If Marx hadn't happened we'd all be living in Blanquist-Saint-Simonian Phalanstere utopia already. The sooner we abandon Marx the better it will be for the anti-capitalist struggle.
Marx Ruined Socialism
Wyatt Allen
Other urls found in this thread:
marxists.org
twitter.com
Aiden Gray
Kayden Garcia
Is there any logic behind this statement?
Adam Miller
M-Ls ruined socialism, not Marx.
Jackson Baker
Blanqui was basically Stirner with an endgame.
Robert Allen
>>>Zig Forums
Noah Collins
A TA I had for class once wrote his Ph.D dissertation on how Marxism would have naturally arrived in the world due to the events that were happening at the time, writing a tongue-in-cheek hypothetical that said Marx was actually from the future and an ultra-capitalist, going back in time to describe "Marxism" to the world so as to have the elites know that it is a valid critique of the system and plan out the system to combat it and make sure it never actually happens.
Hudson Bennett
Wow, it's literally Hegel. Bravo.
Caleb Jackson
Hitler thought the same and so do I. The next step is abandoning the left entirely and becoming a right wing socialist.
Jaxon Powell
jews ruin everything tbh
Liam Bell
MLs are the ones implementing socialism
Levi Reyes
David Smith
how?
Benjamin Sanchez
Jonathan Hill
Camden Ortiz
...
Julian Garcia
lrn 2 economics muke
Luke Baker
found a flag muke?
Aiden Campbell
And ☭TANKIE☭s have no argument, as per the usual
Hunter Bell
China is capitalist but your arguments for calling it so are bad.
Capitalism, as stated by Marx is not commodity production as such but generalized commodity production. China is not capitalist because commodities are being produced, but because their state is based around commodity production.
A lack of private property necessarily entails the negation of it through public property, which is just property owned by the state. China's economy is barely run by public enterprises, but is instead mainly run on private enterprises which collaborate with the state.
Brandon Thomas
You are right for the most part, but whether state owned property is public is contextual. A state that is not held accountable to workers is not socialist. Sometimes this is debatable, but in China's case the oligarchical government is hard to deny.
Daniel Williams
who's muke?
Robert Morris
You're right, I should have been more clear:
Public property is state-owned property, but not all state-owned property is proper public property. In China, most of the state-run enterprises function more like private enterprises than like public enterprises. The "state capitalism" label which is infamously ill-suited for describing the Soviet Union can actually describe modern China pretty well. But as I said earlier, China's economy is barely run by these state capitalist enterprises and is run mainly by the private capitalist enterprises.
Nathaniel Ross
A faggot
Luke Reed
GTFO Leftcom
Jayden Scott
200 years later where is the guaranteed implosion of capital?
Jonathan Ortiz
Read A Fucking Book
John Russell
Leo Walker
...
Kayden Morales
Chase Walker
criticizing =/= attacking & underming
Juan Cruz
Criticism means that you actually know what you're talking about though. It isn't simply throwing around buzzwords that you think fit.
I bet you couldn't even define Communism.
Charles Gutierrez
Carter Hughes
>>>/liberty/
Jaxon Torres
I'm a Marxist but honestly I sometimes think this unironically.
Brayden Lewis
That is, by definition, what it is. Are you conflating it with social ownership?
James Price
Get your permanent revolution horseshit out of here. You clearly didn't even understand the excerpt you linked.
Ryan Howard
lol
Wyatt Phillips
Let me reword it to be as clear as possible then
Luke Torres
funny you should link that screencap since i distinctly remeber that post and argued against it.
But since you have literally nothing but sperging out at the sight of a flag and throwing about buzzwords while being functionally illiterate in regards to marx i'll just leave you to it.
not surprised that the devil doesn't read marx
Grayson Nelson
PUBLIC OWNERSHIP ALREADY EXISTS! Just buy a stock instead of an extraordinarily pack of cigarettes this week, prole…
Cooper Sanchez
You literally didn't add anything to the dialogue except copy/paste a link that seems to have no relevancy to the topic at hand and now you're engaging in cheap rhetoric.
Being such an expert on Marx's teaching, could you please explain in what way the post you linked was relevant to the conversation?
David Gonzalez
That's not clear at all.
I wasn't arguing from any sort of capitalistic dichotomy. Public ownership means public ownership if you mean social ownership you should say it. just because these terms were devised by capitalists doesn't mean we're not allowed to use them to describe a fitting scenario.
Gabriel Bell
...
James Jones
lol
The characterisation of state ownership as not private property because its owned by a state rather than an individual capitalist indicates a profound ignorance of marxism given that one's idea of private property being defined by its relation between capital and its ownership by a private person rather than the actual social relation characterising private property: the relation between capital and labour.
There is a distinction to be made between private property owned by individuals and private property owned by the state, marx acknowledges this and just as the bourgeois state is not the bourgeoisie itself, a workers' state is not the proletariat itself. Where the state owns capital it is nonetheless private property as the relationship between ownership of capital and labour, mediated through wage-labour remains unchanged.
Joshua Miller
Your superficial understanding of Marxism and use of it's terminology is horseshit.
To quote Marx:
What he does not say is "But if one eliminates the capitalists without eliminating capital, we have state capitalism!"
The capital relation isn't some disembodied metaphysical spook, it's a social relation between classes, made up of real people. No capitalist, no capital.
Gavin Williams
This isn't 1989 anymore, the only country still kinda Marxist-Leninist is Cuba
It's time to move on and find a better path towards Socialism
Camden Barnes
Yes, it's time for cyber-ML
Joshua Reyes
Utterly undialectical. Property relations aren't an on/off switch for Socialism and the CPC recognizes that they haven't achieved Socialistic relations yet.
You don't seem to even understand the quotes you posted.
Luke Wilson
He does not comment on state ownership in Capital. He does however, post a theoretical "national capitalist" who concentrates all capitals in its own hands (which would hardly bare any resemblance to "capitalist' as you mean it here). Marx's explanation of the economy wide rate of profit in Capital Volume 3 also posits that it should be understood as a single capital with joint stock investors despite being individual capitalist. This is a clear example of him seeing judicial ownership as of secondary importance to the structure of social relations of production. Then we have Notes On Wagner where Marx states:
>As it may be, it would be a nonsense, in an analysis of the commodity-since it presents itself as a use-value or commodity, on the other hand as a value -to-tie-up. in this juncture all places of banal reflections about use-values or goods which do not enter into the world of commodities, such as "state goods," "communal goods," etc. as Wagner and the German professor in general does, or about goods like "health," etc. Where the state is itself a capitalist producer, as in the exploitation of mines, forests, etc., its product is a "commodity" and hence possesses the specific character of every other commodity.
But luckily we have Engels who clarifies the matter in Socialism, Utopian and Scientific who explicitly says moving capital to state hands does not eliminate the capitalist character of production.
not do away with the capitalistic nature of the productive forces. In the joint-stock companies and trusts,
this is obvious. And the modern State, again, is only the organization that bourgeois society takes on in
order to support the external conditions of the capitalist mode of production against the encroachments as
well of the workers as of individual capitalists. The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a
capitalist machine — the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The
more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more does it actually become the national
capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage-workers — proletarians. The
capitalist relation is not done away with. It is, rather, brought to a head. But, brought to a head, it topples
over. State-ownership of the productive forces is not the solution of the conflict, but concealed within it
are the technical conditions that form the elements of that solution.
In other words: State property and a shift in judicial ownership does nothing to abolish the Capitalist character of production, but by centralizing and socializing production creates the conditions for its supersession via communism.
Jordan Wilson
Btw posting the 1844 Manuscripts to explain the conceptual framework of late Marx is beyond retarded, Trot practice what you preach.
Jose Lee
funny because i can't find Marx saying that anywhere
which makes sense since it runs counter to both Marx and Engels' conception of capital, private property across their work. Moreover your very argument demonstrates your poor understanding of marxism, in asserting that that relations of production can only exist between 'real people' you tacitly reveal that in your mind a capitalist is an individual not the economic position in relation to capital and labour itself which can exist whether it is an individual, a legal entity like a corporation, a state or a state holding shares in a corporate entity.
drink bleach
None of which is relevant to whether state ownership comprises private property
I'm sure if you keep saying it it'll become true
Evan Sanders
the tard with the 4 isn't a trot, or if he is he's one of trotskys unwanted "new class" children like shachtman and cliff
Brandon Ross
thems fighting words faggot
fuck off right back to reddit with your non-arguments
Connor Sanders
You're not wrong, just advocating for a worse outcome.
Jack Robinson
Also
Worse than Marx ever was, fuck off.
Samuel Gomez
I think the argument is that state ownership can be considered public ownership as long as there is a shift in class relations like the abolition of wage labour and production for exchange. Bourgeois nationalisation doesn't constitute socialism, but a worker's government managing an enterprise would be compatible with socialism and constitute a form of public ownership as long as labour isn't commodified and production is done for use.
im probably not as well read on marx as you but I respectfully want to engage in dialogue to understand this topic more
Carter Adams
the cia/bourgouise propoganda attack during the cold war ruined socialism, not marxist leninists.
but it will come back again
Ryan Miller
Saint-Simon was a bourgeois technocrat who supported private property and class collaboration. Blanqui was a brainlet and many of his followers eventually drifted towards nationalism, revanchism and antisemitism. France was a mistake.
Luke Davis
Marx ruined socialism the same way I ruined your mother's vagina
Ethan Hill
no you ruined internet socialism A.W.
Benjamin Scott
Its always nice to see the retards brand themselves.
Daniel Wood
Read the Grundrisse, not Kapital OK.
Easton Johnson
...
Oliver Cook
Revolutions that actually worked. That were actually able to seize power and hold it in some capacity.
David Fisher
Most successful communist leaders, Stalin and Mao, were also the least theoretical.
Really makes you think.
Jose Garcia
Marx saved socialism from utopians tbh
Jace Morris
Yes, very glad I'm still living under capitalism. Thank you, Karl.
Ian Bennett
Really gets the old noggin' joggin'
William Edwards
Josiah Lopez
lol guess I just gotta live through some more capitalism, amirite? Marx only!
Yes, which is a clue as to why leftypol and dogmatic Marxists continue to fail.