[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /civ/ - 3927



File: 1483924572820.png (37.42 KB, 300x215, gorby.jpg)

No.3927

Capitalism slides closer to crisis by the day. Soon the proletariat will rise up to take back the value that rightfully belongs to it. Social anarchism is okay too, I guess.

ITT:
What is your view of communism?
How do you think it will come about (if at all)?
Are Orthodox Marxism and Marxist-Leninism cyber, or only anarchism?

  No.3928

>>3927
the pic is semi-ironic

  No.4030

i prefer anarchist mutaulism,
unless abolishing the state automaticaly creates communism (i would welcome this)

  No.4034

File: 1483931371357-0.png (129.86 KB, 200x150, national bolsheviks.jpg)

File: 1483931371357-1.png (32.33 KB, 200x134, jihadi john.jpg)

>>3927
>What is your view of communism?

Socialism used towards the twisted and depraved end of radical intellectuals, a good chunk of whom were not even part of the proletariat or lower class to begin with. It inevitably becomes stuck in a phase of state capitalism and dictatorship due to the impossibility of reaching its stated aims

>How do you think it will come about (if at all)?


Old School Communism is dead and buried really, besides maybe North Korea. What will likely emerge is what we've seen in first world countries, where progressive values mix with the superficial cultural values of Western consumerism. One example of this is the California liberal arts major dining at Starbucks as he types about the oppressive capitalist, white cis-male patriarchy on his blog or some anime imageboard while wearing a Che Guevara shirt he bought on Amazon.com for fifty dollars and wearing his reggae fashion beanie from Zumiez. Some of the communist countries that survived the collapse of the Soviet Union like China and Cuba also seem to be embracing private enterprise more and so will likely remain at a mid-way point for some time.

The only real remnants of the old revolutionary left are, strangely enough, found in the various schools of modern Islamic fundamentalism which have been directly influenced by revolutionary leftist thought, particularly from France, following colonization of the Islamic world

>Are Orthodox Marxism and Marxist-Leninism cyber, or only anarchism?


Well communist countries do have a tendency to become very technocratic in certain respects.

  No.4035

>>3928

It's also incorrect. The combination of the productivity demands of the Soviet state and the conservative family values of the average Soviet man created a society where as a woman unless you resisted being pressured to get married and make babies for the state, you were stuck being an overworked housewife doing menial labor for the state while also trying to manage a household.

  No.4036

I don't think Marxism is cyber per se, because the dictatorship of the proletariat (the intermediate stage between capitalism and communism) doesn't really resemble the cyber version of society where megacorporations play a larger role and dystopian politics are downplayed. I'm sure you could find analogues in broader dystopian sci-fi, though.

  No.4037

>>4036
>I'm sure you could find analogues in broader dystopian sci-fi, though.
One place to look for Marxist-Leninist bureaucracy would be Phillip K. Dick.

  No.4038

>>4036

Because communism kind of began to die out around the time a lot of cyberpunk literature and media emerged in the late 80's and 1990's, there was never really much accounting for communism in such work. Such work was operating on the obvious rise of corporatism and broader international networks of communication brought about the proliferation of consumer technologies, something which was made easier by the decline of communism and the barriers communist countries had set up. In most cyberpunk visions of the future, communism seems to have simply been fazed out. Even in those stories which portray a Sinophilic future where Chinese and Asian culture is very dominant, it is not communist China so much as the emerging corporate power of China and the consumer culture of places like Hong Kong.

The communist dystopia was more the nightmare of industralism that writers like Orwell and filmakers like Fritz Lang attempted to use to warn people of the possible outcome of a society where men are seen as mere tools of production or to warn of an even more violent reactionary force that could come if the unhappiness created by greedy private industrialists was not remedied.

  No.4039

>>4034
> Islamic fundamentalism which have been directly influenced by revolutionary leftist thought, particularly from France, following colonization of the Islamic world

im pretty sure that islamic fundementalism is anticomunist

  No.4040

File: 1483934233693.png (147.08 KB, 33x200, socialism has never worked.png)

>>4034
>It inevitably becomes stuck in a phase of state capitalism and dictatorship due to the impossibility of reaching its stated aims

Well that's just wrong. There are many times that Socialism has actually reached the stage of worker ownership of the means of production, and it would of continued had these societies not been crushed by external force.

Furthermore the reason places like Russia were stuck at State Capitalism was because for their own individual reasons, international revolutions such as Germany failed. Russia was not industrialized like these countries, and was relying on them to give aid to the Socialist cause, with Russia acting like the first domino in world wide revolution, inspiring the working class.

  No.4041

>>4040
as much as i admire people in that meme how do we know that thier socialism would have lasted longer

  No.4042

>>4039
Islamic fundamentalism gained it's prominence due to opposing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, so this. I'd assume any convergence is due to Judeo-Christian emphasis on helping your co-religionists, which from a certain viewpoint can be considered semi-Marxist, I suppose, though I would prefer examples rather than what sound like right-wing memes.

  No.4043

>>4040
>Well that's just wrong. There are many times that Socialism has actually reached the stage of worker ownership of the means of production,

In most cases, worker ownership of the means production is limited or doesn't last very long until the society is forced to privatize as new needs must addressed. It's a lot easier to direct resources towards a particular goal when not everyone owns an equal share.

>and it would of continued had these societies not been crushed by external force.


They were crushed by external force because worker owned societies don't tend to produce societies which can match the military power and economic influence of Western capitalist countries, whose power and influenced is owed to their successful master and manipulation of the rules of capitalist economics.

It's no coincidence that the most imperialist countries were pro-capitalist countries, but the reason for this that leftists miss is that they become imperialist because of the success free market and competitive capitalism generally has in their own countries in generating the wealth and resources needed to take over other countries, usually countries where a culture of modern capitalism has not yet fully developed due to local customs and traditions.

Basically the process goes like this: free market capitalism is so successful in creating a surplus of goods and wealth that companies in first world countries looking to escape the burden of competition at home begin to look abroad at untapped virgin markets where potential competitors have not yet staked a claim. They make a deal with the government of their home countries through various contractual agreements to allow them to monopolize these markets for themselves before any domestic competitor can emerge or before any foreign competitor can tap into it first. This results in less developed (read less capitalist) countries being stuck under the economic and military domination of foreign capitalist nations. In contrast, countries that quickly develop some culture of capitalism usually are able to ward off imperialist forces for much longer. The Soviet Union itself is one example of this. Being more accurately defined as a state capitalist system with a strong emphasis on using resources to develop and expand its military power, the Soviet Union remained fairly independent of Western capitalist control, but at the same time it itself became an imperialist power in its own right all the same for much of the same reasons. But of course, it did this with much greater strain than its competitors as the quality of life of the average worker in the Soviet Union always lagged behind that of the average American worker under the "oppressive" capitalist system.

  No.4044

File: 1483938050966.png (349.92 KB, 200x167, 1480890054750.png)

>>3927
Better dead than red.

  No.4045

File: 1483939164751-0.png (46.1 KB, 200x145, Sayyid-Qutb.jpg)

File: 1483939164751-1.png (164.83 KB, 147x200, Mahmoud_Taleghani_(2).jpg)

File: 1483939164751-2.png (105.82 KB, 154x200, Dr_Ali_Shariati.jpg)

>>4039
>>4042

It was the atheism of the Soviet Union and other communist countries that Muslims rejected and for many of them "Marxism" was synonymous with "atheism", but as far as the ideals of a radical egalitarian society were concerned as well as the anti-capitalist socialist rhetoric, said fundamentalists embraced these concepts wholeheartedly.

Sayid Qutb from Egypt for example, envisioned a vanguard party of mujahideen who would wipe away all bidah, overthrow oppressive fake Muslims rulers (the sultans) and their supporters (the traditional ulama), ward off the Western imperialist forces, create the ideal Islamic state which would eventually give way to a classless, stateless utopia where all believers were equal and only God ruled. His ideas were clearly Leninist (a fact which didn't escape his harsher critics) wrapped in Islamic religious dressing. And these are the ideals which generally govern the political philosophy of many Islamic extremists including Al-Qaeda.

The liberal Western educated Shi'ite intellectual, Dr. Ali Shariati, also crafted an ideology that was highly influenced by his education in the works of Pierre Joseph Proudhon, Jean Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx, calling for a "restoration"
of the "revolutionary" Islamic principles which would create a stateless, classless society, what he called "Red Shi'ism"
as opposed to "Black Shi'ism" (the Shi'ite Islamic religion patronized under the various sultans and shahs). Shariati also was well known for his translation of Che Guavara's memoirs into Persian. Other early Iranian figures who tried to reconcile the economic ideals of Marxism and revolutionary socialism along similar, albeit more socially conservative lines to Shariati's also included such key figures of the Iranian revolution as Mahmud Taleghani and Ruhollah Khomeini who took care to adopt much of the leftist rhetoric that was popular among young Iranian students.

Western Colonialism, despite being a byproduct of capitalism in many ways, also opened up the channels for the influence of Marxism, especially through student exchange programs with major universities in Paris or New York. And in such Marxist and socialist values, nationalists and religious fundamentalists found the rhetoric they needed to oppose Western imperialism while also opposing the traditional aristocratic social orders that governed their own societies for so many years, which were on their last legs

  No.4083

>>4040
Communist party of Czechoslovakia was against Dubcek as much as the Soviet Union. If not even more. He was very pro-decentralized, which would mean that communists in Prague would get less of the money they stole from people. They were spying on him until 1989, he even reported that his grand-daughter was really sick, so he took her to the hospital and the state "security" people were going after him even then.

The fact that suicide rates after 1989 dropped to half means one of the two things. Life got much better or the murders of state "security" workers weren't happening anymore.

  No.4084

Why is it that communists and anarchists are constantly forced to defend arguments against strawmen that were defeated over 100 years ago?

  No.4099

>>3927
>Soon the proletariat will rise up to take back the value that rightfully belongs to it.
Is this even possible nowadays in a developed country?

  No.4101

>>4099
I argue it is. The current order is stagnating, you can tell by how many young people these days are realizing how fucked they really are. Combine that with the increased awareness of the lower class(BLM is a good example) and you've got a volatile mixture ready to throw out the old. The strategy that's worked in the past(and is working now) is to divide people along lines besides class(e.g. racism), so that the educated and uneducated proles don't join forces and become a real threat.

  No.4114

>>4099

No, because the working class doesn't really exist in developed countries which simply automate or outsource their labor.

>>4101

>The current order is stagnating, you can tell by how many young people these days are realizing how fucked they really are.


Most of those young people are well-off suburbanites who have the privilege of being able to intend big universities where Marxist drivel is drilled into their heads by professors who make their money publishing articles talking about bullshit.

If you ever talk to the REAL working class in America and other developed countries, most of them are fairly conservative in their political affiliations.

>The strategy that's worked in the past(and is working now) is to divide people along lines besides class(e.g. racism)


So BLM and other movements that persist in constantly focusing on irrelevant race issues instead of real economic and political issues are a strategy by the bourgeoisie to divide and conquer the proles by keeping them focused on talking about shit that doesn't matter. Got it.

  No.4115

>>4114

*attend big universities

fixed

  No.4116

>>3927
Gulags, bread lines and political purges, and the party as the new elite leeching off the workers.

Also fuck Jews.

  No.4121

>>4116
>also fuck jews

so close...

  No.4136

>>4121
Are you denying their disproportionate representation on power structures, their clannish nature, or its significance?

  No.4137

Forgot to add:
>>3927
>How do you think it will come about (if at all)?
Over my dead body.
>Are Orthodox (((Marxism))) and Marxist-Leninism cyber, or only anarchism?
Communism tends to be technologically backwards, what with killing intellectuals or sending them to gulags, and not rewarding exceptionality, and the tight control over what is produced with the associated bureaucracy.

Anarchy never lasts for long, factions will be formed, power consolidated, and you will have a government, quite possibly a rather authoritarian one, in no time at all.

Also, read a book, fuaaarker. The government style of Cyberpunk settings is: Doesn't matter because it's megacorporations that hold the strings, and the "government" is just their puppet. If they even try to hide it, that is.

A more interesting topic would be the power structure of the megacorps. Privately owned? Co-op? Publicly traded shares? A mix?

  No.4164

File: 1484390863102.png (96.63 KB, 200x200, commiethumb.png)

>>3927
>What is your view of communism?
I dont actively support it but i wont oppose it, i hope it will happen in my lifetime but i dont support any communist party.
>How do you think it will come about
It will happen if we want it or not due to the constant and unstoppable improvement of techonology which will make robots take place of every job on earth leading to a dystopian society led by capitalists owning every mean of production without giving anything back to the population which will either lead to a revolution and thus collectively owned means of production or back to the dystopian society which leads to a revolution etc.
That or mankind slowly slides to communism peacefully by giving progressively more power to the people blurring the border between capitalism and socialist/communist society.

  No.4165

>>4137
>Communism tends to be technologically backwards

I'm not a fan of the USSR, but this is incorrect. The USSR went from a agrarian backwater to an industrialized superpower in about 20 years.

>and not rewarding exceptionality,


also false. People doing important work were generally put in better houses.

>Anarchy never lasts for long, factions will be formed, power consolidated, and you will have a government, quite possibly a rather authoritarian one, in no time at all.


"If you limit your thinking only to what you can see, you close your mind to the possibility of something new"

  No.4166

>>4114
>No, because the working class doesn't really exist in developed countries which simply automate or outsource their labor.

Anyone who has to work for someone else to live is, by definition, working class. There's also the concept of the "Precariat", which describes most of the people who can only find part-time work and are in many ways worse off than the old-style proletariat.

>Most of those young people are well-off suburbanites who have the privilege of being able to intend big universities


And graduating to find that nobody wants to pay them a fair wage and they're deeply in debt? You mistake raw income for economic power. Those "well-off suburbanites" aren't too different from Jamal from Flint Michigan, and a lot of people on both sides know it.

>Marxist drivel is drilled into their heads by professors


I go to one of the most famously left-wing schools in existence, and I've never had a professor tell me anything remotely Marxist.

>If you ever talk to the REAL working class in America and other developed countries, most of them are fairly conservative in their political affiliations.


Yep, something called "false consciousness". It's the biggest hurdle to left-wingers in existence.

>So BLM and other movements that persist in constantly focusing on irrelevant race issues instead of real economic and political issues


Depends what you mean by that. There are significant elements of BLM that are undeniably aware of the economic and social problems that cause racism. It's not a centralized movement.

  No.4206

>>4114

>Most of those young people are well-off suburbanites who have the privilege of being able to intend big universities where Marxist drivel is drilled into their heads by professors who make their money publishing articles talking about bullshit.


me thinks most of your experience with politics is being said university student. This is obviously not true.

>If you ever talk to the REAL working class in America and other developed countries, most of them are fairly conservative in their political affiliations.


Whats the "real" working class in your eyes? Chances are its relatively well off socially conservative white union workers with skilled labor jobs, and a very hard to get union job. Then we get to "conservative".

>So BLM and other movements that persist in constantly focusing on irrelevant race issues


Race isn't an irrelevant issue. I could try telling you the US has one of the nastiest police forces in the world, even compared to developing nations. You are not going to believe me, but the statistics of highest incarceration rate in the world does not lie. Its not even close.

I'm pretty sure you're every bit the rich college kid who's only experience with socialists and socialism are other rich college kids. So thats why they seem like that to you.

  No.4207

>>4137

>Communism tends to be technologically backwards,


Hardly. Just about all communist regimes in existence rapidly progress. Perhaps none of them reached the levels of the US, but none of them started at the same time either.

When Russia and China became communist, they where centuries behind the west. Under communism they caught up.

Long before the USSR really got a chance to do everything, Germany invaded and nearly wiped them out. They wiped out the USSR, including most of what infrastructure they had.

So the USSR was a new nation that hadn't really been able to work out the kinks of an untried economic system, that nearly got wiped out. Russia still hasn't recovered population wise or otherwise from German invasion in WW2

Also consider this. In spite of all this, they managed to beat the US to the moon, only 12 years after WW2 ended, in spite of all that.

Now, the USSR was a little brutal for my taste, but to say that communism was responsible for them being ass backwards is a blatant lie.

>not rewarding exceptionality, and the tight control over what is produced with the associated bureaucracy.


The US awards exceptionalism. HAR HAR HAR. No it doesn't. Capitalism does the exact same thing. Most large corporations are not run by engineers, but bureaucrats that hate engineers.

Compare to China, where there premier has an Bachelors in EE, with the US who the current president was a lawyer, and the incomming president is a business fool. Most politicians are lawyers.

China is hardly a model of free market capitalism, and their ability to rapidly modernize is due to their very centralized nature.

Even look at the US under its most prosperous period was not the result of a free market. Heck, the internet itself was the result of a very open publicly funded project

GNU and Linux which are most servers. FreeBSD. Apache, nginx, mysql, are all developed outside the typical capitalist model.

  No.4213

>>4114
> No, because the working class doesn't really exist in developed countries which simply automate or outsource their labor.

It does still exist, but it is shrinking. The reason is the majority doesn't want to do blue collar jobs (truck drivers, electricians, plumbers, etc).

> If you ever talk to the REAL working class in America and other developed countries, most of them are fairly conservative in their political affiliations.


First, most of blue collar workers on northern states are socially liberal. Second, majority of blue collar workers are conservative because they want lower taxes, and higher wages. Liberals wants to increase taxes, and immigration, which in turn reduces wages.

> So BLM and other movements that persist in constantly focusing on irrelevant race issues instead of real economic and political issues


BLM is somewhat misguided, but a broken clock is correct twice a day. They are correct on the issue of police brutality, and abnormally high rate of incarceration.

  No.4214

There is nothing stopping you from saving up money along with other interested people to buy "the means of production" and as far as I know there is no force active at the moment attempting to stop you from doing so. So while it may take some time to raise funds I think it would be much easier than upsetting the entire social/economical order and once you have a successful worker run business you can help other workers to do the same. The question is then why is this never done by so called communists ?

  No.4221

>>4040
>it would of continued
this is the singular argument of every socialist alive today

>it failed because of X, otherwise it would have been perfect forever

  No.4225

Is socialism considered communism nowadays or is it just some crafty re-labeling of an ideology?
Kind of like how "greenhouse effect" is called "climate change/disruption" now. (please don't discuss the weather here, it's just the closest analogy I could find)

  No.4232

>>4214
Except that is done to an extent by the syndicalists. However, the point of communism isn't just to create merely a society with even wealth distribution but to destroy all ideas of class itself.

  No.4235

>>4232
What does
>destroy all ideas of class itself
even mean ? More importantly what does it entail ?

You contradicted yourself right there because if class is merely an idea, ideas can't be destroyed. So unless you aim to somehow control what the populace is capable of thinking, what you really want is to eliminate all the factors that allow class to be perceived.

The Khmer Rouge were really good at that sort of thing. Hopefully you have a less genocidal solution to the problem. However that's just social/economic class, what about political class ?

Surely there need to be leaders and people that make decisions. I can't think of any example of communism where the party leaders did not effectively make themselves a separate class from the general population.

All of that ignores the biggest question. Which is why do you want to destroy class ? Marx talked a lot about the evils of capitalism and a class system but that was not the important problem he noticed in my opinion.

The important problem Marx saw was the efficiency of capitalism not just exploiting workers but making them unneeded. Because in a capitalist system you are worth what you earn and if you can't earn anything you are worthless. We're starting to see the beginnings of that sort of thing today, but I don't think any *isms are the answer.

  No.4246

File: 1484822819633-0.png (200.43 KB, 200x147, Constitution-of-the-Athenians-in-the-4th-century-BC.png)

File: 1484822819633-1.png (620.24 KB, 200x200, dictators handbook.epub)

File: 1484822819633-2.png (124.97 KB, 200x200, animal farm.epub)

>>4235
>Surely there need to be leaders and people that make decisions.
Yes, you probably can't avoid some amount of representation, the same way Athenian democracy had to have some amount of representation even though the General Assembly (open to any citizen) was the main governing body. For means by which to avoid the tendency of these leaders becoming a separate class we can look at Athens again. What they did:
1. Very short terms, 2 years max. You can only serve once or twice in a lifetime.
2. People enter these positions primarily by lot, drawn randomly from the population (well, you have to sign up first). For certain expert positions (like Generals) there can be elections.
3. High amount of accountability. The general assembly has means of punishing those in office.
Aka actual democracy.

>Which is why do you want to destroy class ?

Well, as long as
all human beings have their natural right to well-being fulfiled equally, contribute roughly equally to the fulfilment of said right, have equal really existing opportunity to take part in social, economic and political decisions and are free of illegitimate authority in all its manifestations,
I do not mind having classes.

>>4225
Socialisms' meaning has been eroded to the point where political/economic systems over the whole spectrum like ultra-totalitarianism, capitalism with state ownership, stateless anarchosyndicalism ("Libertarian Socialism"), jew-murdering fascism ("National Socialism") or plain old social democracy (Sanders) has been called some form of Socialism. Meaning it is considered everything you want it to be.

  No.4248

Orthodox Marxism is absolutely not cyber, but anarchism is insufficient by itself. Check out the modern ultra-left, shit like communisation, the autonomists/post-autonomists. Good shit. Highly recommend the following reading list:

https://edensauvage.wordpress.com/2016/07/25/reading-list-for-aspiring-ultra-lefts/

  No.4302

File: 1485043632936.png (111.38 KB, 200x187, Communism 2017.jpg)

Communism is dumb. The working class has made it clear that they favorite Nationalism in the current climate. This is because you Commie fucks care more about Trannies and Safe spaces than actual issues like the American debt crisis or Islamic terrorism.

  No.4351

>>4207
>Hardly. Just about all communist regimes in existence rapidly progress. Perhaps none of them reached the levels of the US, but none of them started at the same time either.

Which all? As far as I know, you could call Cuba to be a close one, but that's about it. Well, North Korea as well, but country relying on humanitarian help is hardly progressing.

>When Russia and China became communist, they where centuries behind the west. Under communism they caught up.


When African nations became colonies, they were centuries behind the west. Now they aren't. No communism there. It wasn't about communism, but about collectivism. And you can bet that every country will go forward when they rob every one of their citizens. But it ends when the money run out and they eventually do, because elites steal and ordinary people steal back as well. Why do you think that people used to say "If you don't steal from state, you rob your own family"?

>Long before the USSR really got a chance to do everything, Germany invaded and nearly wiped them out. They wiped out the USSR, including most of what infrastructure they had.


Well, if USSR would let Poland, Baltics, Finland and Romania be, they could have, you know, prepare defenses. There were unprepared to do anything, but they attacked their neighbors left and right.

>Also consider this. In spite of all this, they managed to beat the US to the moon, only 12 years after WW2 ended, in spite of all that.


Yeah, while they managed to starve out Ukraine a few years before that.

Tell me please how Russia or USSR is not technologically backwards. What things that were designed or made in Russia you have at home?

>Compare to China, where there premier has an Bachelors in EE, with the US who the current president was a lawyer, and the incomming president is a business fool. Most politicians are lawyers.


Yeah, that's why late USSR leaders have had only education in Moscow University of political bullshit? Lawyers have their job, but political universities produce just politicians.

>China is hardly a model of free market capitalism, and their ability to rapidly modernize is due to their very centralized nature.


Modernize? Show me one original Chinese product that was designed by Chinese engineer and made by Chinese company in China. And yes, it has to actually work. Their cars are design copies of Korean, Japanese, European and American models.

>GNU and Linux which are most servers. FreeBSD. Apache, nginx, mysql, are all developed outside the typical capitalist model.


Great examples... MySQL is Oracle Corporation, nginx is NGINX Inc., RHEL is Red Hat Inc. Their basic product might be free, but they still make money from supporting it. Just like your printer was sold to you with a loss to the company, they make it up when they sell you overpriced cartridges.

  No.4423

>>4246
I just want to say that I love you for your informative posts and I believe that you are the same wonderful lain that helped me to make sense in another /civ/ thread.
I want Socialism without the co-opted buzzwords (true left on the spectrum, minimal state intervention) but it looks like "National Socialism" will always be there to slide the meaning.

  No.4581

>>4114

>Most of those young people are well-off suburbanites who have the privilege of being able to intend big universities where Marxist drivel is drilled into their heads by professors who make their money publishing articles talking about bullshit.


Dude, lay off the Infowars.

  No.4583

>>4351
The appeal of communism was that it industrialized poorer nations. Saying that Russia or China are behind us now misses the point that if you look at where those nations were at the time of revolutions and where they were several decades later, they did advance. The cost was tens of millions of lives, freedom of speech and forved labour to name a few things and no, I'm no communist but it's historically wrong to say that communism didn't advance rhose nations technologically.

And did you just say there was no communism in Africa?? I hope you mesnt only during colonial times and not cold war era.

  No.4584

>>4583
god my spelling... damn new phone, I'll never get used to this touch screen. Sorry.

  No.4595

>>4583
Y'all need to look up Thomas Sankara, African communist and all round good comrade.

  No.4598

Communism is evil to me as a fervent anti-communist American; at heart I'm an anarcho-individualist. I say better dead than red. I don't think it will come about again in a form we recognize but maybe it would be like the creepy Fedaration from Star Trek. Tankies are not cyber; anarcho-communists are okay I guess.

  No.4630

>>4598
In that case, shouldn't you also be "better dead than capitalist"? And shouldn't you have died fighting against capitalism?

  No.4682

>>4630
Not him, but being a lone martyr for various purposes (inciting insurrection, propaganda of the deed, etc...) is generally not the smartest thing to do especially since it puts your life in danger. That being said resisting capitalism (and hierarchical authority in general) happens on a broader level than just revolutions. Spread of anarchist theory and literature is equally as important as a revolutionary struggle.

Unless he's using individualist anarchism as a synonym for anarcho-capitalism and is somehow alright with ancoms.

  No.4683

>>4038
>The communist dystopia was more the nightmare of industralism that writers like Orwell and filmakers like Fritz Lang
Those were just totalitarian dystopias, it's not inherent to communism. Orwell himself was an anarcho-communist sympathizer.

  No.4684

>>4136
No, but why does it even matter? You're not different from the "fuck white people" crowd. You have to attack the ruling class, not Jews, even if a big part of it is composed by Jews. See, even if you kill all Jews just the remaining people in the ruling class and other non-Jews will jump into the ruling class and they will take control and nothing will change.

  No.4685

>>4683
Orwell was a socialist certainly but I don't think he ever called himself an anarcho anything. He was a colonial policeman once remember, and in Spain he fought (and was wounded) with the POUM who were Trotskyist. He wad strongly against communism in the form of Stalinism anyway.

  No.4687

>>4685
Yeah, that's why I said sympathizer. He was against totalitarian governments (that includes Stalinism), not against communism.

  No.4694

Socialist, but not a communist.

I'll take the commies to these NatSoc and fascist creeps any day of the week.

>>4034

>The only real remnants of the old revolutionary left are, strangely enough, found in the various schools of modern Islamic fundamentalism which have been directly influenced by revolutionary leftist thought, particularly from France, following colonization of the Islamic world


This is a blatant lie. Islamic fundamentalist has more in common with fascism, anti-capitalist nationalism and third positionalism than it even did with socialism or communism. In fact, It fact, the CIA helped create these brands of Islamic fundimentalism to combat secular socialist movements in the 1960s.

The ME used to be filled with secular, socialists, and communists. these people slaughtered them all.

Oh, and socialism always fought for the rights of woman and ethic minorities, even when the west did not. The soviet union had far more rights for women than either modern day russia or the contemporary US of the time.

I really think its time we abandon cold war disinformation about socialism and socialist regimes.

  No.4695

>>4685

He might not have called himself an "anarchist", but he actually fought for the FAI/CNT during the Spanish civil war.

  No.4697

>>4351
>Modernize? Show me one original Chinese product that was designed by Chinese engineer and made by Chinese company in China. And yes, it has to actually work. Their cars are design copies of Korean, Japanese, European and American models.

Welcome to globalization. Thats true of anything. Lets see something Designed in the US, by an American, built by an American. Again no.

  No.4704

>>4034

>The only real remnants of the old revolutionary left are, strangely enough, found in the various schools of modern Islamic fundamentalism


If this was even remotely true then ask yourself why the US - no friend of the rev left, to say the least - is so keen to throw its support behind Islamist organisations in the ME. Also, if Islamic fundamentalism is rev left, does that make the Saudi royal family communist revolutionaries? You are way, way off on this one, friend.

  No.4711

>>4695
He was not in the CNT/FAI or even the International Brigades, he joined the POUM who were allied with those groups but were Trotskyites which is a more moderate branch of Marxism/Leninism. The Spanish revolutionaries were a mixed bunch. Some weren't from any radical background, just Spanish patriots who wanted their country back after a military coup plus tens of thousands of foreign volunteers who wanted to put fascism down before it threatened the rest of the world.