Thread 18082223

>world revolution succeeds and marxism is achieved
>every thesis contains its antithesis
>antithesis of marxism is capitalism
>these synthesise into social democracy
BRAVO

You could not live with your own failure, and where did that bring you? Back to me...

>>18082223 (OP)
Late stage capitalism and communism are áctually identical systems. Both a statecorp who has a monopoly on everything run by a small select people of the state while the working class goy proletariaat all equally own nothing. The same is true for fascism btw lmfao. Communism is a bourg trick created by the rich to speedrun towards late stage capitalism. The real soulless human beings are always statists, people who worship the state, whether commies globalists technocratic faggots liberals bureaucrats " humanists" or fascists they all worship the state. To make the state the godhead there lays the great danger.

The synthesis isn't a midpoint you fucking lib

The result of the contradiction between capitalism and socialism is the higher stage of communism, not your shitty nordic social democracy that still exploits the global south

>>18083975
So contradictions end at communism and there are no synthesis after that?

>>18082223 (OP)
Social democracy works great in a high trust society yes

>>18083975
>not your shitty nordic social democracy that still exploits the global south
Argentina just got a bail out from Donald Trump. Nobody is exploiting those shit hole countries.

>>18082223 (OP)
>every thesis contains its antithesis
Doesn't work because marxism and capitalism aren't "thesis" but systems. The dialectical movement has to be applied to people [picrel], not ideas. In the case of socialism, it's precisely because the bourgeois is antithetical to the proles that a synthesis is reached through the state.

>these synthesise into social democracy
No because social democracy is only a reaction to give proles a better life, consequently making them less desire to revolt. It's more of a backwards step, a concession by the bourgeoisie from the marxist pov.
Nontheless, the dialectical "method" works through necessity and artificiality. Given the catastrophic failures of planned models, it seems apparent that market socialism, or democratic socialism, has to be achieved first before moving to a fully planned distribution of ressources. This is also unsurprisingly the model which worked best historically. Slovenia under yugoslavia is a good example : it achieved 90-95% of real wages in its neighbor austria, had 2-4% unemployment throughout its history, despite being hindered by third-world southern republics throughout its entire life. Imo, it's a good example of what could happen if larger rich european countries transitioned to socialism simply by having an pro-active state in the economy and by imposing democracy in the workplace (de jure making all private enterprises co-ops which were praised by marx).

>>18084034
Social demoncracy was in charge for a few decades and Europe is already falling apart, "works great" my ass.

>>18084156
Social democracy was replaced by neoliberalism in the 80’s and 90’s. Europe fell apart because its leaders became convinced infinite economic growth was worth declining social cohesion

>>18084169
welfare is not "neoliberalism"

>>18084174
Starving your social safety net and privatizing public services is textbook neoliberalism

>>18084180
"Social safety" bullshit is the no.1 expenditure in every western country.

>>18084186
No, the number 1 expenditure is the social costs of infinity imported scab laborers

>>18084195
Nope, its boomer leeches who dont have the dignity to die already. By a wide margin.
Also there isnt a single social democrat in the world opposing mass immigration.

>>18084198
Denmarks social democrats support remigration

>>18084198
>Oy vey, why won’t these old white people die already so we can finally finish ethnically replacing them with browns?
You’re not slick schlomo

>>18084201
>remigration
Meaningless buzzword, doesnt change that they enabled the problem in the first place.

>>18084201
Oh nononon you’re not allowed to have that opinion. You need to be either pro-mass migration or pro-enslaving your populace to Jewish bankers you can’t be neither

>>18083975
The result of the contradiction between capitalism and socialism is the higher stage of neoliberal corporatism, as has been demonstrated by every time capitalism and socialism have clashed.

>>18084205
>Sending people back is meaningless
Sure thing Mr Goldstein

>>18084204
These boomer leeches are robbing you off a future.

>>18084212
>achsually, it’s your parents and grandparents who are evil, not the international bankers who see you as a replaceable economic unit.

>>18084211
Thanks to social democrat globohomo policies a lot of niggers and shitskins already have citizenship or at least shat out an anchor baby.
"Remigration" wont do anything.

>>18084214
These boomer leeches dont even have children, which is why the population pyramid of the west is so fucked up.

>>18084216
No, they are sending those back who were here on temporary asylum you retard. They’ve actually been effective at it to unlike cuckservative neolibs who cuck out because Goldstein gave them the call that they need more H1B Jeets last minute

>>18084220
Which is essentially nobody at this point.
Also its besides the point because Europe is falling apart economically, financially and socially.
A system that cant even outlast one generation is garbage.

>>18084186
>No bro don't allow the children to get treatment nooooooooo!!!
>My heckerino profits aaaaahhh

>>18084217
>boomers don't have children
now I know you're retarded.

>>18082409
>le horseshoe theory

>>18082223 (OP)
The "antithesis" you propose assumes capitalism’s eternal return, ignoring the historical irreversibility of socialist construction. Social democracy is a bourgeois compromise, not a synthesis. It literally preserves capital’s dominance, betraying the proletariat. True communism abolishes contradictions of class society, not reconciles them. Read Lenin’s State and Revolution and stop dabbling in idealist nonsense.

>>18082409
Socialism is by design the same thing as crony capitalism which is why it fails because every corrupting influence in capitalism negatively effects the end product

>>18085098
>historical irreversibility
Never beating the apocalyptic religion accusations.

>>18085118
A bourgeois misreading. Capitalism’s internal contradictions (class antagonism, overproduction) drive its inevitable collapse. This is not prophecy but the scientific outcome of historical materialism. Social democracy is nothing but a reformist half-measure, and it cannot resolve these contradictions. In other words, it merely delays the inevitable. Anti-revisionism demands clarity: communism is the real movement abolishing the present state, not a utopian dream.

>>18085162
>put us in power and let us do whatever we want because Capitalism bad.
Communism was just a way to move people around wherever you wanted and imprison pesky intellectuals and land owners so they could modernize thier economy and put people in factories.
>I make bullets and I love it because I own this factory, my profits are bread and an apartment.
It only worked in failed Monarchist feudal farming nations that hadn't liberalized enough.
Not that capitalism cant fail or take over the state through tyranny, it absolutely can. At least communists could provide labor without constant immigration so there is that.
Anyhow, we're entering a new era of industrialization. Human labor will not be so important as it once was if manufacturing becomes more advanced. Though it still is now.

>>18085217
>put us in power and let us do whatever we want because Capitalism bad
It’s not about arbitrary power but the proletariat seizing the means of production to abolish class exploitation. Capitalism’s crises stem from its anarchic profit motive, which socialism replaces with planned production for social needs.
>Communism was just a way to move people around wherever you wanted and imprison pesky intellectuals and land owners so they could modernize thier economy and put people in factories
Nice distortion of history. Socialist revolutions dismantled feudal remnants and bourgeois property relations not to "move people around," but to collectivize production and end exploitation. Intellectuals and landowners faced suppression only when they actively opposed the revolution, and industrialization under socialism built economies for the masses, not private profit.
>I make bullets and I love it because I own this factory, my profits are bread and an apartment
Under capitalism, factory ownership concentrates wealth. Your "bread and apartment" are garbage compared to bourgeois profits. Socialism eliminates private ownership of production, ensuring labor serves collective needs and not individual enrichment.
>It only worked in failed Monarchist feudal farming nations that hadn't liberalized enough
Socialism succeeded in transforming backward economies (USSR, China) into industrial powers, proving its adaptability. It’s not limited to feudal contexts but applies wherever class contradictions exist. Capitalism’s "liberalization" often masks intensified exploitation.

cont.

>>18085237
>Not that capitalism cant fail or take over the state through tyranny, it absolutely can. At least communists could provide labor without constant immigration so there is that
Capitalism’s tyranny reflects its class nature. Socialism’s labor organization prioritizes domestic working-class power, not immigration as a capitalist tool to depress wages. This is one of the strengths of planned economies.
>Anyhow, we're entering a new era of industrialization. Human labor will not be so important as it once was if manufacturing becomes more advanced
Automation under capitalism displaces workers and creates unemployment and misery. Under socialism, advanced production reduces labor time, which would free humanity for creative pursuits. Marxism-Leninism demands seizing these means to serve the proletariat, not bourgeois elites.

>>18085217
nta but you just don't have any knowledge about the other anon is talking about don't you ?
To dumb it down for you : Every society has a dominant class, whether de jure or de facto. This dominance isn't legitimate oftentimes and is only a produce of arbitrary historical chance (e.g. you were drafted by a local chieftain to fight with him, you helped him defeat the enemy, and you now acquire a new social status of nobility). These arbitrary dominances, once acknowledged by the dominated, appear artificial and superfluous, and thus become contentious : people fight to overthrow them. For Hegel, this dialectical method was the product of ideas and rights, such as people willing to die for their king would be rewarded with a dominant position.
For Marx, this dialectical method was the result of material context : you were drafted to fight for the king because you lived in a specific land, seemed nice to the king etc.


>inb4 le gommunist dictators killed 100 grillion trobillion
Every marxist experiment has been a failure because leninism reinforces the hierarchical perception of the state. Especially in third world countries, this just translates into auth governments who also happen to be often isolated and in conflict because the West dislikes challenging socialist regimes (which is entirely natural).

>>18085237
You're just spouting Marxist theory that I already know.
Marx was some kind of dark sorcerer skilled in hypnosis.
The French revolutionaries wrote of many high minded ideals as well. They still allied with the most immoral countrymen possible and fell to thier own guillotine.

What i know is how this theory has taken place among it's proponents. A centralization of State power to advance industrialization.
>>18085242
>not real communism also wrong race, I'm a marxist but also racist when convenient

These are the only two arguments ever used in defense of Communism. Not one of you marxists can ever even explain how the Soviet Government functioned.

>You see in real Communism everybody holds hands in peace those evil leninists hijacked real Communism. States don't have to have leadership they really dont.

If Communism could actually work so could benevolent altruistic capitalism.

>>18085239
>Under socialism, advanced production reduces labor time, which would free humanity for creative pursuits. Marxism-Leninism demands seizing these means to serve the proletariat, not bourgeois elites.

Meanwhile, outside of marxist loo loo land, technology and automation are something communists have lagged behind, when it comes to making the economy more productive, or shortening work hours.

>>18085162
>no you have to read the text with Marxist eyes, too!
not only a religion but a cult. straight out of the Straussian playbook.

>>18082223 (OP)
You can string up words almost as good as a LLM now.

>>18085333
>Reducing labor is good
You had better hope a state that surpasses the need for your labor values your artistic pursuits enough to compensate you instead of sterilizing you.

>>18085288
>Marx was some kind of dark sorcerer skilled in hypnosis
Marx’s predictions (capitalist crises, class struggle) have been validated by history, from the Great Depression to today’s monopolistic stagnation. Cry more.
>The French revolutionaries wrote of many high minded ideals as well. They still allied with the most immoral countrymen possible and fell to thier own guillotine
The French Revolution was a bourgeois revolution, limited by its class character, which allied with opportunists to secure capitalist property relations. Marxist-Leninist revolutions are by contrast proletarian and aim to abolish private property. Errors occurred, but equating them to bourgeois betrayals is retarded, since it ignores their fundamentally different aims and outcomes. Just look at the USSR’s rapid industrialization versus France’s descent into Napoleonic imperialism.
>What i know is how this theory has taken place among it's proponents. A centralization of State power to advance industrialization
Centralized state power under socialism is a tool of the proletariat to suppress bourgeois counter-revolution and plan production. The USSR and China used it to transform feudal economies, and by doing so achieving literacy, electrification, and industrial output rivaling capitalist powers in decades. This wasn’t “centralization for its own sake” but a necessity to overcome backwardness and imperialist encirclement.

cont.

>>18085419
>Meanwhile, outside of marxist loo loo land, technology and automation are something communists have lagged behind, when it comes to making the economy more productive, or shortening work hours.
Another distortion. Socialist states pioneered automation and technological leaps under constraints. See the USSR’s space program, computing advancements (e.g., BESM-6), and China’s modern high-speed rail. Capitalist automation serves profit and displaces workers. Socialist automation, where implemented, aimed to reduce labor time, though it was limited by resources and sabotage (imperialist blockades). Cuba’s biotech innovations under sanctions disprove the “lag” myth. Shortened work hours were achieved in socialist experiments (USSR’s 7-hour workday in the 1920s) before capitalist competition and war forced reallocation. The record speaks for itself.

Imagine actually caring about ideology, theory, and doctrine instead of policy and practical application.

>>18085288
>not real communism
Indeed, authoritarian centralized economies are not "socialism". As an other anon indirectly pointed out, just because you have a monopolistic enterprise managing everything to extract profit for its beneficiaries doesn't mean you have socialism.

>racism
lol lmfao even. It's racist now to say that third world countries don't have solid democratic traditions ? lol topkek

>States don't have to have leadership they really dont
very ironic given that marxism historically was the "pro-state" left wing stance lol

>those evil leninists hijacked real Communism
I mean, you do consider Stalin and Mao to be bad, right ?

>If Communism could actually work
Funnily enough, despite being handled by psychopathic incompetent opportunistic dictators, marxism still managed to get millions out of poverty, to bring easy access to health, to work, to education, to technology etc. Quite the miracle isn't it? I mean when you consider countries like Africa or India, how is it that their socialist states almost always performed amongst the best in most metric (see Kerala, Seychelles, Somalia under socialism etc) ?

>>18085446
Its because they were taken over by violent psychopathic dictatorship it was able to force the people to provide labor. You need to really not value human autonomy to support that.
Marxists quote Marxist gobledeegook like Bible scripture. It stands to reason, seeing as how Marx twisted biblical justifications with modern intellectualism.

>>18085541
You can't consistently hold the position that:
>it was real socialism, as intended by marx
and
>they were ruthless dictators whose achievements were ONLY due to forced labour

Either it wasn't real socialism, in which case what you said earlier is wrong. Either it was real yet degenerated socialism, in which case the experiences proves the ability to have some successes despite poor management

I'll let you choose

>>18085561
False choice.
I can say everyone in the world will get free ice cream if they all just feel love for each other.
I can create conditions to bring this about and new words to explain it.
>The lamoceckovists (godly, loving men) must abolish the doodoonochovie (poopy pants people) if everyone doesn't spontaneously recieve ice cream, then true lovitism has not been achieved.

Marxists are the ones who say not true communism (quit calling communism socialism). But really they lust for blood.

>>18085073
look at the population pyramid of your country

>>18085098
>stop dabbling in idealist nonsense.
How is the concept of
>betraying the proletariat
not idealist?
>>18085162
The USSR's collapse was caused by the internal contradictions of "Proletarian Internationalism".

>>18082223 (OP)
>>these synthesise into feudalism
fixed that for you.

>>18085436
>The record speaks for itself.
I already posted the gif of the Soviet flag being pulled down.

>>18082223 (OP)
They synthetized into managerialism which was a victim of another synthesis since(antithesis was libertarianism and synthesis was neoliberalism). Burnham was right all his detractors were wrong, marxists not adapting his Managerial Revolution into their framework just because it would mean they have to give up on the communist utopia being inevitability confirmed wishful thinkers.

>>18084209
This.
Capitalism + socialism = more capitalism.

>The successesfull examoles of socialism are all top heavy bureaucratic survaillance states where the mop are owned by a revolutionary vanguard, not the workers.
This *isn't* a contradiction?

>>18086140
>False choice.
Lmfao no but you're really incapable of noticing why because you have 0 knowledge on marxism. Please, at least read the fucking wiki page before posting.
fyi, marxism is not "forced labour", it's definitionally incorrect to say so. Hence, if you recognize that it was forced labour, then, you also recognize that it wasn't marxism.

>quit calling communism socialism
>doesn't know the difference
grim.

>>18086346
>not idealist?
Because it means the very real thing that social democracy maintains the dominance of one class on society but makes their dominance more comfortable

>The USSR's collapse was caused by the internal contradictions of "Proletarian Internationalism"
Wrong it was caused by decadent leadership and poor reform

>>18087064
>Because it means the very real thing that social democracy maintains the dominance of one class on society but makes their dominance more comfortable
This is a dumb argument to make because it discounts the real, material differences policies makes for peoples' lives for idealistic non-sense about "power." Power will always be necessary in society. What matters is what it is being used for. If social democrats are using their power to help workers, then there's no reason to criticize it.

>>18087123
>If social democrats are using their power to help workers, then there's no reason to criticize it.
They're not helping workers though. If you give a junkie a nice bed to sleep in, are you helping him fundamentally ?

>>18083975
>The result of the contradiction between capitalism and socialism is the higher stage of communism
How do you know this?
Isn't it equally likely it's just going to end up with a human face being stamped with a boot forever.