the man is kinda right tho. problem is: communists themselves deny marx. as olavo de carvalho used to say: we’re living the worst of communism and the worst of capitalism altogether nowadays. china is the best (worst) example of it. hence: lenin’s statue in schwab’s office. that’s the model they wanna adopt, same shit as usual, same classes as usual, 1% on the top, 90% on the base, 9% of a technocrat middle class. that’s not marxism. but the frankenstein that came later on with lenin/stalin/mao. when you say communism is the late stateless stage, you fall into the same mistake of 99% of communists: you havent read what marx wrote after paris commune. that is, it didnt work. that’s when marx became more of an anarchist. no more the socialism stage till the fall of state. the rule then was: destroy. destroy the state. destroy the means of production. destroy society as a whole and start from zero. people mattered, not the party, not the state. then he died. and engels was the first to betray him, placing the party above the people.

not saying I agree with him. I mostly dont agree with 20th century communists, let alone 21th century’s. tho we certainly disagree for different reasons.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I wont deny im not familiar with marx as I should be. But i do acknowledge that marxism had been bastardized as a state ideology by the likes of lenin and stalin, which id a complete farce that is still perpetuated by tankies today. I appreciate your level of nuance when it comes to this, its hard to come by when discussing communism.

read maximilien rubel, a french sociologist from 70s who studied marx writings that were censored by bolsheviks till the end of the 70s due to soviet decay. none talks bout him cuz it simply doesnt serve the global agenda, mainly now that most of the left is coopted by davos’ foundations. marx is officially dead, man. and left itself killed him. alt right is way more marxist nowadays than any leftist zi know (unironically).

Left memes have excessive text and I’m honestly here for it 😂🥂

lmao 🥂

The alt right is filled with fascists and nazis, I should know, I used to self identify that way back in my teenage years *shudders.* I realize that right populist movements can co opt Marxist rhetoric for a time, but they always have historically leaned towards excessive state control.

I will check out that Rubel tho, he does look interesting, I just read his wiki. It seems right up my alley.

was it any different amongst communism? they’ve always executed gays, for example. in china, nowadays, we have the uigures concentration camps. no freedom of speech at all. and so on. that’s the very definition of fascism to me.

you’re gonna love rubel.

Communism (and socialism) start from a mistaken idea, they assume that some enlightened constructs with power and the monopoly of violence can direct the macroeconomy and decide what the needs of all people are and how to allocate the means of production to satisfy them.

Free market always wins in the long term.

that’s another usual mistake made both by right and left. market is as old as humankind, it’s not a capitalist invention. anarchism and “left-wing” socialism and liberalism defended a free market driven by the people, also free of taxes (which was a feudalism/monarchy thing as well as absolutist state). state was always the problem there as well. neoliberalism nowadays is as free as USSR used to be. there’s nothing “free” in corporatist monopoly, in global governances, in IMF and WTO, WEF, vanguard, blackrock. and, no, they ain’t commies. they’re capitalist pigs. as dirty as any commie, yup, still: capitalism. as I’ve said, or rather, as olavo de carvalho said: the worst of capitalism and the worst of communism. the only possible scenario for a free market is to destroy what’s out there — fiat, to begin with.

whats the difference between the three, then? basically, means of production. whereas liberals believe in concentration of wealth on the hands of the fittest, socialism believes in distribution of means of production — later on, after paris commune, in its destruction just like anarchism has always believed in.

search bout pierre-joseph proudhon. he was against the property but the property on state’s hands. totally pro property on people’s hands tho.

anyways. in short: destroy.

I think we are fundamentally using different definitons of these words which I admit can be hard to definest times.