Why the fuck should I listen to someone who was born to rich parents, never worked, and spent his life in his attic about the struggles of the working class?
I feel like most, if not all, political literature is genuinely outdated and doesn't cover the struggles of modern life

>>24470611 (OP)
Both the authors of picrel worked all their lives. /lit/ is not the place where you convince people that work is not

>>24470621
>worked all their lives
Dunno about Engels but Marx literally didn't
Even if they did, (which they didn't), they can't possibly comprehend the 21st century world

>>24470621
>*that writing is not work

>>24470622
As I said, /lit/ is not the place you convince people that writing and journalism is not work. You may be right about parts of their work being outdated but parts of it will still hold value as long as we live under the Capitalist paradigm.

>>24470628
It's not that I don't think writing is work, it's just that it strikes me as dishonest for a person born to rich parents, who is a writer, to pretend to know what it's like as a labourer
My main concern is that there's no political literature relevant to the 21st century
I feel no one has captured the alienation and dehumanisiation of 21st century living

>>24470621
>>24470622
>>24470625
Wage labour and work are different concepts. They are also different lived social realities of classed power in social reproduction. (That expression is, however, conceptual.)

>>24470611 (OP)
>Why the fuck should I listen to someone who was born to rich parents, never worked, and spent his life in his attic about the struggles of the working class?
Because his concept of the value-form and his elucidation of it in critique of it is really useful for figuring out what actually builds working class power at work, and what builds boss's power at work? I mean if you want to learn how to map a workplace, develop rank and file leadership, and take winnable actions together come see me down the pub. We *never* talk about those nuts and bolts in public.

>>24470629
>to pretend to know what it's like as a labourer
I don't think they ever made that pretense
>I feel no one has captured the alienation and dehumanisiation of 21st century living
You know, for that you'd have to read works written in 21st century. But as I said, parts of what they wote will still be applicable today insofar as those realities are concerned which haven't changed since 19th century.
>Wage labour and work are different concepts. They are also different lived social realities of classed power in social reproduction
Sure, but that doesn't mean they were lazing around. Which seems to be the implication in such cases

>>24470705
But my concern is there's no works written in the 21st century about the alienation and isolation modern people, especially modern white men, feel
Even when working, it feels futile

>>24470611 (OP)
if thats your harshest criticism then i suppose it must be a good book, right?

You shouldn't.

Engels & Marx weren't writing anecdotally. Their analyses are scientific. Whether they worked or not (they did) isn't really relevant.

>>24470621
sorry chuddie, journalism is unproductive parasitic kike-coded labour, not a real job for real men

>>24470981
>removing the possibility to increase ones social status, which is fundamental to all lifeforms, is unsustainable

who would’ve guessed

>>24471315
fuck you mean removing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparatchik
real socialism recognizes real socialists

>>24470611 (OP)
>I feel like most, if not all, political literature is genuinely outdated
Aristotle's Politics still holds up

>>24471315
>the only real manifestation of social status if money
This is why you are ruled by fat ugly pedophile kikes.

>>24470981
What a vandalizable mural.

>>24471315
Nothing about that is fundamental to all lifeforms

>>24470611 (OP)
Marx was close to the workers, he was the leading figure in the International Workingmen Association

>>24470981
every western country has enacted socialist policies of some stripe.
it's a necessary part of propping up the decaying corpse of capitalism, because wealth flowing in one direction causes hyperinflation and economic necrosis.

>>24471261
They are not scientific, their hypotheses are entirely non-falsifiable and therefore not scientific. Case in point, communism is attempted, it fails, "that wasn't real communism" despite the hypothesis being attempted. Me saying that I got abducted by an alien last night is as scientific as Marx's historical analysis.

>>24471928
This is not true, and it bears mentioning that real communism has not been tried.

>>24470611 (OP)
because the workers were too busy to think about their place in the world and to write about it.
usually when you come back from a long day of work you don't want to do much other than relax. weekends, holidays and after work hours are usually consumed by family, friends, pub, hobbies, etc.
also as an outside observer you sometimes have a more complete view of the complex patterns, systems and how they impact people's lives.
not everything can be learned from just observation tho, so it is still a major fault..

>>24471945
explain instead of making an unscientific and baseless assertion

>>24471960
You don't even know what their hypotheses are because you haven't read Marx or Engels. Your claims are based on internet posts you have read because you are a midwit. Read 'Socialism: Utopian and Scientific' and you will see that the claims Engels makes are absolutely falsifiable, testable, and as scientific as any other theses.

>>24470611 (OP)
you shouldn't because 99% of belief systems still followed today are created by and for autists. The only use these belief systems have is gaining an insight into the mentally ill. "Objective truth" "Objective morality" and "Science" are all only useful for the practical benefits they give you and to gain insight into the autistically insane individuals that constructed them.

>>24471967
right so instead of countering the monstrous amounts of demonstrable evidence in real life you point towards theories made by a faggot capitalist that pretended to be an intellectual.

Idc if "real communism" has never been tried according to your arbitrary standard. People who held true to communism attempted it and failed, that proves a theory false through observation. You genuinely could never do better than any of them.

Ergo you are a theory fag that spergs out when you see actual evidence.

>>24471980
You don't know how to read.

>>24470611 (OP)
>Ignores Marx because he was a born to rich parents and never had to work, instead of his ideas, which were toxic nonsense
Okay, got it
>most political literature is outdated
What does that mean?
>doesn't cover the struggles of modern life
>
/lit/ is just booktok now

>>24470611 (OP)
Have you read picrel? How much political literature have you read that you feel confident the themes behind them are outdated?

>>24472048
/Lit/ has been dead for quite a while now Anon.
I only come here to shitpost and have long reatarded debates with ignorant posters out of boredom.

>>24471842
State socialism is not Marxism. Marx advocated the abolition of the state.
And the countries who suffered hyperinflation and economic collapse in the last 100 years were the ones who had too much socialism, not too much capitalism.

>>24471945
Because the whole idea is a fallacy.
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.

>>24470611 (OP)
>never worked
He studied and wrote several books.
>spent his life in his attic about the struggles of the working class
He worked on parties alongside the working class all his life.
>political literature is genuinely outdated and doesn't cover the struggles of modern life
It's objectively the opposite. Everything he wrote about capitalism turned out to be true ever since.

>>24471980
Illiterate mid wit spotted, maybe try reading their theories before discounting them on the basis of posts paid for by the mises institution and other ancap instituitions along with the retards parroting their opinions.

Just about every commie book is free to read online lmao, so you have no fucking excuse to be this ignorant.

>>24472533
cope

what are marx's best books from the pov of being peppered with literary and cultural references ie his most lit books not his most economic books if the two types are distinct. in the book marx and satan by wurmbrand or whomever marx's prose is described as bordering on the poetic which got me interested but he's got a huge corpus and i can't imagine most of it fits that description. did do a short unit on him back in school and i don't remember his writing being especially interesting

>>24472421
Literally wrong lmao. Absolute midwit.

>>24472577
Not an argument therefore I won

>>24470611 (OP)
>forces/relations of production and class antagonism is genuinely outdated and doesnt cover the struggles of modern life
no, you're just a baiting retard who hasnt actually read marx. have fun driving to your wagecuck job tomorrow

>>24472670
People who haven't read Marx have the strongest opinions about him.

>>24472670
>>24472533
>>24472048
t. wfhfags

>>24470611 (OP)
>Why the fuck should I listen to someone who was born to rich parents, never worked, and spent his life in his attic about the struggles of the working class?
Because they might make a reasonable economic or historical argument?

>>24472826
>This
It is bewildering to me that so many people are content with parroting the opinions of others without reading the source material for themselves and forming their own opinions.

It's as if they are happy and content to be manipulated. It's infuriating.

>>24472826
>no, you have to drink the kool aid before you're allowed to comment on it
No, I can just look at every single time his ideas have been tried, it's always shit.

Commies are just murderers and thieves -- and cowards since they want to do it through the state.

>>24472853
>trust the plan!
>2 more weeks of property theft, murdering dissidents, and starvation and we'll have utopia!

>>24472853
They believe that he argues for everybody to be gay and brown but that's because they think all this libtarded shit is in any way related to his works and not the manifestation of narcissistic identitarians who play as leftists.

>>24472879
I actually do pretty well for myself but I dream of a better world. It would probably mean I end up having less but that's okay.

>>24472415
Be Marx say explicitly:

Shall not be a nationalist country state on a capitalist world

And there goes nationalist socialism always about how socialist their nation state is compared to the capitalist world

>>24471980
>right so instead of countering the monstrous amounts of demonstrable evidence in real life you point towards theories made by a faggot capitalist that pretended to be an intellectual.

What the fuck did he mean by this?...

Also if you are pointing to Russia and China as examples Leninism ≠ (Orthodox) Marxism. Which you would know if you had read either of them and knew even a little bit of what you are talking about. These are two distinctly different socialist philosophies only sharing the comomnality of using Marx himself as an origin point of criticism.

>Marx:

“Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation... Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.”
— Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Programme” (1875)

The state is nothing but an instrument of oppression of one class by another — no less so in a democratic republic than under a monarchy.”
— Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Programme” (1875)

“The working class must break up, smash the ready-made state machinery, and not confine itself merely to laying hold of it.”
— Marx, “The Civil War in France” (1871)

>Lenin:

“The dictatorship of the proletariat is not the end of the struggle—it is the continuation of the struggle in new forms... The state must be smashed and replaced with a new kind of state.”
— Lenin, “The State and Revolution” (1917)

We are not waging war against individuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a class.”
— *Lenin, quoted in Latsis, “The Red Terror” (1918)

“The dictatorship of the proletariat is rule based directly upon force and unrestricted by any laws.”
— Lenin, “The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky” (1918)


>Idc if "real communism" has never been tried according to your arbitrary standard. People who held true to communism attempted it and failed, that proves a theory false through observation. You genuinely could never do better than any of them.

You don't know what Communism means.
If you look closely the Soviets (as well as Mao) (and the descendants of their form of governance) never re-distributed the means of production nor took any steps to dissolve the authority of the state as necessary and as such they were never truly Communist.
Anon go to fucking wikipedia at the bare minimum and learn a basic definition of what Communism is.

>You genuinely could never do better than any of them.
Ad. Hominem

>that proves a theory false through observation
>right so instead of countering the monstrous amounts of demonstrable evidence in real life fact.

Provide historical examples with cited sources seeing as you are so confident in stating this as fact.

>Ergo you are a theory fag that spergs out when you see actual evidence.
What evidence? All that you have done here is make baseless assertions.

>>24472894
It's funny that most communists activists have more wealth and were born to better circumstances than the average person, and especially the actual hard-working blue-collar workers who they typically despise and hate (especially if they're white or from the south or... heaven forbid, Christian) while they claim to be "champions of the workers".

>>24472910
I won't deny that, there are a lot of champagne socialists, but I was born into a poor family, know how to work hard, and don't hate Christians.

>>24470611 (OP)
every great writer with the exception of the 2-3 that existed this last century were spoiled aristocrats no one else had the caloric surplus to even write.

>>24472910
>It's funny that most communists activists have more wealth and were born to better circumstances than the average person and especially the actual hard-working blue-collar workers who they typically despise and hate (especially if they're white or from the south or... heaven forbid, Christian) while they claim to be "champions of the workers".

Sure some people like this may exist (I have certainly met and despised them) but that doesn't give either you or I any right or genuine base to make these sorts of broad generalizations even to those we may disagree with either politically or philosophically.

You are very angry at a caricaturized strawman of a person that doesn't actually exist and resorting to emotionally charged adhomimem riddled rhetoric that is both not getting you anywhere in arguing your point and immediately closing you off from anyone who would have been willing to engage with you on account that you are not willing to respect their position.

>>24472925
>and don't hate Christians.
You do though, since you're a communist. Your ideology always persecutes Christians because Christianity and communism are polar opposites, and Christianity is the enemy of communism just as much as it is the enemy of Pharisee Judaism.

>>24472933
You type like a fag and your shit's all retarded. Your first paragraph is just SJW faggotry and whining, so I didn't bother reading the second.

>>24472954
>You do though, since you're a communist.
Not really, no.

>>24472962
Oh, thanks for reminding me.

Communists aren't just murderers and thieves, they're all liars too.

>>24472962
More than enough of my brothers and sisters in Christ have been slaughtered and tortured and raped by you communist dogs for me not to believe your lies. Maybe you can deceive the gaytheists and fagnostics, though.

>>24470611 (OP)
Who cares about all that. People who interface with philosophy like this are fucking dumb. You’re supposed to inspect their arguments and content. Not advocating for the guy but come on.

>>24470611 (OP)
The Bolshevik coup in Russia proved that Marxism is wrong. One of the basic tenents of Marx's theory was that communism will come in the most advanced regions of the world, yet the only places where Marxism is taken seriously are the most backward countries in the world.

>>24472954
Karl Marx -
The Union of Believers With Christ According to John 15: 1-14, Showing its Basis and Essence, its Absolute Necessity, and its Effects:https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1837-pre/marx/1835chris.htm

In the words of The Virgin Mary: "My soul magnifies the Lord, He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent empty away" [Luke 1:46, 51–53].

Marx although more critical in his later writings was sympathetic to the compassionate and humanistic aspects of religion.

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
- Marx "A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right" (1844)

Lenin was the one who took an abolitionist stance to religion and Stalin was the one who took to persecuting christians specifically.

If there is no synthesis of communism and christianity then explain Liberation Theology.

>>24472954
I'm not even a communist btw.

Labeling yourself according to an ideology is retarded but for the sake of clarifying myself I am more of a libretarian than anything else. Ideally I would like some form of a free market although I do realize that capitalism as it stands is unsustainable.

Don't be an ignorant retard. All you're doing is making everyone look bad.

>>24471928
Fuck off Popper. Time to read Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend. Then D&G. Then Bifo and Land.

>>24472997
>The Bolshevik coup in Russia proved that Marxism is wrong. One of the basic tenents of Marx's theory was that communism will come in the most advanced regions of the world
No that was Engels.

Marx went back and forth on this but ultimately believed that industrally developed capitalist countries were the most likely starting points for a socialist revolution due to their organzational and productive capacity not that communism could only emerge from such nations.
>>24473022
/thread

>>24471928
By following your example, aliens not existing or not being anywhere near earth means really abducting you was never tried

Communism and even capitalism has the same problem

You can distribute resources equally among a community but can't change an entire world who depends on trade instead of cooperation, same issue capitalism has with people just sharing, like sharing a disney plus account, oh no we must restrict multiple devices cause people naturally share, instead of egotistically tell their friends to pay their own

>>24473088
The solution to that was to introduce real time calulation and predictive models in regards to Economic planning. Look up Project Cybersyn.

>>24472977
Mark 8:34

>>24473088
>aliens not existing
Comrade Posadas wants a word, comrade.

>>24473046
I never really understood Marxism until I read Fanged Noumena.

>>24471928
Evolution is unfalsifiable and is one of tje most widely accepted scientific theories

>>24471980

You see this is the kind of sheer midwittery that dominates anti-communist discourse. I may have excused it owing to years of glowie brainwash but the iq part cannot be ignored

>>24470621
>Marx worked all his life
I understand completely why your leaders execute you after every revolution: you have no principles and you lie with every breath.

>>24474455
>You see this is the kind of sheer midwittery that dominates anti-communist discourse
How'd your freshman year go, Timmy?

>>24474455
>we should kill everyone who has more money than me!
>work in the FACTORY!!!??? No, no, comrade, I will be leading teatime sewing hour on Diversity Thursdays. Work is for the lesser peopl---ACK!
One hundred years later (someone else's grandchild; you won't have any): That wasn't REAL communism!

And the comedy of errors marches on.

>>24474422
Platypus

Was it ever a bird why it has a beak?

Why is the only mammal with one, why it lay eggs?

>>24473227
Or

just read the whole paragraph

>>24474483
>>24474489
>>24474506

Wow. Thanks for the midwitism samples to prove my point. I couldn't have acted better like a completely unaware mouthbreathing breathing retard anti-communist even if I tried. I implore you to post more of this

>>24473168
Yeah sounds absurd but it was gramsci concept of grasping the superstructure

Then we got manners and all went to shit

>>24470611 (OP)
To be fair, the way to know the actual struggles of the working class is to join a trade union and watch people suffer while union bosses jerk off and make money to contribute nothing.

It depends on what you want OP. Someone JUST posted in this thread.

>>24472905
>Leninism ≠ (Orthodox) Marxism.
>Absolute orthodoxy, he thought a proposition could be proved by quoting a text in Marx, and he was quite incapable of supposing that there could be anything in Marx that wasn’t right

I meant to write Classical Marxism not Orthodox.

Which you could have easily understood but you didn't read what I wrote im the first place nor did you understand the reason as to why I quoted both Marx and Lenin in the first place otherwise you would see that I was explicitly writing in defense of Classical Marxism im contrast to Lenin's Orthodoxy.

>>24470611 (OP)
The idea of an original, clear-cut, and permanent inequality among the different races is one of the oldest and most widely held opinions in the world. We need not be surprised at this, when we consider the isolation of primitive tribes and communities, and how in the early ages they all used to “retire into their shell”; a great number have never left this stage. Except in quite modern times, this idea has been the basis of nearly all theories of government. Every people, great or small, has begun by making inequality its chief political motto. This is the origin of all systems of caste, of nobility, and of aristocracy, in so far as the last is founded on the right of birth. The law of primogeniture, which assumes the pre-eminence of the first born and his descendants, is merely a corollary of the same principle. With it go the repulsion felt for the foreigner and the superiority which every nation claims for itself with regard to its neighbours. As soon as the isolated groups have begun to intermingle and to become one people, they grow great and civilized, and look at each other in a more favourable light, as one finds the other useful. Then, and only then, do we see the absolute principle of the inequality, and hence the mutual hostility, of races questioned and undermined. Finally, when the majority of the citizens have mixed blood flowing in their veins, they erect into a universal and absolute truth what is only true for themselves, and feel it to be their duty to assert that all men are equal. They are also moved by praiseworthy dislike of oppression, a legitimate hatred towards the abuse of power; to all thinking men these cast an ugly shadow on the memory of races which have once been dominant, and which have never failed (for such is the way of the world) to justify to some extent many of the charges that have been brought against them. From mere declamation against tyranny, men go on to deny the natural causes of the superiority against which they are declaiming. The tyrant’s power is, to them, not only misused, but usurped. They refuse, quite wrongly, to admit that certain qualities are by a fatal necessity the exclusive inheritance of such and such a stock. In fact, the more heterogeneous the elements of which a people is composed, the more complacently does it assert that the most different powers are, or can be, possessed in the same measure by every fraction of the human race, without exception. This theory is barely applicable to these hybrid philosophers themselves; but they extend it to cover all the generations which were, are, and ever shall be on the earth. They end one day by summing up their views in the words which, like the bag of Æolus, contain so many storms—“All men are brothers.”[15]

>>24475382
It's pretty obvious that I meant Classical instead of Orthodox

>>24475398
unc is drunk

>>24470611 (OP)
I agree, OP. You don't deserve rights so they wasted their time with these writings.

>>24475404
true

Op is a retarded faggot.
Simple as.

>>24475382
>permanent inequality
Marx never argues for abolition of inequality as a concept though. Only for (violent) deconstruction of economic inequality, which has grown useless and inefficient, and not by making everyone economically equal, but by making economy irrelevant.

He argues for abolition of this inequality not because it's "unfair" or "evil" (though by this point it is), and not because (again, by this point) it fails to recognize the true inequality of individuals - blacks and whites, intelligent and idiotic, brave and cowardly all being turned into entirely equal and wholly interchangeable wageslaving machines or managerial kikes characterizable only by their class - but because it now fails at being productive. It no longer creates, it no longer builds, it no longer expands, it no longer evolves or changes. It just keeps turning people into these alienated disposable entities for no purpose beyond perpetuating itself.

It fails to process the "exclusive inheritance of such and such a stock" because it is incapable of not reducing an individual down to his net worth.

>>24470611 (OP)
>I feel like most, if not all, political literature is genuinely outdated and doesn't cover the struggles of modern life
That's the problem with 90% of political or philosophical works. They are written by elites or people born into the upper class. If you've never really struggled or been poor you can't claim to have a understanding of how the world really works.

>>24476184
We've already gone over this in this very thread. Marxism is a scientific analysis. It's not anecdotal. There can be no "how the world really works" because that's a narrative history, not a scientific analysis.

>>24476189
It's like fucking pulling teeth to get people to understand this.

>>24476208
Yeah, to be fair there is a bunch of Marx that is narrative history, but it's about shit like the 1848 revolutions, the Civil War, etc. The main meat of his and Engels' work is not narrative histories.

>>24475783
If our rural populations were merely brutal and ignorant, we might not take much notice of this cleavage, but console ourselves with the delusive hope of gradually winning them over, and absorbing them in the multitudes that are already civilized. But these peasants are like certain savage tribes: at first sight they seem brutish and unthinking, for they are outwardly self-effacing and humble. But if one digs even a little beneath the surface, into their real life, one finds that their isolation is voluntary, and comes from no feeling of weakness. Their likes and dislikes are not a matter of chance; everything obeys a logical sequence of definite ideas. When I spoke just now of religion, I might also have pointed out how very far removed our moral doctrines are from those of the peasants,[45] what a different sense they give to the word delicacy, how obstinately they cling to their custom of regarding every one who is not of peasant stock in the same way as the men of remote antiquity viewed the foreigner. It is true they do not murder him, thanks to the strange and mysterious terror inspired by laws they have not themselves made; but they do not conceal their 101hatred and distrust of him, and they take great pleasure in annoying him, if they can do it without risk. Does this mean that they are ill-natured? No, not among themselves—we may continually see them doing each other little kindnesses. They simply look on themselves as a race apart, a race (if we may believe them) which is weak and oppressed, and obliged to deal crookedly, but which also keeps its stiff-necked and contemptuous pride. In some of our provinces the workman thinks himself of far better blood and older stock than his former master. Family pride, in some of the peasants, is at least equal to that of the nobility of the Middle Ages.

>>24475382

>Picrel

Isn't that the faggot who thought races as real? Not gonna read his babble

>>24476189
>Marxism is a scientific analysis.
No it isn't.
>It's not anecdotal.
It actually is.

>>24476839
Wow, Marxism is so totally owned. Good work.

>>24470981
>try to setup communism
>kikes bomb your country to hell or overthrow the government

>>24476978
Many such cases.

>>24470630
holy fuck I cannot hear you over the BBC you're gagging on

>>24476189
>>24476242
I love it when cunts don't know how historiography works.

>>24472954
“Sell your possessions and give to the poor.”
— Luke 12:33
Acts 4:32 says no one claimed private ownership.
So tell me again how Christianity and communism are “polar opposites.”

>>24476978
>Try to setup communism
>Become lawless shithole and/or narco state
>Start funding terrorism
>Get bombed by kikes
>Wasn't real communism anyway
But next time...

>>24470611 (OP)
You might want to read a short thing from a guy who was wrong about how to fix problems he saw but still has a depressingly large fan club

>>24478605
It's a common theme.

>>24470611 (OP)
This is such a common talking point but Marx himself literally adresses this in Kapital????
He knows he's born into a position of wealth and luck. So much so that, unlike a lotta modern commies these days, he straight up differentiates himself from the workers and never, linguistically at least, puts himself in the same group as them by saying "us" or the like. He wrote this Manifesto for workers so it's probably why he sounded more preachy in that, most people who know what they are talking don't recommend you reading it anyway so...
Im not even a marxist, im a classical liberal (Look I attached a image of a anime woman to this post cmon) but I struggle to see common everyday people come up with takedowns of marxism that are not literally adressed by Marx himself, even people who call themselves professionals haven't taken the time of day to read it sadly.

>>24470611 (OP)
You shouldn't. Duh

>>24478617
Communism is covetousness and theft, which are violations of God's law. That's not even mentioning all the murdering they do. Further, communism is against private property, and the Bible constantly reinforces the idea of private property.

You take verses out of context to promote a lie, because all communists are lying subhuman dogs.

>>24478617
>>24480179
The Bible also says a good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children, and communism is against inheritances. I could really just keep going, but commies don't care about truth and they'll keep peddling these lies that Christianity doesn't condemn them and their abominable jewish political system.

>>24478605
>>24476189
>>24476242
Since everyone is talking past each other, here is what's happening:
>Marxists say they have the Evidence and the facts
>Anti-Marxists are saying there is little to know evidence and facts
>Therefore the anti-Marxists only see the narratives because they're rejecting the evidence outright and denying certain facts without saying which they really disagree with

I'm not a Marxist, but bringing up historiography was a mistake, because the Marxists are playing with a loaded deck on this one. If you're an anti-Marxist, you'll need to reject the evidence or present new evidence.

Protip: I know your history degree didn't teach you this, but historiography is more than just the final narrative. It's a process. In fact, there's a good chance if you have a history degree they only spoke about historiography as it pertains directly to narrative history, which is the one type of history that isn't really history because you're effectively just repeating stories, not examining them, and barely even interpreting them in a specific way (lens). It's why narrative historians put a premium on recent, post-modern secondary sources and almost nothing on primary sources, because they're (we were) trained to preserve stories- not discover them or enhance them, or break them down in any meaningful way.

>>24480181
>The Bible also says a good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children

A Marxist would argue that private inheritance necessarily aggregates wealth in the hands of the few, and that communism creates a mutual inheritance for all people. This is partially true too, not even stretch, when you look at features like healthcare, guaranteed housing, jobs, education, etc etc etc.

They would say that you're not providing an inheritance that God demands for people who can't afford it. You'd effectively be an agent of satan.

>>24480183
>In fact, there's a good chance if you have a history degree they only spoke about historiography as it pertains directly to narrative history, which is the one type of history that isn't really history because you're effectively just repeating stories, not examining them, and barely even interpreting them in a specific way (lens).
This is why dialectical materialism is so powerful.

>>24480194
Shut the fuck up, retard. This board's so fucking dumb and you idiots think you're so clever. Fucking insufferable twats.

>>24480233
Dialectical materialism has you put an emphasis on material evidence and primary sources that explain material factors. It's narrower in the initiation of an investigation because your evidence set is specific. It's hard to pull those details from poetic accounts for example. On the whole, materialist history is preferable to liberalist narrative histories.

>>24480265
You can argue against it, if you may.

>>24480271
Narrative history still has its place, though. You can synthesize it with your other readings, even though it may, itself, make no further investigation.

>>24480274
>AKSHUALLY promoting what the bible plainly says makes you an agent of satan because I'm a fat subhuman retard who never took care of my health and that's your fault so you have to pay for my healthcare and I never got a job so you have to pay for my housing and I'm a retard so you have to pay for my education
GET A JOB YOU SUBHUMAN PIECE OF SHIT

II. Thessalonians 3:10
For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

ITT:
>Historians don't understand history. Marx can help us get it right.
>Economists don't understand economics. Marx can help us get it right.
> Social scientists don't understand social science. Marx can help us get it right.
You people are blind religious zealots and you don't even realise it. You are trying to take subjects back to 'first principles' that have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of highly-qualified specialists who understand them much better than you do. If Ug and Grug (cavemen to the gentry) were acting capitalistically as they squabbled over a boar carcass, then their good friend Kug might feasibly lecture them on dialectical materialism. Even as late as the eighteenth century, some reverend or aristocratic scholar might gain the ear of an arbitrary tyrant and make him change course. But no spotty 19 year old acolyte of a long-dead autist, nor even a bearded university professor still clinging on to revolutionary vanguardism, is going to be able to undo many years of observed truths about the functioning of financial markets, or production chains, or even international relations. It's just been solved to too high a degree of accuracy, and is too widespread around all but a handful of nations across the entire planet. It's proliferated because it works, and it works because it proliferated. "Real communism has never been tried" (TM) not because of a series of Jewish sabotages (which, in any case, beardy ought to have foreseen), but because it does not and can not and will not work. Can you imagine if REAL science, like Maxwell's equations, remained at the level of unproven theory two centuries after they were proposed? Or if the internal combustion engine had been designed, to the nth degree of detail, by Benz and Daimler but had simply never been constructed, apart from in highly imperfect forms that did not actually move the car, due to Jewish trickery? Do you realise how unbelievably ridiculous this is?

The remaining Marxists either come across as complete neophytes, who will no doubt mature into Patrick Bateman as they climb the greasy pole, or as muttering madmen who keep harassing people on the street that this time, THIS TIME the rapture is upon us.

When you and I die, dear reader, it will be in a state that practices market economics, probably ameliorated by the same state-socialism that predated Marx by centuries if not millennia. If you doubt this, print this post out and then consult it again on your deathbed, see if I was right.

>>24480316
I'm not reading this because I guarantee it's a recapitulation of all the incredibly banal polemics against Marxism since Marx wrote his first letters.

>>24480316
>acting capitalistically as they squabbled over a boar carcass
ousted yourself hard with that one

>>24474566
>>24474455
>>24472611
>midwit
>midwit
>midwit
This is the might of communist intellectualism...
If you disagree with them it's because you haven't read the sacred texts
If you have read the sacred texts but disagree, then you were obviously too dumb to understand it
Because it's impossible for anyone to disagree with the sophomore who thinks that communism will totally, definitely work this time.
Newsflash: reading a person's entire bibliography is not necessary to discuss their ideas. A truly powerful idea is persuasive and convincing even when it is condensed into a simple heuristic. If marx's ideas can't be condensed that way and still be persuasive, then they are no good. if you are incapable of condensing his ideas in your own words, then you clearly don't actually understand what he wrote.
Imma predict your response:
>uh, you didn't read the book
>uh, you're a midwit
>uh, you just don't get it

>>24480490
>>uh, you didn't read the book
>>uh, you're a midwit
>>uh, you just don't get it
These are probably all true, you insufferable faggot. Did you read the book? No, and you're repeating all the same faggot arguments that people have made a million times. If you'd like to dispense with this notion, you can try reading a book for once.

>>24480515
Again, if you've heard these arguments so many times, you'd probably have some defense against them, right?
If you're such a delicate genius, such a veteran of discourse, that you have seen it all before, then surely you'd be able to convince me of the merit of these ideas you spend all day kvetching about while you sit on your dilator?

>>24480490
Weak bait try harder next time.
/thread

>>24480490
>>24480524
Don't stop him. He's got the average anti-communist mind's intellectual defeciency down to a T.

>>24480312
Terrible argument, because if you were arguing with a communist they would say that communism guarantees jobs for everyone.

Why don't communists just move to North Korea?

>>24480664
Because they can't afford the plane ticket to get out of the third world states of America.

>>24470622
writing something of the magnitude of das kapital would take an ordinary person their whole life

I know you guys don't actually do any serious reading because you don't understand the level of work philosophy actually is. My masters thesis was one of the hardest things I've ever done. I've worked a lot of jobs, manual labor and shit, run marathons, done a lot of hard things. Now I come here and see some dumb shit neet talking about other people beoung a neet lol. You will never write a book.

And no I'm not a Marxist, I don't like materialism

Marx and Engels were deported, banned, and wanted for arrest in multiple countries for providing arms to rebel groups. The Manifesto was written in Belgium I think. Not to mention that Marx was a lawyer.

>>24480693
Most people are too retarded to realize that if you are going to be a good writer it requires hours of reading( 6+) and then hours of writing also. Modern writing is ass because people don’t treat it like actual work

>>24470611 (OP)

Marxism is a translation of Kabbalism. That's all it is. It wouldn't surprise me if little Karl was the purposeful outcome of some sort of ritualized breeding program. He's the outcome of like 10 generations worth of Talmudic Rabbis. This isn't a comment on the validity of his thoughts, just appreciate that it's an idea predicated on faith and intuition, not empirical evidence and scientific reasoning. There's nothing "scientific" about it.

>>24476978
>try to set up communism
>kikes run your country, cause famines, turn your country into hell
>get overthrown

>>24480194
>communism creates a mutual inheritance for all people. This is partially true too, not even stretch, when you look at features like healthcare, guaranteed housing, jobs, education, etc etc etc.
If this was true, every communist country would have not suffered from shortages in housing, jobs, and healthcare. In fact, one of the problems of the USSR was the fact it produced a bunch useless academics and not enough workers who could provide housing, jobs or healthcare.

>>24481943
>one of the problems of the USSR was the fact it produced a bunch useless academics and not enough workers

I'm going to have to see a citation on that one.

>shortages in housing, jobs, and healthcare

Another citation please. I just don't know how you could look at America today-that doesn't even use the full unemployment statistics- and not realize that you're basically projecting western modern issues onto a country in history that you hate.

>>24475783
>wholly interchangeable wageslaving machines or managerial kikes characterizable only by their class - but because it now fails at being productive.
This argument is funny because even Lenin thought this was a retarded belief to hold and quickly abandoned Orthodox Marxism to adopt Taylorism. What you're describing are the building blocks necessary for society to function. Coercive hierarchies and management are what society needs to be productive in the first place. Otherwise, people would be lazy pseudo-intellectuals, like yourself, who produce nothing of value to the world.

>>24481963
>I'm going to have to see a citation on that one.
Dude, you are lazy. This is stuff easy to find.
> I just don't know how you could look at America today-that doesn't even use the full unemployment statistics- and not realize that you're basically projecting western modern issues onto a country in history that you hate.
My guy, the USSR literally fucking collapsed. What drugs are you on? If what you said was true, the opposite would have happened.

>>24481977
>Lenin thought this was a retarded belief to hold and quickly abandoned Orthodox Marxism to adopt Taylorism

I don't think it would have mattered. The staff units that took over factories were always going to move to that model regardless of what the party committee delegated.

>>24481943

>>24482028
Did... Did you just use AI as a citation? HOLY FUCKING KEK

>>24482032
Your AI tool is literally pulling Reddit posts as it's basis of fact, you gotta be trolling. You just have to be

>>24482030
>The staff units that took over factories were always going to move to that model regardless of what the party committee delegated.
This was not even true because Lenin actually banned the Workers Opposition who wanted worker control over the economy. You definitely don't know anything about Soviet history dude lmao.

>>24482043
>>24482036
Can you actually debunk the citations, or are you going to cry? You could easily prove the sources are wrong, but you can't.

>>24482047
>This was not even true because Lenin actually banned the Workers Opposition who wanted worker control over the economy. You definitely don't know anything about Soviet history dude lmao.

So you wouldn't know this, but my degree is in history and in my class on Russian history I ordered several books taking the stance of liberal-capitalist-democrats in order to appease my very liberal-capitalist loving instructor. Pavel Miliukov in his book "Russia Today & Tomorrow" mentions very spitefully that factory ownership did change noticeably, and lamented that workers control was established. He even mentioned that the workers voted to have work extensions so they could work longer and tried to refute the increase in productivity as a way of simply making more money, but doesn't even try to give any evidence for a lack of productivity. What we do know is that even opponents of Lenin's system, and I'm one myself, were forced to confess that worker's control was established at least in some areas to some significant change to factory management.

>>24482057
>You could easily prove the sources are wrong, but you can't

Excellent. Are you willing to accept sources by people who are Marxists themselves? Or will you dismiss those out of hand? Obviously those would be the easiest to get, but I have a feeling you'll just throw them off the table and spit your food out as soon as you see them.

>>24482072
Why would I dismiss sources by Marxist? Its only trannies, like yourself, who never lived in the Soviet Union that deny the problems dude. Soviet history is public knowledge.

>>24482072
>What we do know is that even opponents of Lenin's system, and I'm one myself, were forced to confess that worker's control was established at least in some areas to some significant change to factory management.
They established worker control so well they had to ban elections, use chemical weapons and military force to put down worker strikes. Maybe if someone did that to your university; you would get the picture.

>>24482078
I'll tell you, this is a tough sell. I'm trying to get you to entertain something you spend all day commenting on, being inoculated against, and attempting to uproot a decade or so of your indoctrination on the subject. On one hand, I'd like to. On the other hand, I know nothing I post will be even slightly entertained by you because you think this is a battle and not a discussion. If Communists employed people and charged less than 1000$ equivalent for a common drug then it means that the commies are coming to steal your furniture. The real problem is this, and this is the thing we should start with. It's pic related. When I look up employment in the USSR my top three hits are:
>Reddit
>CIA
>a paywalled JSTOR article suggesting without evidence that the USSR simply just made all of their numbers up

Now before we start- do you think this is accidental? I grew up when the internet wasn't like this, so it seems obvious to me what's going on.

>>24482092
>Maybe if someone did that to your university

I'm pro-gassing universities. That's actually my primary political goal.

>They established worker control so well they had to ban elections, use chemical weapons and military force to put down worker strikes

Now what are you referring to, other than the worker strikes?

Yeah, I'm being facetious with the gassing university thing. But the point stands because if you look at the those three sites they even contradict each other: The JSTOR article claims that unemployment must have been very high and their government was lying, while the CIA went with the alternative approach of saying that the USSR was making up jobs that didn't need to be there- and both of those same arguments also apply to western countries. How many figures do we see saying that x number of jobs will be gained next year or this year if you get into a field and it's always wrong? Or how unemployment isn't even counted in full in America because the number would balloon from a few percent to a few dozen percent, all because the US doesn't track people who haven't gotten a job within five weeks?

>>24471928
>>24471980
>>24472879
>>24480664
>>24481928
>communism is attempted, it fails
may I point you to the numerous times democracy was attempted and failed? and the numerous times it resulted in bloody massacres? and how monarchies in europe tried to paint democracy as unstable and even "unscientific" when their colonies revolted and established democracies? have you forgotten that as early as a little more than hundred years ago, prior to ww1, the monarchies of europe were still playing the game of thrones from the medieval era? we will never change unless we try, and try again, and learn from our mistakes.

>>24482094
>CIA
Um, you retards regularly cite CIA as proof Stalin asn't a dictator and that Soviet cizitens ate well. Why do you change your tune when the evidence doesn't favor you?
Also, that JSTOR article isn't even pay walled. Are you so new /lit/ you don't even know to get around them? Do you want data from 70s too?
https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-achieving-full-employment/
You even lied about the JSTOR, they actually cite Soviet statistics. Nice try though.
>I grew up when the internet wasn't like this, so it seems obvious to me what's going on.
Why do you think the revolutions of 1989 happened, retard? Millions of people on the streets got tricked by the CIA to think their lives were terrible?

>>24482127
This false equivalence is odd.
You want us to believe that Poland, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Romania were better off under communism? There is no need for sophistry when we have actual case studies to measure communism against. Even China, under Mao, 90% of its people lived poverty until Deng broke up the Peoples' Communes and privatized agriculture? What point are you trying to make dude...
Marxists themselves don't even agree with you bro, even they abandoned communism. Fucking North Korea doesn't even bother with that retarded shit anymore.

>>24482120
>the JSTOR article claims that unemployment must have been very high and their government was lying, while the CIA went with the alternative approach of saying that the USSR was making up jobs
We know the USSR was lying about stuff because Stalin shot their census workers to cover up, lol. Are you really this stupid? There are entire books on Soviet corruption.

>>24482139
Never said they were better, or that any current communist state is objectively better. But we must strive to be better. Most democratic countries were also doing shit and were swamp countries not too long ago, but we worked hard to try and try again to reach where we are now where at least democracy can be seen as better than monarchy. A communist state is not free from this, and we will get things wrong, horribly wrong, but we learn from our mistakes in order to change.

>>24482164
>We must strive to better
But the overthrow of communism in Eastern Europe, and privatization of China objectively proves getting rid of communism was better for humanity.
Who gives a fuck about your utopian beliefs about being "better" when you can't defend your own alternative?

>>24482168
Because why do you think that the current conditions are good, or even the best that we can achieve? When every single economic system we have devised up till the present has been subject to change and eventual collapse? I do not believe in a utopia, but I certainly believe that we can do better than the current capitalist system. And also that our first attempts to do so will be misguided and likely fail, as what happened to the Soviets, China, NK, Cambodia and elsewhere.

>>24482189
My life is pretty good. I can afford my bills and everything. Go see a therapist because you sound mentally ill dude.

>>24482202
>sad bait
bait harder pls, it's entertaining

>>24482206
Go to your local mental ward and get some SSRis dude.
No normal person acts or talks you. You serious mental help, and if this place wasn't anonymous, I would calling them for you. You clearly are one of those people who will get picked up by some those 764 grooming servers. No one is even baiting you. You're mentally ill.

>>24472905
>Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, et cetera never actually read Marx or tried to apply his ideas.
>No communist leader of a communist country ever did, so it wasn't real communism.
See, this is the biggest problem with communists: you don't understand how the laws of probability work. You want us to believe it was totally possible that none of the people involved, in countless communist revolutions for over 100 years, had nothing to do with grappling with the application of his theory to real life. Just absolute, bonkers shit from retards.
No one will ever take you seriously.

>>24482189
>Because why do you think that the current conditions are good, or even the best that we can achieve?
Political systems aren't measured by whether they're "better"; they're measured by whether they actually work and persist. That's why most governments that exist today are modeled after either Athenian democracy, Absolute Monarchism, or Roman Republicanism. Only an insane communist dumbass would suggest we take the enormous risk of destabilizing civilization by trying to rewrite working systems on the wims' fucking bums like you. You already did so many damage with your insistence of moral relativism and atheism, we don't need anymore "modernizers" when you're just destroyers.

>>24482130
>you retards regularly cite
So this is my point: I'm not a communist, not a Marxist, actively oppose Leninism, and you're still acting like you're punching some made up figure in your head. The irony here is that you've probably ended up turning people into communists with bad arguments, ill temperament, and a tenacious habit of producing results against your own stated goals. I'm only willing to tell you this because I know you won't unfuck yourself. You're incapable. Too stupid.

>Also, that JSTOR article isn't even pay walled. Are you so new /lit/ you don't even know to get around them?

I see a paywall and that's all I needed to know. The simple fact is that most people are going to read the first page and leave because they won't be able to get around it- and that's the whole point. It's about why the search engine is set up the way it is.

>You even lied about the JSTOR, they actually cite Soviet statistics. Nice try though.

An overwhelming try it seems. You even cite where they are lying about it themselves- they are withholding rural statistics intentionally. That's not the Soviet statistics- that's from an anti-Soviet partisan who ran away to Britain in 1942.
>A specialist in the Soviet economy and a liberal
>Swianiewicz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanis%C5%82aw_Swianiewicz

Your entire premise about this being a Soviet record is bunk. The author of the article probably did that knowing that people like you would just assume it's a Soviet number based on the name.

>Why do you think the revolutions of 1989 happened

Soros. Same reason why there are revolutions in LA and Oregon. He's a liberal, btw.

>We know the USSR was lying about stuff because Stalin shot their census workers

*sigh* No, Stalin was not going around shooting census workers.

>>24470611 (OP)
You described most of academia. Wisdom is found closer the soil and away from skyscrapers

>>24482280
The current government Russia says Bolshevik Revolution was bad and that it was a coup led by jews who murdered millions of people.
The current Russian government admits the USSR was an economic disaster and will not return to it
They even admit killing the Royal Family was a disaster and let their descendants
come back after the fall of the USSR
Buried and canonized the entire family
But a retard, like yourself, will insist I should listen to you, over sources and people (who actually LIVED there) about what communism was actually like lol
and you even't speak Russia and have never visited there
like dude, seriously, you're dumb
You don't live in reality.

>>24470611 (OP)
Communism gets proven wrong and stupid (both logically and in practice), then the communists come back the next day and pretend like it never happened and promote their same retarded murdering and thieving ideology. These threads are just spam.

>>24482256
>Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, et cetera never actually read Marx or tried to apply his ideas.

I never claimed that.
(Although that was partially my mistake that line should have read as Leninism ≠ (Classical) Marxism. Sorry for potentially causing confusion.)

What I did actually imply was that some of Marx's most crucial ideas were distorted (due to either ignorance or miscaluclation) by both Lenin and Stalin and consequentially wother self described Communist leaders following suit in both adopting and forwarding these distortions due to the geopolitical nature of the Cold War.
Marx taken directly and expounded upon is not equivical to the geneology of Lenin's interpretation of him.

>No communist leader of a communist country ever did, so it wasn't real communism.

I think you are a bit confused. Communism is the end goal in a gradual transition to a Stateless and Classless society in which the means of production are publicly owned. Despite the fact that many of these states claimed to be "Communist" (or were at least labled as such) none of them ever properly acieved this and it is debatable as to whether many of them ever fully intended to do so. Although few of the referenced countries did achieve at least some form of Socialism (which is itself a loosely defined term) they were in fact never Communist (which has a very clear and distinct definition).

>Countless communist revolutions for over 100 years, had nothing to do with grappling with the application of his theory to real life.

Rojava: A result of Bookchin's theories which are a sythesis of Marxist, Ecological, and Libretarian/Anarchist ideas (Existing Currently)

Chilie (Democratic Socialism with computerized, planned economy under Allende)

Kerala, India: an entirely Democratic development with explictly religious aspects. (Existing currently)

All applied at least some sort of development to Marx's ideas as they relate to Socialism as a whole while rejecting orthodoxy.

OP have you ever considered that the gravitation towards Communism in the zeitgeist could be entirely pragmatic? It is obvious that the Capitalism will kill all life on earth if not severly mediated or uprooted.

Personally I am not an ideologue. I am not entirely beholded to either Marx nor Egalitarianism but that doesn't mean that his work holds no value when it comes to both critquing the system from the ground up as it stands as well as providing the framework for imagining a new configuration of society.

>>24470611 (OP)
If you didn't grow up with a Game Boy, you are a complete foreigner to me. Your life is alien and incomprehensible, your opinions are moulded and shaped by bizarre forces I have no conception of. I might as well ask a Papuan hunter-gatherer about his opinion on politics. I completely and utterly disavow all of Western thought, culture, and philosophy, because it was all created in and for a world that no longer exists. Any Youtuber or Instagram influencer knows more and has a more valuable opinion regarding life, power, and morality in the 21st century than that of any man who never saw it.

>>24478630
ah yes, the infamous "lawless shithole" that was Chile under Allende.

>>24483046
>What I did actually imply was that some of Marx's most crucial ideas were distorted
Nah, the law of probabilities doesn't support your argument. Your argument is crazy, and not one that exists in reality. It is impossible for every single attempt at communism to be a "distortion" of Marx. You, again, would have to believe that every major communist movement in history was in some conspiracy to not do Marxism, despite being communist in nature. That is mathematically impossible. The more logical theory is that, in practice, Marxism leads to the results of death, famine, failure, and societal collapse every time because that result is reproducible and repeatable by the people attempting it. There's no scenario where your belief system could be correct because there's no instance of it ever happening.
>Communism is the end goal in a gradual transition to a Stateless and Classless society
This is idealism. What you describe as communism doesn't matter. What matters is what communism is in practice. For someone who insists they understand Marx, you make some really dumb arguments in support of the idea that philosophy isn't matter of practicability. Philosophers are suppose change the world; not imagine it as something its not; something you're actively doing.
>Rojava, Chile, Kerala
None of those societies achieved communism or socialism, dude. The fact that you can't cite examples, and have to distort Marx yourself, to support your ridiculous argument is quite ironic, considering this is your main contention against Lenin and every other communist revolution. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

>>24483546
You are projecting various arguments that I did not make, assuming the conclusions of stances that I do not ever implicitly hold and consistantly pivoting the topic of discussion.

I deleted my original post because I now realize that it is a waste of time and effort trying to debate you. You would rather argue with your own personally constructed strawmen.

>>24483919
You're a retard, and you should delete your own existence.
Go back whatever Reddit shit hole you came from and stay there

>>24483919
That being said you did make a valid (butflawed) criticism so I will give credit where it is due.

I was indeed engaging in a bit of idealism in that passage, but I will add that your approach is extremely reductionist and oversimplifies Marxism as if initial outcomes alone define it.
You are engaging in various fallacies with your vague justification of "the law of probability".

The examples that I provided (Rojava, Chile, and Kerala) are real-world examples of leftist experiments with bottom-up democracy, communal control, planned economy, etc which are features consistent with various Communist and Socialist ideals. I stress these examples as being clear demonstrations of evolution and deviation from the ML orthodoxy as established in the early 20th century. As you stated "Countless communist revolutions for over 100 years, had nothing to do wiyh grappling with the applicatiom of his theory to real life" That is wrong and I never made that claim, I reject that claim, and I am not sure where you even got this from.

>>24483956
>Le reddit bogeyman
Case in point.

>>24470981
China is literally overtly Communist and have a deep reverence for Karl Marx and they are currently dethroning the USA as top super power in the world. Also, the best quality of life in the world and democratic socialist countries with a heavy Marxist influence. Marx was simply correct in his assessments of capitalism and those insights can bring massive power and prosperity.

>>24470981
China is literally overtly Communist and have a deep reverence for Karl Marx and they are currently dethroning the USA as top super power in the world. Also, the best quality of life in the world are democratic socialist countries with a heavy Marxist influence. Marx was simply correct in his assessments of capitalism and those insights can bring massive power and prosperity.

>>24482270
>athenian democracy
was fucking dead for thousands of years
>roman republicanism
also dead for thousands of years, present in name only in most cases
>absolute monarchism
the only that actually did persist since the time of the first pharaohs and hammurabi to today. guess we should all be monarchist then, fuck democracy lmao, sharia law time