Red pill me on Communism

First of all you need to understand capitalism, so you know why these bad things are happening and why it can't be fixed within capitalism.

It takes 2 things to create a product, the means of production (factories, land, natural resources, etc.) and labour. This divides the population into two classes of people: the ruling class and the working class. The ruling class owns the means of production and the working class don't, this ownership is protected by law. Thus, the working class must sell their labour to the ruling class in order to survive. But the ruling class would only hire members of the working class if it would increase their profits, otherwise why bother? So, the wage that a worker is payed must necessarily be less than the value they produce. But, they can't do anything about it, since the boss owns the means of production, they decide completely how much the worker is paid, what hours they work, what they wear when they are at work, whether or not they get fired once their job is automated, etc. and if the worker puts up a fuss, the boss can easily fire them and replace them with a worker who is more docile.

This problem is compounded with the second feature of capitalism: the market. In order to increase their profits, the ruling class has a few options: they can increase their market share, through advertising or they can pay their workers less, replace workers with automated robots, move factories overseas where workers can be paid a lot less and can be made to work for longer hours, pay politicians to relax laws/remove regulations, pay politicians to start wars to take natural resources, etc. Now, the main point is that, since the ruling classes are competing on a market with each other, if one of them decides not to do these things, another one may, and in doing so will push the other out of the market.

Thus, the interests of the ruling class are to maximise profits, which is at odds with the interests of the working class, but the ruling class has all the power. So what next, right? Well, socialists advocate for "workers control of the means of production", which can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people, so look around for different solutions.

Hope this helped!

This

Why the fuck is everyone telling OP to read massive libraries, historical memes and such?

OP, ignore these raving faggots who have no idea how to appeal to people. This short article will explain why socialism is a necessity and why you've found yourself in the situation you're in. It will take a total of five minutes:
workers.org/2012/us/contradictions_in_capitalism_0223/

If there’s one thing you watch, watch this:
youtu.be/T9Whccunka4

Firstly, discard everything that you've ever been told about Marxism, socialism and communism because, chances are, it's entirely wrong. Socialism is not "the goberment taxing people for free healthcare." Socialism is common ownership of the means of production. Communism is not "the goberment makes everyone equal." Communism is a hypothetical society where an abundance of goods can be produced cheaply and easily to meet the needs of all of society's members thus making things such as class and money obsolete. Marx identified communism as the higher phase of socialism, which would develop over time from socialism as the productive forces become more advanced and efficient. No "communist" society has actually reached communism, as they were in the socialist mode of production attempting to build up to communism. Marxism is a philosophy based on the idea of historical (or dialectical) materialism which postulates that societies develop over time as a result of conflict between opposing classes relative to the material conditions (i.e geography, natural resources, climate, technology) they exist in. Marx believed that human society has went through multiple modes of production throughout its history, starting with primitive communism in humanity's pre-historic days as tribes of hunter-gatherers. This mode of production was replaced by the slave economies of the ancient empires that formed after the development of agriculture and permanent settlements and eventually was replaced by feudalism. Feudalism eventually fell out of favor and was replaced by capitalism. Marx believed that as time went on the capitalist mode of production would be rendered inefficient and obsolete by changes in the material conditions (namely the advancement and improvement of productive forces in terms of productivity and efficiency) and would be replaced by a socialist mode of production which would eventually develop into a communist mode of production, the highest phase of human development. I'm a former conservative myself and this is just a brief and by-no-means comprehensive and all-encompassing list of the things that I learned quickly after developing an interest in Marxism that completely changed my perspective on socialist and communist thought as a whole. Read and watch lectures and videos to continue to develop your understanding. I hope you found this helpful and I hope you join us, potential comrade.

Attached: 1e7ccaf5c140d83c9b54bf39af610e82e625b72341766e2e7c4c445bd0f09ffc.jpg (1242x1119, 621.71K)

funny how you never consider why marx never finished his theory is simple he dint because is impossible

so who will ensure that bogdanov is not monopolizing with ak47 market or who will stop bogdan from establishing slave market or how i will make living if i live in city but i dont have money to buy food on market

is impossible to have real communist country even in theory

OP, please ignore the reactionaries in this thread.

Read State and Revolution. Specifically section 4. marxists.org/ebooks/lenin/state-and-revolution.pdf

Attached: 18557219_1865199977139056_1382080777289866939_n.jpg (477x414, 12.46K)

Capitalism is inherently flawed. Its faults are not due to greedy people, due to bad people, due to cronys, due to governments fucking people over. Its faults are part of itself. Capitalism without its contradictions cannot exist, but its contradictions are what fucks it up in the first place. There are many contradictions with capitalism that cannot be resolved. One of them:

Your employer wants to pay you as little as possible (in order to have higher profits for himself). This is in his economic interest. At the same time, your employer hopes that the employers of other people pays them as much as possible, so that the other employers' employees can buy as many good/services from your employer's company as possible with all the money they get. He wants to pay you little and have everyone elses boss pay them a lot. But the other boss? He wants to do the same: He wants to pay HIS guys as little as possible, and hope that the other companies pay their guys as much as possible so that they can consume like the good goyim they are.

Another big contradiction: The higher technological advancement is, the higher production levels are, the lower the rate of profit is. Capitalism does not benefit from an efficient economy. Capitalism benefits from waste, from mark-ups, from planned obsolescence. It is wasting human labor, it is wasting away our labor hours, our time, the most precious good we have. Only through cybernetic planning via socialism can we do away with this waste and advance societies at rates never seen before. Even the primitive socialist nations of the USSR and China have managed to insanely develop their productive forces with the flawed tools they have - with the tools of the 21st century, we could very well achieve feats like mankind has never seen before - IF we start to work towards production for use, not production for profit.

what do you think the revolution is for comrade?

Nigger I bet you fucking voted.
There's no point in thinking politically because your vote doesn't matter.
Just sit and wait for a collapse and THEN worry about politics. No point in wasting precious time over things that you have no control over.

Capitalism will destroy itself and eventually we'll finally revert to tribalist societies.

Read Marx, not just the manifesto. And understand why capitalism is inherently unethical for leaving so few with so much and so many with nothing.

Attached: 9B90D460-2F31-41D6-9571-621DE4BCC32B.jpeg (753x527, 61.7K)

Based.
Back in my day, I payed for college tuition with my day job. Millennials now a days are just lazy. Weak, too. In high school I could bench 500 lbs.
Yep. Those were the days.

Attached: 1532059189632.jpg (912x768, 228.98K)

Im not OP but I have questions about Communism. Mostly about religion. I am an Christian and I have some right-wing views. My question is why do Communists dislike organized religion so much? Why did the CNT-FAI burn down churches during the Spanish Civil War? Im not a fan of Franco, he did some horrible stuff but what is with the hate against Christianity? I see a lot of people here in support of Islam and Black Power movements but I find it strange that they have problems with Christianity and White Power. I might be missing something here but I would like an answer. Thanks.

I don’t think anyone in here particularly supports any religion. Also, what the CNT-FAI did was kind of fucked up. There is “Islamic Socialism, and Christian socialism” though. Anyway, religion is the opium of the masses. Religion has traditionally been oppressive. Organized religion, Catholicism for example played a huge role in suppressing religious minorities, even other sects of Christianity that didn’t conform to the pope, often violently.

The same fucking people that revolted in the first place.
You don't have fucking dedicated revolutionaries go "Oh yeah monopoly capitalism is bad, let's allow monopoly capitalism after the revolution XD"

Attached: 5d8a232e61b1af86e0162ce83aa87b9abd9d26a5e85d4137715b797469dc92f6.png (1200x800, 606.04K)

historically anti-religious sentiment in socialist movements has been due to the close ties between capitalist states and the church (especially in the Russian Empire). the reason we support "black power" and not "white power" is pretty simple. black power is rooted in liberating the black communities against racial oppression. white power is completely different because it's purely about maintaining white supremacy. as much as some people like to dogwhistle "no it's just me being proud of my race, if blacks can do it than why can't i?" the truth of the matter is that people who support "white power" are right wingers who only use the comparison between white and black power to be accepted by normies who don't know any better.

Tbh, if it were up to me, religion would be tolerated but in no way supported.

Want to pray etc? Want to teach religion to your kids? Yeah cool.
Don't expect any support for your spooks. Your kids aint getting any concessions education wise. Straight science for that kid.
Also build your own damn churches.

Attached: d0eb9ed79ed4458871d8417d431b95007059a685eea1e24b459f7b3f27fc0869.jpg (500x500, 68.47K)

You have plenty of christcom friends, user.

they are likely talking about the Black Panther Party, who abandoned overt black nationalism early on and were just marxist-leninists, not to be confused with the "new" BPP, who are just retarded nationalists, and don't give much thought to economics
I'm not a professor of history myself, but as far as I know, the marxist view of christianity would be that it emerged in the minds of slaves in the roman empire, and as the material conditions that made it necessary as a coping mechanism for the opressed slave laborers gave way to feudalism, and eventually capitalism, there is no real reason for it to exist, from a purely materialistic worldview. Also, one of the arguments against communism from christian conservatives is that, since humanity is fundamentally sinful and damned, even trying or thinking you could improve anything (and not without an endorsement from god/the church)is blasphemous. also, to adress the church burning, the church in many countries had become integrated into the economic machinery of feudalism and capitalism itself, to the point that enough people saw it as merely an unnessesary vehicle for exploitation. this is why, during the french revolution, the catholic church was so forcefully stripped of its power and separated from the state. on the other end of the spectrum, this is what inspired martin luther to reform christianity.

The redpill I can give you is that words like Socialism and Communism, when understood in a Marxist sense, imply a transformation from the private ownership of the "means of production" (understood to be, basically, where people work and create profit) to some type of collective or social ownership of said means of production.

What this will look like in detail is something we refrain from guessing, because our immediate concern is how to empower the class likely to protagonize this change, the proletariat, which broadly speaking is people who exchange their labor for a wage and have this wage as their main means of subsistence. To make a parallel, capitalists in the 18th century didn't know the details of how capitalism, as a dominant system, would look like and how it would be managed, but they did understand private ownership, wage labor and market economy, and focused on gradually making those the dominant features of society and letting the government and technocrats gradually refine the specifics with time, knowing when to step forward and when to step back according to circumstances. We plan to do the same with the working masses, collective property and a planned economy.

For your specific concern about loss of social programs and tools for increasing popular quality of life, I'm personally *inclined* to see those not as intrinsic features of bourgeois capitalism, but something they momentarily tolerate when the fear of a radical change from below is at sight. The first modern welfare state was established by Bismarck concomitantly with the anti-Socialist laws, precisely aiming to alienate the masses from radical solutions, particularly the SPD that Marx and Engels greatly influenced. Again and again, I see this concern with the quality of life of the masses coming from above only when a threat to the whole system is building from below.

That doesn't mean we're against voting, reforming the system or welfare (although some factions can be more radical, demanding revolutionary change as the only valid course of action), only that we see those as limited transitional measures, and that changing production is the most important thing. Like I said, our worldview is that once relations of production and distribution are changed, everything else in society is gradually transformed to accomodate this change and the class the benefits from it. Broadly speaking, we call this perspective historical materialism.

Don't encourage him

I think that is a valid criticism of Catholicism. They did fucked up shit. But from our point of view your belief in God is of utmost importance.
I don't agree with this. I think humans are inherently religious. Instead of placing icons of Christ on their wall, people put posters of the ideology they believe in. But from the Marxist point of view I can see why one would think that.

I see what you are saying. I think I understand Marxist perspectives better. In ancient Christian countries, the Church and state have usually worked together like in the Byzantine Empire. In my opinion this is what it should be. The Church and the state should work together to make a Christian society. I see what you mean about "white power" and "black power" movements. I get that you want to bring the capitalist power structure down but I don't see anything wrong with trying to preserve your own people. Especially if other people get to do it. I understand that "White Power" movements are usually right wing but that doesn't necessarily mean that trying to protect the White race is a bad thing. White people have done bad things to other races but I don't think that means White people should cease to exist.

What if I disagree with "science?" Should I be able to teach my kid what I want him to believe? If I cant then you might as well just ban religion entirely. If you have a state-run belief system based on Darwinism that you want all your citizens to believe than there is nothing wrong with having a state religion. That is essentially what you are teaching. You just don't call it a religion.

I appreciate it, bud. I'll look into Marxism more.

I disagree with the Christians who say this and I disagree with Original Sin. I think humans are fundamentally good but demonic influence, the fall of Adam and Eve, and a corrupt society lead humans to the wrong path.

don't. read only marx/engels/lenin and soviet scholars

It really isn't mate

yes, and you're right. black power isn't about getting rid of dem evil whiteys, it's about giving blacks the right to live as equals. you don't need to be a white supremacist to want your race to not be wiped out, it's common sense. don't let the far right convince you that "white power is just preserving our race" beceause that sugarcoated definition entails a lot more, mainly keeping the very institutions that opress other "lesser races" which we as socialists and promoters of groups like the Black Panthers (the OG, from what j know the current state of the party is a shell of it's former self) wish to destroy.

Its almost like the federal reserve is bullshit, and under the American Constitution is fucking ILLEGAL. Letting a non-government entity control the value of the money supply, atrocious. Having FIAT currency at all, atrocious.

Attached: 2580be75c9051e907866156f5aa9a6a4b91f8f0a99b6949029596a1631bb84a3.png (1024x557, 364.27K)

as much as Hoxha may have been right, the way he carried out religious persecution (going as far as banning individual faith, something which no other socialist state had done) was too far. keep the state as atheistic as you like, but the only thing you're achieving by going as Albania did is creating dissatisfaction among the people. let them have their religion, just keep it out of the state.

Honestly. I'm more amazed that right-wingers can even call themselves Christians. The popular western interpretation of Jesus paints him out to be a bit of a radical left-winger.

"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. And God's grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need" Acts 4:32–35

Attached: dec.png (533x541, 113.51K)

You might not say it is not a religion but in my opinion it is just a replacement for real religion but is still fundamentally religious. If there is a system of beliefs and dogmas pushed by the state that is basically a state religion. It's called "atheism" but it is just a replacement for the already established religions. Instead of Jesus and the apostles you have Lenin and the revolutionaries. You replace depictions of Christ with the Soviet flag, a bust of Stalin and a painting of Lenin. Instead of believing in an after-life or reincarnation you just replace them with nothingness. It is anti-religious in name only.
This is just a question, I really don't want to piss anyone off. But are there certain values Marxists need to hold up and strive after? I understand that there is a "do as thou wilt" mentality but there are still principles Marxists need to uphold, right?

I agree with you here. I think we're all just people tryna get by. I respect tribes in Africa who uphold the values of their tribe for more than the White Liberals who have no regard for anything higher than themselves.

I understand where you're coming from. But aren't there differences between males and females? I think we should treat people with respect but that men and women have different roles in society.

Based. I always look at St. Anthony as an inspiration. He heard the verse "Go, sell what you have, and give to the poor" and did just that.

Honestly it was pretty good, bros. I heard a lot of strawmen about Marxists but I respect you.

There none here that do it unironically. Anymore.

i had to go to a catholic school named after him, was pretty good tbh.

except that it lacks all the basic traits that constitute a religion, like the belief in a metaphysical higher being or beings etc.

No, it's not. There is no dogma in scientifically proven laws, and Marxism is scientific in nature. And again, for something to be a religion, it needs to be rooted in idealist metaphysical belief. Marxism is the polar opposite, it's dialectical materialism.

Don't confuse bourgeoisie atheism like that of dawkins with revolutionary atheism.

The "cult of personality" was meant to replace the iconography surrounding the royal family, not religion. It was a necessity of its time.

You cannot call every ideological system a religion mate. Like I said, religions have to have a dogma espousing metaphysical beliefs.

The religious right are religio-political fascists. They believe that women and brown people shouldn't have equal rights as white men, they believe that mass shootings comes from single-mother homes, and that atheism is a mental illness with bloodlust and psychopathy.
Yet they yap on about "LOGIC" and "COMMON SENSE".

Says the guy who lived before Recession. Spoken like a projecting Xennial.

This a priori assumes that Darwinism and Creationism are equally valid, which isn't true and also liberal bullshit. Religious thought is an objectively shittier way of teaching people to understand reality. This applies to all ideas, values and opinions. Communists have better ones and non-communist ones are shit. And unlike non-communists, we actually work hard to determine what constitutes a better idea, hence "scientific socialism".

So you believe in truth? Things can be true and things cannot be true? Doesn't this imply that you believe in a metaphysical truth?

I see what you're saying. I did not know the purpose behind "cult of personality" was to replace the royal family. I get that you don't believe in metaphysical deities, spirits, etc. But let me reiterate a question.

Sure, but truth being independent of observation or knowledge doesn't mean religion is invited, especially yours.

Believing in a metaphysical truth and ideals are religious, you silly goose.

No, it's scientific. Religious thought is (intentionally) self-contradictory, open to reinterpretation, and anyone looking into a religious text can read into it whatever they want, which is usually affirming their existing beliefs. Science doesn't let you choose what you believe, and doesn't require your consent.

Of course, Marxism is after all the most egalitarian ideology in the world. Marxists should always strive to live revolutionary lives that aid in humanities historical quest to unify itself and end all exploitation on the planet. You will be surprised reading the incredible stories of self-sacrifice of revolutionaries for nothing more than knowing they are making the world better, from famous examples like Che to lesser known heroes of WW2 like Sava Kovasevic of the Yugoslav Partisans etc. All this without expecting any personal reward in an afterlife

communism is nothing but free time.

Bzzzt, wrong, the answer was that science doesn't ask for, nor provide, metaphysical truth.

Are you even aware anime girl in your picture wears uniform of Imperial Japanese Army and they generally persecuted and exterminated communists? How retarded can one person be to make such image.