridled people, with human intelligence but canine instincts and monkeys’ features.
>…they stretched their arms out across the plain like a net for animals. Nothing escaped their clutches, no one left their grasp. Messengers no longer traveled the highways, the courier’s boat no longer passed along the rivers. Prisoners manned the watch. Brigands occupied the highways. Those who lay down on the roof, died on the roof; those who lay down in the house were not buried. People were flailing at themselves from hunger.
>…dogs were packed together in the silent streets; if two men walked there they would be devoured by them, and if three men walked there they would be devoured by them. Noses were punched, heads were smashed, noses were piled up, heads were sown like seeds. Honest people were confounded with traitors, heroes lay dead on top of heroes, the blood of traitors ran upon the blood of honest men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ7cMwKwCYA

>>17947969
Browning, Nestle, Toyota, to name a few.

>>17948004
?
Toyota is still headquartered in Japan along with most of their production.

>>17947643
they're owned by the Chinese government, that's not happening

>>17947077 (OP)
>Do you think communism is inevitable?
No

>Or is class stratification unavoidable?
No

>>17947523
>Communism isn't supposed to be non-hierarchical, just non-classicist ... any individual, regardless of birth, can rise to any position through ability and hard work. The higher and more important the position, the more resources are made available to that person
I understand the point about not everyone being identical, but this implies that people will have a higher / lower social status. I don't know how you get that out of what's also supposed to be a classless society. Also a part of Marx was to reduce the number of hours people work and increase the amount of free time.

>>17947817
>China is on the verge of a 2nd cultural revolution because its on the verge of defaulting on its internal debt because of a lack of revenue due to orangeman tariffs.
They have a lot of problems and a lot of Chinese are in the same bummed-out / blugh mode as everybody else.

>>17947543
>I'm not sure I even understand communism as a concept or that Marx had any idea himself
I think his idea was that it'd be a radical expansion of freedom but he didn't really lay down what it would look like because he distrusted "utopian" things. From what I can tell, communism is supposed to be a society without economic exploitation, political domination, or ideological intimidation.

Part of the idea here is that capitalism relates to labor in a fundamentally different way. Like in a mostly agricultural society, peasants could get rid of the aristocrats and go back to farming on their plots of land. But the proletariat which is created by capitalism is also necessary for the mode of production's own expansion, so the victory of the proletariat is not just to abolish capitalism but also the conditions of the proletariat's own existence as a class. In communism, there is no bourgeoisie but there's no proletariat either, it's a fundamentally different mode of production and way of living.

>What does it even mean to eliminate the division between manual and intellectual labor? You're a nuclear physicist for half the work week and a farmer the other half?
Yeah. In principle. If you want to. There's no caste system between the "thinkers" and "doers" really.

>Or eliminating the division between town and country, what does that actually mean? The state that doesn't exist spreads everyone out evenly? And how would any of it work without a state? How would you plan production/distribution according to social utility without a state?
The town/country thing is pretty dated, very 19th century. I think the idea was to make agriculture more mechanized, and also eliminate the problem of overcrowded urban industrial slums. On the state, they had this belief that "the government of persons" (the state) would "die out" and be replaced by "the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production."

>>17947077 (OP)
Most communist countries end up as the latter anyway in it's lifespan

>>17947859
The strongest beat the weakers.

>>17947523
>and hard work
Hard work is a myth perpetuated by captialists and something something protestant work ethic.

>>17947298
Class is the word for the different levels in the hierarchy, dingus.

>>17947523
>communism is when everyone is working class
No, not in practice.

>>17947590
I bet you are unable to do such a thing, zoom zoom.

Share the pussy, or else

>>17948189
Historical experience shows that it ends up more like share the bussy* or else

>>17947077 (OP)
In the presence of the state, there is no communism.
In the absence of the state, there is no enforcement of communism.
Therefore communism can never exist, with or without the state. QED.

>>17947523
>Communist state
LOL