I just do not understand these anarkiddies...

I just do not understand these anarkiddies. Why can't they understand that the proletariat can only be free by being enslaved by a dictator who has total power over an authoritarian police state?!

Attached: 1499707787378.png (500x329 69.65 KB, 52.78K)

Other urls found in this thread:


Attached: ef00035e78f861205d77009feac10455ed801ab4dab3ef86506e7a2cc88dc3a8.jpg (720x501, 30.57K)

If you're going to keep this up at least change your images.

Attached: DxCSFAhWoAEUP1Q.jpeg (916x660, 89.04K)

Same poll again:

I get where this is coming from, but if you live in a communist society and have an idea for some production to start doing to meet a need, you have to call that something. If you're in a transitional society, people already know what a business is.

Unless you ignore everything about china they are promoting capitalism fam.

I don't support China. They're clearly not socialist. I was responding to the use of that image, which came off to me like it was trying to be a criticism of the rhetoric. Shit, I don't know how to read Chinese. It might even be a mistranslation. Just thought I'd try derailing the thread with a more salient discussion.

Arguments against China these days:
Really powerful, ya know…

Encouraging private enterprise and including a porky into the party are solid evidence China is capitalist.

This thread's OP is so dumb, and the image you responded to was such silly banter, but the laughably po-faced apologia in this post has forced me to empty my Dengist folder. Congrats.

Attached: chinaprivatisation2.gif (332x311 11.46 KB, 51.9K)

Attached: chinasoes4.jpg (290x281 33.14 KB, 31.92K)

Attached: chinawealth.png (960x720 41.1 KB, 59.47K)

Once you are a materialist, you begin to understand that freedom and liberty, both are abstract spooks. In a world chained by cause and effect, there can be no "freedom in itself". "Free will" becomes the ultimate oxymoron, for will itself is not free. There is only matter and how it is distributed. To believe in "freedom" is to deny matter and its efficient organisation.

The socialist state is the supreme source of freedom, that which protects the people from anti-socialist states, from fascist invaders, from restorationist traitors. There is no freedom without a totalitarian state in socialism - on the contrary, socialist totalitarianism IS freedom. Freedom from chaos, freedom from doubts, freedom from loneliness and freedom from capitalist disorder!

There is only a crust of bread, the one in charge of dividing that bread and how they divide it. It is our mission as socialists to ensure the bread is divided that "from each their ability, to each their contribution" is fulfilled.

Attached: images (9)

You still failed to deliver the reason why totalitarianism is the only entity capable of implementing proletariat owned means of production and distribution . Ultimate power will corrupt in long enough time frame. More concentrated it is, faster will it expire.

One opposing the very concept of democratically owned or planned means of production and distribution will appear obviously suspicious no matter how much aesthetics you smear on top of it.

That's actually pretty aesthetic

Aesthetisation of politics is reactionary, kid

Attached: wbjmn.jpg (1500x800, 1.63M)

true tbh to me at least it is. a state where the basic rights to human life are protected: no rape, no murder, etc on another comarade and open means of production where direct democracy takes place. Thats the freest society.

I have the higher freedom the law of the people allows me to enjoy, and law of the people gets made by me and my homies the workers so win-win. We are more powerful and freer together after all.

Attached: HegelGlasses.jpg (332x400, 21.66K)

This has generally not happened in very many Marxist state's except oddballs like Mao's China and the USSR in the post-1945-1953 era

I don't see the contradiction here
The CCP has already admitted the role of Private enterprise in their Socialist economy in the name of development and technological advancement
Many other Socialist states (A modern example being Cuba also incorporate a national-capitalist class

yeah tbqh i didnt knew a lot about the USSR until last year when I read a fuck ton. Early USSR made a lot of sense actually too bad it didn't had that philosopher-king to guide it. By philosopher-king i just mean a benevolent weltgeist. It is needed early on to beat the reaction, as things calm down communism (acessible autonomy) starts to happen, and its not only 1 communism whole, its communism(s) all ruled by their own law of the workers which gets decided by the workers with direct democracy. To protect that democracy and those rights to that higher liberty a military dedicated to the workers is needed because contradiction and reaction will always exist also its not an utopia problems obviously still exist here and there but humanity and freedom is enjoyed the most in a society like that were armed forces really do justice for the working class.

Attached: absolute, abstract, concrete.png (1017x400 36.3 KB, 491.12K)

Lenin could kinda have been that weltgeist but oh well what happened happened. I dont like Stalin tbh only his efforts against the Nazis are very welcome then post that shit the revisionism and what is known as Soviet Nomenklatura happened and shitted everything up. But the Soviet Union had a lot of potential it was really the counter force to capitalism that was needed something more mature without the historical mistakes of the USSR will rise you will see tho maybe by grace of socialist enlightenment the whole European Union becomes socialist that would be dope af.

Does China even have any worker cooperatives?


Attached: fda2caf9f03624aba7e3e9b01544b1b87e0ea92e.jpg (612x541, 52.91K)

The PRC prior to Deng's reforms did have a larger amount of collectivisation and Direct ownership of state assests by the working class this came in the form of the "Iron Rice bowl" where individuals in low reduncy fields were payed in Labor Vouchers

These programs were rolled backed by Deng in the 80s and 90s because of mass complaints about this system and needing to free up more enterprises for economic reform

China is not claiming to have achieved Communism and the complete abolishment of capitalism and the laws of the Market
China's only claim is that its economy is Socialist which in itself is the transitionary stage between the Capitalist stage of development and communism and is not defined in a singular way as "The abolishment of all private enterprise immediately" and as stated serves as a transitional point
During this stage the existence of Private enterprise for the purpose of development is not a contradiction as long as the class character of the State/Goverment remains true (Cuba Vietnam China Laos DPR-Korea)

Literally every Chinese exchange student at my college is a filthy rich asshole and card-carying party member. Look at these asshole Chinese kids maxing out their credit cards on Yeezys and Balenciagas and tell me they are the product of a socialist society with a straight face.

A Capitalist class does exist in china so obviously young offspring of these capitalist families will exist and will sometimes travel abroad / become capitalists themselves

And I know it's just anecdotal (Much like your example) but most Chinese expats in my country are literally Anti-Communist "Principled Conservatives" that the Liberal-National front panders to

Attached: feynman.jpg (2200x1444, 323.52K)