Zig Forums, redpill me on Communism...

Zig Forums, redpill me on Communism. I'm usually a hard right individual but I'm interested in seeing the opposition to my viewpoints.

Attached: in-case-you-didnt-realise-but-there-are-actually-photos-27477942.png (500x811, 195.28K)

Other urls found in this thread:

monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/1868-syn/index.htm.
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/mar/x01.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/granat/index.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Basically it's this

Attached: Dasrite.png (832x380, 135.23K)

I'm not gonna write a long post laying out all the arguments for communism, but I think the article Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein is a good place to start.

monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/

I'd just like to interject for a moment. Your attached PNG is in fact not a photo of Max Stirner. The only known depictions of him are through drawings such as pic related.

Oh yeah and I'm not a communist but I've read into it through here and I strongly suggest checking the FAQ, reading list, and asking questions in the QTDDTOT thread before posting threads like these. Cheers.

Attached: stirner drawing.jpg (200x237, 6.14K)

Attached: hades4.jpg (870x864, 45.76K)

the opposition to your viewpoint is all around you. The world is for the most part liberal (right wing to anyone who isn't retarded) and the world is a festering shithole.

Also OP, if you've got any questions about how things were organized in the USSR, Cuba, GDR or any other 20th century communist state, you should ask Ismail over at /marx/.

First thread for questions related to the USSR, second thread for everything else.
>>>/marx/4702
>>>/marx/10096

I'll talk to you about this. I'm pretty relaxed right now, so I think I am in a peak mood for this. What do you want to know? I have read and understand a good bit; I should be able to answer almost anything you ask about.

Alright i wanna know the basics of course, through the lens of someone who knows about it. I want to know how sustainable it would be, and who are some basic people to read into to learn more about it. I already checked out the well known Das Kapital(I intend to start reading it soon) so any other important literature to read?

What's your favorite Beckett novel, OP?

Go to the reading thread and read "Wage Labour and Capitalism" and "Critique of the Gotha Program" to begin with. Also, try this if Capital is too dense for you at first marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/1868-syn/index.htm. Read all of Capital still because it goes into more detail and is critical to understanding Marx's analysis of capitalism, but if you find yourself not actually willing to bother going carefully through it, at least skim this.

what are your viewpoints exactly? which political group do you align the most with?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (600x600, 404.9K)

You know in my op, I called myself far-right. I wouldn't really describe myself as that though. My viewpoints are that workers should be represented and protected. I believe in whatever benefits them benefits the country more. I disagree with everything the current Democratic party has to offer. I agree with some of the things the Republican party has to offer but I disagree more than I agree. I was pretty on the right side of politics, I believe that stricter policy benefited the people and that intervention by the government would be necessary to protect those rights. I agree with some aspects of fascism, but those oriented for the worker. And I believe identity politics are (unfortunately) inescapable.
I would however be hard-pressed to call myself a fascist. Especially since it would most likely not be used to protect its people realistically. I realized I didn't know much about Communism, Zig Forums, and leftist views in general discept the mainstream ones proposed by the American Democratic party. So here I am today trying to educate myself.

They go in gulag
Here are some shot works by Lenin that serve as a good intro into commie thinking

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/mar/x01.htm

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/granat/index.htm

Attached: All purpose Lenin.jpg (404x600, 47.63K)

Thanks I appreciate this.

The most beautiful and inspiring words I've heard in a while.

Out of all the things you said, this might be the one that causes you the most friction here. There are plenty people here who used to be right-wing or right leaning, myself included. Idpol really is the biggest hurdle you have to get over as it detracts from the class focus of Marxism.

Attached: 0e121db85db6aefab7f6765c8ae744ec31cd7763.jpg (750x602 326.11 KB, 131.12K)

It literally says "Samuel Beckett as a student" on the photo.

It's difficult to introduce the whole of Marxist analysis to someone that is unfamiliar with them (not faulting you, btw, just stating a fact).
The Marxist critique of capitalism and the capitalist society are not simply a rejection of the policies that govern our lives today, but a much deeper analysis of what capitalism actually is, how it came to be and why it should go away.

So let's start with the basis, the method that Marx utilizes to prove his theories, and also the modus operandi of any socialist that is worthy of such name: dialiectical materialism. While it may look like a scary concept that needs six years of philosophical study to be understood, it really is not. Marxism is dialectical because it finds the nature of political economy to be about relationships rather than absolute quantities, materialist because it believes the realm of the material (in contrast to the realm of the metaphysical) is enough to explain the "laws of motion of history."

Dialectics recognize unity where traditional analysis would see division. It recognizes that those divisions are not tangible, but exist as a relationship between an otherwise unitary object. To make a concrete example, let's use the classical "chicken and egg" dilemma: using an analytical/logical method does not yield any result, since the cause of one is the consequence of the other it is not possible to establish a causal relationship. A dialectical approach instantly recognizes that the problem is malformed, that the chicken and the egg are not separate entities, but the same unitary system; the egg-chicken system is really just a relationship, that transforms in time and sustain itself by recreating the same kind of relationship in time, with another pair of egg-chicken.

Furthermore, being materialist does not mean ignoring what is subjective, nor refusing to consider things that are effectively "immaterial" as can culture often be, but fundamentally that research starts and remains at a material level, without the aid of metaphysical constructs. To make an example:

If we want to study human history and development, then we can consider as the birth of "economy" the moment humans could produce more than what they strictly needed individually to survive. The economy is so the set of rules and relationships that determine how this surplus production is distributed and used. The form this surplus takes will depend on historical circumstances, but its presence necessarily implies the creation of particular relationships of power that accumulate (or distribute) it; for example in a feudal economy, the lord accumulates the surplus production of the serfs, with which he maintains his private army who in turn maintain his control over the surplus production of the serfs.

And here you can see the dialectical nature of the theory: there is no clear causal relationship between the lord or the serfs just like there is no clear causal relationship between the egg and the chicken; it is a dialectical system, because fundamentally it is a set of relationships that perpetrate themselves in time. An analytical analysis of society would necessarily lose the dynamic character that exists between the lord and the serf, just like the problem of the chicken and the egg is unsolvable without using a chronological/biological solution.


Here are the first few lines of the communist manifesto:


You can now understand what it means that history is a struggle between dialectical pairs. History is the sequence of succeeding transformation of a fundamental and single unity (society), through the transformation of its fundamental relationship, oppressed and oppressor.

Glad to have you join the party, when you have time, maybe read the ego book and despook yourself.

Attached: I just did.jpg (664x960, 53.79K)

I think the best way to start is to read the Communist Manifesto, it's not that long, and still very current.

read the FAQ. we don't disagree with you on anything.

which aspects of fascism favor the workers?

That last one you’re going to want to find selections of. The whole thing is way too long and mostly irrelevant, but some parts of it are critical to understanding Marxism.

lol everyone itt is either shilling some very specific form of Marxism or dropping pdfs without context

Communists criticize capitalist society for many reasons. Private ownership gives the relatively small bourgeois class full control over production; the market ensures employment is compulsory and necessitates pursuit of profit over human needs by selecting for the most ruthless competitors. States perpetuate capitalism by enforcing private property laws via cops, opening new markets for investors via military imperialism, funding research that is later commodified (the iPhone is a good example of this), placating the lower classes with social programs (New Deal), etc. Not to mention the ecological devastation wrought by the oil, mining, timber, chemical, and agricultural industries.

A lot of the users here agitate for workers to seize control of production and run society via centralized democracy, but personally I'd rather drastically reduce production than work in a factory with pictures of Stalin on the wall, even if that means destroying infrastructure. A lot of technology is both bad for the biosphere and unnecessary, anyway.

And I think the whole idpol debate is stupid, tbh. Yes, some people are toxic about it, and even more classcucked, but the people who ignore or deny the material reality of oppression and its relevance to communist politics (a lot of white dude internet leftists) are undoubtedly a much bigger threat to working class solidarity.

Attached: pig_iron.jpg (900x506, 108.48K)

Everything in this thread is regular commnuist stuff.

Antisage

Attached: 1423373133422.jpg (560x747, 15.41K)

You fucking moron. Destroying the factories doesn't mean you have to work less, it means you have to work more to produce less.

Attached: 5375-63116-original.jpeg (1600x900, 88.17K)

Destroy the factories, anprim now!

there's more to communism than Marxism-Leninism dipshit


30-40 hours, sure, but in a variety of different ways that actually allow you to go through the power process vs being a cog in the machine to get a piece of social surplus

Ah yes working the fields with stone tools is going to feel so empowering.
We filthy commies (or the first people that decide using technology isn't cheating) will push you off the land for your moronic and inefficient use of it.

where we're going we won't need fields comrade

Literally an argument white settlers used to justify land theft and native genocide. Come back when you aren't an imperialist Western chauvinist pretending to be a communist.

Attached: golden idol.jpg (1024x1330, 328.96K)

And then when people in your primmie commune go hungry because of a bad rain season and we give them free food grown by industrial agriculture, they'll abandon your commune and rejoin society. Or maybe it won't be hunger, but sickness or natural disaster or thirst. We won't even need to push you off your land like says - you'll happily give it to us for access the fruits of high technology.

Yeah you'd probably just give us smallpox blankets. Thing is, colonization is a much the result of individual responses to internal pressures in agricultural societies as state policy. Enclosure of commons, overpopulation, soil degradation, biosphere destruction, etc. Don't pretend that civilization is immune to environmental disasters, either, given how dependent it is on constant resource flows and growth, i.e. ecocide, and is currently causing a mass extinction via global warming, pollution, and habitat destruction. Not everyone wants to live your sick, alienated life.

Attached: 3da62f25ed27fb02c7b04c811f4f09e55d7a2a38454c52228e42130d88a848eb.jpg (540x489, 25.44K)

Cuba achieved sustainable development, yet still finds within the goodness of its heart to send doctors and aid to people who need it for nothing in return. They have shown, without a doubt, that under centralized control of a socialist governmentevery single "sickness" of civilization can be cured. Global warming, pollution, habitat destruction, overpopulation, soil degradation - these are the externalities of capitalism. They are not natural consequences of civilization itself.