Is there any point to being a communist or anarchist today if all we're going to get in our lifetime is social...

Apples to oranges comparison.

Stopped reading right there. I am not dreaming of an utopian future, I am struggling against capitalism, and the struggle of the working class against capital leads to communism. Read Marx, faggot.

What do you mean by "struggling?" Obviously, you're not in some guerrilla army actively waging violence. And if you do succeed in your goal - so what? Communism isn't something that can just be implemented, it's a process which will ultimately be based on whatever system came before it. It's NOT for *you* to theorize.

As in, class struggle. The working class is in conflict with the capitalist class, this struggle is the class struggle, and the society that will emerge should the working class win this struggle is communism. As a class conscious member of the working class, I would be more active in this struggle than most. This is the actual theory of communism, not building some mind castle in your head and trying to force it on the world - as you are implying - but understanding the nature of social change and applying it in order to further said change. Ultimately, you're fighting against windmills. We aren't utopians, we're communists.

We have the option to move things in the right direction or stand by and let them go in the opposite. Lets not forget that the masses are in many cases supportive of our ideas, but t have been brainwashed (I use the term lightly) by others. I can only speak from the USA for instance, but consider that most Americans are absolutely in favor of the kind of policies advocated by leftists - at least to democratic/market socialism . Things like single payer health care, public funding of infrastructure and schools etc…. however, why are we not moving this direction? Because of wedge issues and the corruption of those with lots of wealth.

They know the current system isn't working. Hell thats why they voted for Trump - he promised to fuck it over and didn't speak like a "normal" politician etc… but the people kind of forgot that any asshole isn't good enough just for being different, they have to have actual policies that will help you instead of right wing abortions. Look at all of the young people on the chans alone who worship the Trump cult of personality and alt-right shit because of essentially brainwashing + wedge issues. The right fought back against toxic feminism and whatnot etc… and it appeared that the left did not, so the right convinced all these people to support a ton of policies that make no fucking sense, because they're "also against Anita Sarkeesian trying to censor your video games".

If we strike back against these kinds of wedge issues we can pull the populace in the right direction. Part of it is just knowing how to interact with people. To be completely honest we cannot be fixed by dogma, even socialist dogma of the past, and instead must make changes that make sense for the future. All this "hur durr hate dem-soc/soc-dem" crap is part of the problem. Books written over 100 years ago don't have to exactly detail how the future will go!

I think the potential for real socialism in the future in a global, universal aspect will come down to technology. We're going to come up against a time when manufacturing and many jobs will be mostly tech based and that will mean a turning point - either we will rightfully institute things like socialist policies in order to put the benefits of this transition to the people, or we get a society where the 1% gets all the benefits and owns them while the 99% suffer; if this happens, there may very well be a time for revolution etc… but lets hope it doesn't come to this.

There are things we can do now to push our nations further left, but we have to be future-thinking and open minded. Hell, look at the Nordic nations which have leftist policies nearly across the board - no, they're not abolishing any private property and that's okay ; they work and have the highest standards of living etc. While they can still improve, why don't we move towards favoring these sorts of policies universally which will lead to a major advance in living standard all through socialism and leftist ideas. This can take place on every level. For instance, in the US abolishing the idea of drug patents and instead putting public money into research. Strong regulation on genetic research and modification to be sure the health of the public is protected and the benefits are spread across everyone. Action on net neturality, climate change, and tons of other issues etc… we don't need to envision a one step revolutionary change in order for things to be worthwhile

No, that's definitely not okay. The "welfare state" has been in the process of being dismantled for the last few decades. Any concession by capital is only temporary, the only real option is to abolish it.

Being an educated and determined leftist does imply being "above" the masses, so why throw your values out the window just to deny this?

SocDems are the real utopians.

But it's fun to pretend.

Attached: 030515LARP15.jpg (1800x1200, 351.47K)

Market Socialism, is still a good first step.

Attached: tumblr_okmrkfBzoR1u86t2qo1_500.jpg (500x701, 66.56K)

[source]

It is due to the fact that you believe this so, that it will be so. It is the radical who proclaims, regardless of notions such as yours, that he will have his revolution one way or another that will commit himself and get the furthest ahead of anyone in the pursuit of a Socialist reality.
marxists.org/subject/anarchism/nechayev/catechism.htm

Attached: 8ffd407d56bc5aa0aeedc993382b5edbe8d9f375a7e05084aadf4ede8987574f - Copy.png (756x760, 13.45K)

This. The socdem Nordic countries only achieved their (temporary) levels of social and economic freedom for their workers through a highly motivated and active working class and the resulting strong unions' political alliance with their respective Labour parties.

As the working class in SocDem Scandinavia has become increasingly complacent and cucked by social democracy and liberal propaganda (while being increasingly ignored and forgotten by the so-called labour parties), the forces of capital mobilize to turn the welfare state into yet another venue for their predatory practices. A lot of the general welfare systems and other formerly public functions in my native Norway for example, has been co-opted by capitalists through privatizations and outsourcing and they make obscene amounts of money through government contracts, basically legally thieving our tax money (because muh mixed economy and private-public cooperation).

Far too often the welfare systems that were supposed to benefit the people become just another way for the capitalist class to rob the working class. I feel this is the largest weakness of social democracy - it's a system that I guess could work well enough in a perfect world, but in reality requires constant vigilance or it will inevitably be corrupted, which is what usually happens. I really wish it wasn't so because I really am a social democrat at heart, but I struggle to see how you could actually implement a sustainable social democratic society that won't sooner or later turn to shit due to capitalism's inevitable concentration of capital and thus, political power. I think I've come to realize that social democracy is both utopian and naive.

Attached: f05ce168133ff97624ffac92c913cba1e72bcca99253bdcffdb0980859ffec7a.jpg (268x403, 30.57K)

Anticommunism is dominant, but slowly dying, and people are becoming increasingly tired of red-baiting in politics. The old guard of the left dying with it is a good thing–M-Ls and Maoists are LARPing retards.

Marxism needs a revival, but it should be seen as an opportunity, not a setback

So how do you jump directly from capitalism to communism without social democracy in between?

How do you jump from capitalism to communism with social democracy in between? I'm confused by all the socialists who still insist social democracy is a bridge towards socialism despite all historical evidence to the contrary.

Got any physical data to back this up, or just feelz?

IRL, the only way for socialism to become dominant is if Africans, Arabs, or Chinese conquer the globe, and other races/cultures would de facto be enslaved to their will.

Revolution is a process, not a jump. Every single time socialism was implemented it maintained elements of capitalism.

The left in the US, even normie Democrat politicians, support little to zero border control, because they explicitly want to make the white voter base irrelevant, and they know that Mexicans and other Hispanics vote leftist by a wide margin (70%=80%).

Part of the reason why right-wingers support Trump so hard is they rightly see him as a defense against the forced "Hispanicization" of the United States.

Leftists did better when they explicitly appeal to white manufacturing unions, and supported trade protectionism and closed borders in order to increase the value of native labor.

But what about the mauve voter base?

What's that, feminists who wear mauve pussy hats?

No they're really just lavenders that don't get enough sunlight.

...

Our Marxist and SocDem parties support even laxer border controls. I was lumping them all together.

Should I lump you in with ancaps who want borders abolished?

Open borders is a stupid thing to ask for. No one wants open borders except for utopian ideological reasons.

Anarcho-communists in the US generally support open borders. It's basically an inevitable consequence of their ideology.

Are you guys specifically statist ☭TANKIE☭s, or what?

AnComms are idiots, period.

So how would you realistically prevent Mexican/Latino cultural and legal superiority, given the current resources and power structures in the US?

Open borders is an impossibility. There.

Do you think it's impossible for ethnocentric Latinos to gain a majority of power over the US Federal government, if migration and birth trends continue?

What about canada?

Canada would likely be the next country to become dominated by Mexican/Latino ethnocentrism, after the US, if specific border controls aren't put in place.

The new President of Mexico explicitly stated that he wants to help colonize North America with Hispanics.

Do not fret White brother, TechnoThor will deliver us to Digi.Valhalla.7.0.7

Attached: technoviking.gif (320x240, 1.92M)

If I were the lord of white idpol, invite some (but not all) Hispanics to be honorary whites, and they'll abandon muh culture in an instant. No one would give up the institutional power of honorary whiteness for some silly Aztlan nationalist ideology. It works better if they can pumped up for a war against their traditional enemy and scapegoat, the blacks.

The Republican Party was trying this strategy and actually having a fair bit of success with it, and despite Trump it's still in play.

Quite frankly neither party sees any problem with the current situation re: the border. Capital gets its cheap labor, the government can apply an arbitrary level of pressure selectively to "enforce the border" (i.e., punish migrant laborers that get too uppity), and immigrants can displace uppity natives in some of the skilled trades. No one with power has any incentive to upset the status quo, they want business to continue as usual so that they can continue to both drive down the conditions of migrant labor and the conditions of native labor. The long-term endgame is that a fraction of the native labor force would be forced into a situation not unlike China's "internal migrants" who comprise a good chunk of the factory-working population over there. (cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-internal-migrants - yeah it's CFR but it's a pretty good write-up of what's happening)

OP, there is nothing worse than being a Marxist (or semi-Marxist) and not being a communist. If social democracy is all you desire - even if out of being "realistic" - you are not "woke" as you propose zero break from the dominant paradigm IN PRACTICE. SocDem does nothing but reproduce the same exact system. This is why the USSR fell into shit: it developed along the same capitalist line (muh productive forces). Mao's China was better in this respect, but New Democracy and selling out to the West were its downfall.

We learn. Anarchism and Marxism are evolving ideologies.

Interestingly, the Koch Brothers and other GlobCaps oppose Trump's immigration policies. These are people who traditionally funded Republicans for decades.

Perhaps if elites see white nationalists (overt or subconsciously) as a lucrative voter base, they could switch. I suspect there will be more Paul Nehlens and Patrick Littles in future races, and the decline of Christianity will lead to more whites abandoning spiritual universal in favor of tribal genetic materialism. Trump should invest in creating a civnat news station to counter both the globalist left and globalist right.

How do you theorize revolution? You can't, because you're not playing God. Every social experiment in trying to change society has failed.

How is this “process” supposed to work? How exactly do you go from social democracy to socialism (which has never been done before)? Look at European and Scandinavian social democracies - they sure as hell aren’t any closer to achieving actual socialism than burgerstan.

Even if there is no communist revolution during our lifetimes (I have no idea how you could possibly predict this) your communist activity will keep the dream alive for the upcoming generations. By keeping ourselves organized and updating our theory to any new developments, we make sure that when the chance arises, we'll be ready to lead society beyond capitalism. That's what matters.

We seriously need to be fucking serious. We are in the last stage of Capitalism and the result is gonna be Neo-Feudalism.

We need to use any means possible, even stuff that would be outside our beliefs normally, literally everything that is happening is happening on purpose and is being done so because the Capitalists know they will win.

We need to become fucking serious and use any means to stop it.

It's not really Trump's immigration policy in effect, what's going on now is a continuation of Bush and Obama policies more than anything new Trump is doing (because Trump doesn't actually do anything except say a bunch of retarded shit). Do you see the migrant laborers being carted off en masse and replaced with a native workforce? You don't see that happening at all, and it's never going to happen until you get natives reduced to the legal status of those migrants, and that's the real goal of the Kochs.

No one is going to listen to retard man Trump when it comes to actually doing anything. Like I said, they like the quasi-legal status quo that keeps the labor base illegal, but not really illegal. White nationalists when it comes down to it have no real opposition to this, because they like cheap food and cheap shit; they're so pathetic that they can't into fucking basic economics. Then again, the white nationalists actively want to drive down the native workforce and want to use prison labor en masse; as long as it isn't them working the slave jobs, they don't care. White nats don't think and they never will, because their ideology is retarded and dictated for them. I mean, sweet Jesus, the white nationalists STILL believe in Trump after all the cuckoldry. If they will accept Trump, they will do the bidding of the booj in all things.

Public life is a very small part of your life after you start your own family. Choose a suitable wife with similar attitude and start having kids. Make your own castle and raise them with values you hold high. Start small and grow tall.

...

One could say that French revolution was successful in many aspects. Lasting devastation of the French aristocracy, as well as the universal acceptance of the concept of human rights, even though not many people get to enjoy the freedoms.

One cannot obviously theorize revolution, as obviously the transient state of society during it requires a model far more complex than what could fit in a book. This is why nobody bothers with prescription of how the revolution will look, only guidelines on how to achieve the struggles that revolution is used for as one of possible ways.

Then revolution is not a social experiment, it is the culmination of the struggles of people for liberation. Result of ongoing previous struggle which does not happen overnight, or because somebody wills it, as would calling it "a social experiment" indicate.

The failures of past should be analyzed and conclusion for future struggle of the masses should be permeated among the masses.

You can do many theories, but there are obvious limits. Being aware of these limits does not keep people from writing useful theory, or criticizing or reviewing existing theory and judge its usefulness or accuracy.

Tell that to the nativists. They don't care about what's true, they care about what they feel and what ideology they are spoon-fed.

The irony…
The "socialist states" were dismantled over the last few decades. Socialism can be abolished just as much as capital can be abolished.

Any "socialist" revolution will ultimately lead to social democracy. Every time socialism was implemented it looked like this, maintaining most elements of capitalism.

See this is what I mean by communists behaving like a "chosen people." They think they are above the masses and only their actions matter when it comes to social change, whereas anyone who understands how history works will tell you any revolutionary movement has to come internally from the public at large. Imagine if your party were to "win" - you're society would fall apart into civil war almost instantly because you would be imposing something on society in which said society can't have. Socialism can ONLY occur after capitalism has fully phased out on its own. Just imagine if some vanguard party tried to implement capitalism in the 1500s, it would have failed or maintained almost all elements of feudalism.

Except that we already know capitalism isn't working, that it can only be kept alive by massive state intervention and that we're at the point where it's not even working for the petty bourgeois (even though they believe it is, because they're just desperate not to sink to the level of the precariat). We also know that there is enough resources for everyone, that there isn't really a reason why we need capitalism and the market, once people can get past the smog of propaganda put out in defense of the capitalist system. In a lot of ways capitalism is already dead, but it's being replaced with something else that definitely isn't socialist.

There is a lot of LARPing and stupidity among self-described socialists though, but a large part of that is because socialism has been thoroughly cointelpro'd and the serious ones have given up or gone extremely underground rather than post on internet sites.

taiping, levellers, savonarola, munster anabaptists, peasant wars, florentine ciompi revolt, cola di rienzi's mad schemes were all in a semi feudal context you can say, not that your wrong though

also forgot taborites/ radical hussites

True commieism is a moneyless society. Are you willing to work without getting paid?

inb4 not true

ITT: fatalism

If you're not going to struggle for communism, you are useless as a comrade.

Can I be your roommate? Oh, can borrow 20 bucks? Its the communist thing to do.

So how do you dismantle the entire capitalist system? You can't. All the socialisms which have ever existed have looked nearly IDENTICAL to capitalism in content, because there is no "break" in the historical process.

Pic related

Attached: acid.jpg (960x326, 37.95K)

If capitalism isn't logical, why does it exist at all?

Like I said, capitalism is only kept alive by massive state interventions to keep the consumerist pump going, and lots of private debt. Capitalism in 2000 barely resembles capitalism in 1900 even - fundamentally they are the same, they still use the commodity-form and money, but the nature of that money is fiat rather than currency backed by precious metals, and capitalist governments do considerable economic planning (the free market ain't so free any more). I think we're in a transitory period between capitalism and "meritism" where property converts from being private to being the collective property of a ruling group who dole out privileges based on perceived merit (which has already become largely hereditary rather than actual merit). Once the professional class cannot receive enough gibs from capitalism, once the technicians see a better deal, they can and would have the means to install a different system with themselves at top. The oppressed masses have nothing to do with it.

Subversion, even if futile and ineffective, is still preferable to outright bootlicking.