State your socialist current and try to convince me that it's the one to follow

State your socialist current and try to convince me that it's the one to follow.

Attached: the-different-types-of-socialists-marxist-leninist-the-guy-who-30329377.png (500x425, 90.88K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Marxism-Leninism because you're a fag and will fit right in with those larpers.

why do you assume that? mind you the pic I chose for the thread is the first image that popped out when I searched for "socialist types" or some shit

Neo-Hoxhaist Post-Anarchy Leftism with Tanzanian Characteristics

You shouldn't because we are way too exclusive for the likes of you.

You made an OP.

Attached: OP.png (800x578, 871.49K)

According to your image, OP, I'm a Syndicalist.

not shocking but oh well

Democracy is the vital missing ingredient for socialism that has caused all the 'muh gorillions' throughout history.

Neither. I'm more of a market socialist.

Workers control of the economy + voluntary exchange + competitive markets = everybody wins.

spotted the ancap

Economic freedom for one person means no economic freedom for someone else. Worker ownership doesn't eliminate class at all

Attached: fdf89c284872a364a486c8e44801ac2d9cec12df8248a94574f032390d739452.jpg (900x900, 68.24K)

you mean you're a mutualist?

Attached: Daisies milk tub.png (720x540, 845.39K)

Since you can't have a functioning democracy under capitalism, the tankies don't normally use it. They still need to purge the reactionaries (as if it were a genetic thing)
Democratic-socialism can work fine afterwards (regionally even) in the libertarian-socialist system. Though some will grouse and walk away and mutter about the tyranny of the ballot box, but whatever. It shouldn't be used for centralized authority, much less nation-states.

Leave competition for the sports fields. I want actual FREE markets

yeah that worked GREAT for Yugoslavia

this is why no one takes you seriously

Mutualism isn't the only form of market socialism.

Such a patriotic fella

Attached: constitution-on-fire.jpg (600x400, 51.16K)

Spotted the bitch.

I favor mutualism a LOT. I don't stop there, though, and have a lot of green/utopian leanings, among other things. Basically, kick out the boss, let democratic workers' enterprises, resident-owned apartment complexes, and the shareholders' meeting at the credit union lead people to wonder "why does the government have no democratic inputs? why is it the only untouchable authoritarian thing in my life?"
Disrupt absentee ownership ENTIRELY. Self-employed, agorist, cooperative, however you kill the boss… but at the same time, launch gift markets just for the hell of it, promote homelessness (it really is a better model of living, tbh - you get to go places and see shit), implement communism… as in open-access-to-the-means-of-production-for-all communism, not "communism is when the gov't does stuff and I'm an authoritarian so let's post on leftpol" communism, mutual aid, direct action, guerilla garden the place so food is fucking free, etc.
Most of the bitches who talk shit are LITERALLY ASKING YOU TO UPHOLD GLOBAL CAPITALISM. Ask yourself who they probably work for. Meanwhile, I'll go as far as to say local small capitalism over global capitalism is socialist, because while the way they run their business is fucked up at least it's someone who shows up to the residential district meeting. I'd RATHER have folks in the spectrum of local-small-artisan to horizontal cooperative startups, though… and once you've built total FALGMarketSoc, crash it with a gift economy and some communism.
Hell, let the two fight it out. Your worker-owned business failed because folks just get it on the raging gift economy, or check a little communism out of the library and DIY themselves some stuff; everything the gift economy doesn't come up with, a few folks get together and marketsoc their way into at least covering the cost of going out, getting it, and getting it done.
Basically, Proudhon to the Diggers. I'm hella down for everything in that range. And usually hella not down with ML, because it's god-damn rare that it's anything but sabotage.
There are two ways to get control - both factual and economic - of an apartment complex; one is to marketsoc a scheme to fundraise buying out the landlord. The other is to shoot the landlord, shoot the city cops, shoot the state/province cops, shoot every last member of your states' military, and then shoot whoever the hell the IMF sends.
All these bitches whining about how everything in the Proudhon-to-Diggers range aren't "pure" enough… haven't shot anyone yet. They haven't done ANYTHING. But they'll sure as hell try to sabotage anything anyone ELSE does. Think about that…
…and yeah. Mutualism on one end. "Radical Christianity for aetheists" (Diggers, beghards et al) on the other.
Between the nine billion "kill whatever idpol offends my right-authoritarian sentiment" posts and the constant "horizontal self-management is BAD, man, just love the capitalism we have now!" posts, this is not-very-left-pol. That kinda sucks. But I've lain out a range for things I support.

Samefag here. Whoops, thought you were talking to the other marketsoc.

Ah well, still applies.

I am an anarchist!

Attached: serval-toy.png (900x1200, 1.19M)


The history of the entire human species is the history of the Tragedy of the Commons and it will simply play out at a different scale once we have expanded democracy to production.

Because I want you to and fuck property

Attached: DB9E9C40-9B53-4177-83D4-75D719C62F24.png (250x252, 52.5K)

Communalism because google Bookchin

Primitive communism.

Post post leftist Yakovenkoist Materialist Anarcho-Hoxhaist with Posadist Characteristics because it combines everything into some inhuman raging fireball that will topple the establishment.

So you are anti-communists?

Obvious bait to start a sectarian flamewar. Don't respond to provocation, comrades.

Egoist/Individualist anarchism
But also a Ancom and Ansyn since it's alright.

Attached: 5Vw0RIfTsV0F5SFGktuZVFAcVd_vCB2_LFTdgojADzM.png (540x382, 99K)

No one has said this, and it doesn't matter what we call it in the end, communism, communalism, anarchism, just as long as we have it.

Convincing people which ideology to buy whole cloth is stupid bullshit. Read. What matters more is that you engage in political struggle in some way. Communicate with workers, organize, educate yourelf/others, etc. What matters is you contribute to the real movement.

Eliminating class doesn't eliminate the MCM cycle. Commodity fetishism drives the economy at a more fundamental level than class.

/shitpost flag

Post left Anarchy is Individualist, Nihilist, and Egoist Anarchism if it was diagnosed with Down syndrome user.

can be used with Anarchy, Marxism and Nationalism at the same time, has all of that without the cultural libertinism of the previous two.

well there also goes women's suffrage. you're fucked user. that's ok.

Sorelianism is absent from that pic.

It's in the bottom left

speaking of bottoms, I'd bet you'd make a great power bottom, just like your entire family.

I've been reading your posts on Zig Forums and Zig Forums and I agree with almost everything you say, but you have to distance yourself from post-leftsts. Bob Black was an FBI informant and post-leftists are lifestyleists happy to eat capitalism's refuse without any ambitions towards organising or changing things.

its also the name of a retired News Anchor here. that's why I had to do a double-take when I saw his name.

Primarily just Marxism, because it's a scientific and fundamentally critical method of analysing the world and how we can alter it. Perhaps also Marxism-Leninism because I value Lenin's contributions to Marxist theory (and practice).

Haven't read about this in ages, but wasn't the reality behind "Bob Black was a snitch!!!" actually "Scammers were picking fistfights with Bob Black, so he had them arrested"?

What level of anarkiddy LARP do you have to be on when using the cops in their legitimate role of mopping up petty thuggery is comparable to infiltrating and destroying activist movements?

Fite me IRL

More like (You)-ism


Its direct democracy + actually functional computerized planning + it eliminates the commodity form by using labour vouchers and therefore directly producing for use (as exchange can not occur) + it more efficiently/accurately uses labour resources as opposed to monetary measurements which obscure the true labour cost + it makes it very obvious and intuitive to the population how much certain things really cost (no more lotsa dollars, but discrete total labour time and time per worker) + it will reward automation much more than a monetary system as under a monetary system labour is sold as a commodity which means that surplus labour will be under its true value, this will reward not automating (see sweatshops in china) even if it takes more total labour to automate, furthermore since production is planned not for profits but for use, labour reduction is encouraged and welcomed.

Inquire within. We also can trade easily with the outside world if need be and theres plenty of things to think up to tackle things like service-labour and non-scarce-production labour. (doctors/teachers and artists/programmers/researchers), such as a patreon-type support system for artist collectives, vote-based allocated startup resources, etc.
Lastly, while in the end we need to have a whole system working as one, coordinated by a single plan, the way to implement local politics can be done in whatever way and generally favours as local as possible, bottom up structures where you only go up a level if needed.

Marxism-leninism-maoism-posadism luciferian naztrot primitivist thought post lacanian postpost zizekian with judeo-bolshevik anarcho-totalitarian characterists, postpostpost left.

less labour.
Sorry im very tired.
So to sum up

this actually sounds pretty awesome, is there any movement behind it? any international? some political party? give info user

no. Its mostly just mr Cockshott himself and a few autists like myself on here (the leftchans) who follow him. It doesnt help much that he is a programmer and writes his things in ways that appeals mainly to programmers. There isnt a cohesive body of "must read" work of him either, its a collection of papers, books and videos he made over time and is still working on.

But check him out on youtube (if you can bear his terrible editing skills). Heres a video of him proving the LTV to be correct based on empiracal data.

Attached: crying.png (500x270, 169.39K)

I guess I'll be joining the group of autists that follow him. I happen to study Computer Science so it's really fucking appealing. Hope it gets to a political project at some point (maybe we should do something about it?)

As worthless to us as it is to men under capitalism. Goldman knew that over a hundred years ago.

Well nice to hear, but what is this "post-leftism" thing? I think I'm pretty distant from it as is.
All I know of Black is the title of that essay/book w/e about the end of work. I just assumed the title was being bombastic. But yeah, in that Jetsons kind of future we could eliminate the need for work as we know it. We'd instead work on things for leisure's sake. Well, that's a long and very uncertain way off.
I advocate taking active steps and spreading the word, but I am unsure of exact what steps to take, beyond getting neighborhoods more self sufficient and prepared for economic and environmental collapse, and I am certainly not eager to energize tankies to spread their rhetoric.


You replied to an user talking about people identifying as post-leftists so I thought you were defending post-leftists.

In their defense, CrimethInc. has some eye-catching graphics and their "Days of War, Nights of Love" is a good intro to anarchism for people who aren't on the left.

For me it’s Posadism.
There will be an environmental collapse 20+ years from now, it’ll provide ripe time for a revolution. It doesn’t have to be nukes, but they may drop anyways. Also I believe in aliens and that human-dolphin communication sounds cool.

It's the only one actually based on Marxist theory and has a real material understanding of how Capitalism works. Instead of focusing on shit like Succdem or third worldism or anti-imperialism, it instead looks at global capitalism and identifies it's weak spots. Like Marx, we understand that Capitalism will expand until it consumes itself and buckles first in the areas of the world where there is the most capital accumulation and technological advancement.
Also means you get to call other Socialists anti-Marxists and dunk on them with quotes from Marx and Engels which is always fun.

But isn't it simply consuming us and the world? I'm afraid they'll just keep adapting till it's all too late.

Encouraging, had similar thoughts.


the flag is hella cool


brocialism > manarchism

Attached: manarchist test.jpg (808x1106, 321.12K)

Cockshotist who supports Permeant Revolution.
Cockshotism is a perfect balance for the need of a direct democracy to ensure that Capitalism never returns and to ensure the working class remain in control of the country, as well as a need Technocratic State that emphases the need for scientific innovation. Also Invading Reactionary Countries to spread Socialism is always good idea, as long as your military is big enough.

Attached: CommunistPrussia.png (1024x615, 210.65K)

Marxist Blackpill/Jim Profitism/LHP leftist

Attached: 1c87ba93fbb962a1a4f2e1d5c85c29c417fa4135fcc92528ae2b340de1fcb8e3.png (820x420, 173.74K)

Social Confucianist with an emphasis on state capitalism and promoting employee operated/owned businesses.

Aka, Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) between the 1930s and 1980s but with increased unity and an improved democracy.
Or People's Action Party of Singapore

I'm a Monarcho-Socialist. I believe that without a strong central figure, the revolution will inevitably collapse; and that to allow any system other than the hereditary one will inevitably result in weak leaders or leadership struggles. With a monarchy, the succession is secure and stable, and the future leader can be raised with leadership skills and leftist ideology.

Marxism-Leninism as it has been the most successful at creating socialist economies and societies of any real historical significant


Attached: kim.jpg (700x700, 38.83K)

Exactly. Notice how the DPRK is the longest-lasting worker's state that hasn't been subverted by capital like China has.

The succession was actually secure, its just that for geopolitical reasons England and Austria brought their own candidate up despite minimal link to Spain.

The Juche Idea, as it has further developed and enriched the achievements of Marxism-Leninism as required by historical progress.

The Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly (head of state) is Kim Yong Nam since 1999. The Premier of the Cabinet is Pak Pong Ju since 2013. The only Kim who was head of state is Kim Il Sung, and the position held by Kim Jong Un is leadership of the Party and the Army.
There is no text from the DPRK which supports hereditary succession as a method of preserving the revolution. Unless you count the fabricated Ten Principles which is supposedly a very central document yet cannot be found from any DPRK source and are not referenced in any DPRK text.

Attached: ABUSES OF SOCIALISM ARE INTOLERABLE.pdf (1080x1971 149.65 KB, 2.4M)

I'm for autocracy as I'm totally sick of seeing socialist movements dissolve into infighting over petty differences but hereditary rule is nonsense. Those who are highly-educated or have served in the military should be allowed to select a head of state.

Forgot to mention that Kim Yong Nam is from another Kim family

Attached: kim yong nam and maduro.jpg (1024x743, 80.88K)

…this has to be a false flag.

Wolffian co-op-ism.
If you make 10 big changes to society simultaneously, you can't know which change caused which effect. It's impossible to predict the future of society accurately, even for the best human minds, so let's make one big change at a time. Co-ops are an easy sell for workers. They certainly aren't full communism, but once we see what exact changes they make to society we'll be able to see what to do next.



I guess Demsoc. I mostly believe in capitalism + wealth redistribution (UBI). You should follow that one because it's practical and realistic, you still get the benefits of capitalism, and you can still have freedom instead of living in a tankie shithole.

Attached: communism.jpg (545x349, 76.38K)

Kim Jong Un is Supreme Leader of the DPRK as well as Chairman of the Party, the two positions relevant in keeping the revolution strong- I never said the Monarchy must be the end-all-be-all, just the protectors of the revolution.

oh boy I sure love wageslavery

Attached: APOLOGISE.png (561x427, 206.61K)

all this dumass labels are useless and only divides the radical left, aside from ML who are a close minded authoritharian ideology with little to no communist, lets say philosophy, built into it. We can be marxists and anarchists at the same time, ideas do not need labels or a cause attached to them, i am not an abomination if i like the idea of an anarcho-communist society and still belive in, say dialectic materialism, dont limit yourselves in ideological groups, pick the ideas you find better and look everything from different sides, dont limit yourself.

Juche or anprim. Go big or go home [to your cabin].

That's still not a Monarchy like what Anti-Socialists try to Brand North Korea
It's like saying that since Stalin held most positions of power in the USSR until 1954 that it was a Monarchy

was stalin's grandfather the eternal president? was his father the eternal leader? did the soviet union base its calendar on the birthdate of its first leader, who was also the grandfather of the current leader?
by a strict definition DPRK obviously isn't a monarchy since it has no king, but it is an autocracy (using this word descriptively rather than normatively) with a ruling dynasty, which can be likened to a monarchy

Kim il Sung wasn't "Really" Eternal leader archetype that il attempted to build around himself with propaganda
Sung was a much more generic Marxist-Leninist Leader throughout much of his tenure and ruled mainly through inter party democracy he also said that he didn't like the fact that il was going to be appointed leader after him but that he viewed no one else as especially capable or standing out
il actually did attempt to build the whole Glorious leader thing while leader of the WPK though yes

But Un is attempting to appeal to memories of his grandfather much more then his father whose time in office is more or less seen as disastrous by most people behind closed doors

Changing something like a calendar is much more of a propaganda move more then anything else
The Jacobins changed the French calendar to own the Catholic Church epic style
The Khmer Rouge reset the date as a sign of the revolution being the beginning of a whole new era
The WPK's choice to do that was much the same except just using the first presidents birthday as a start date instead of the literal day the DPRK was declared

Quite, and what does that tell us of DPRK's fundamental logic? The Jacobins' year zero was the revolution, and so was that of the Khmer Rouge. For DPRK the seminal moment was the birth of the Great Leader, (like fucking Christmas lmao) not the revolution itself.
as a side note Kim Il-Sung was a decent leader, but that doesn't excuse this shit

That's the opposite of my point; were the Soviet Union a monarchy, it wouldn't have betrayed the revolution under Khrushchev and instead would have had a stable succession to protect socialism. In fact, Stalin being succeeded by a string of shitty leaders only exemplifies my point.

No one else would be capable but those raised by the fathers of the revolution. He came to the natural conclusion of a revolutionary monarchy, even if he didn't accept, admit, or codify it.

The USSR did not cease to be socialist after Stalins death and the displacement of Malenkov

top tier:
socdem since it has a chance of being relevant in the modern era

high tier:
ancom both still relevant

rojava tier:

hipster #2deep4u tier:

One party state tier aka ZERO party state:
Kim (lol how can anyone take this guy seriously)

Shit Tier:

Attached: 2605180337_0a80b4ea03_b.jpg (1024x685, 120.06K)

you should just have said that socdem is historically just the correct step to make since history develops slowly when it is through reform, all of society has to get used to it & prevent stupid reactionaries from becoming a thing.

I also like class collaboration, there-is-no-alternative neoliberalism and betraying the working class
and Chavez was a fucking socdem, as is his successor

Stirner belongs below shit tier.

Attached: Shitner.jpg (800x534, 43.39K)

How exactly did Chavez miss being a socdem?

Looks like it was put together in 10 minutes or less by some liberal who wanted to be an anarchist but didn't like the things anarchy actually means. A lot of the statements don't make a lot of sense for how they're supposed to be scored.

my guess would be the democracy part

Bad guess.
The dude won every election

yeah almost like chavismo is bigger than a former army officer who initially tried to take power in a coup

National-Leninism with critical support for Stalin and Juche

Dugin is a traitor and anti-revolutionary. Limonov is the only revolutionary in current Russia.

Attached: limonov bro.jpg (900x692, 193.59K)

Ironic how countries that never left the Socialist state were more authoritarian than groups that were close to achieving Communism.