I don't even dislike hierarchy or think equality is desirable I just hate porky for being a thief
What should I look into?
Leftism, but stay away from anarchism.
"Equality" is not actually a goal of communism or serious leftists despite "equity" being one. Those who confuse the two are either misinformed or opportunistic. Most serious leftists, even many anarchists, also accept hierarchy as a natural part of human exchange and actually root the criticism of capitalism as an economic system in the fact that it abuses what can be called "natural and temporary hiearchies" and turns them into long term and contrived hierarchies that can't justify themselves outside of the nihilistic and slef-defeating goal of producing wealth as an end in itself
something… something… Bordiga armchairs?
Read The Ego and its Own.
"The Communist Manifesto"
"The Principles of Communism"
"The Foundations of Leninism"
"The State and Revolution"
"Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism"
"Blackshirts and Reds"
In that order then get back to us
Good, Marxism isn't built on these things in the first place. Read Marx.
the list you made is good but you're missing a few goodies
Stop recommending the memefesto, it was literally written before capital and is a pamphlet meant give an introduction to the platform of a party which no longer exists. It causes more misconceptions then it answers.
I omitted capital because, while reading it in its entirety is necessary, I don't believe it's an "introductory" work for several reasons. Same with Cockshott
You literally don't have to read mutual aid or anything else by anarchists to be a socialist btw. Mutual Aid is literally just "science proves collectivism is more natural than individualism" which at the time may have been an important argument for both evolutionary biology and socialism but today is largely accepted by serious biologists and many mainstream politicians and activists of both left and right so it offers no actual theoretical foundations or food for thought imo. Every Other anarchist work I have read basically boils down to similar content: stating things that while objectively true don't reinforce the necessity of an anarchist organizational praxis and some of them realize this and so add an objectively untrue Strawman of Marxist-leninist organizing. It's lomgeinded and a waste of time imo
Literally the only things in it that are outdated are specific references to European events and the list of demands at the end. Overall it's still a good intro to socialism but I believe it shouldn't be read without reading the superior work, The Principles of Communism and the Leninist texts I recommended either shortly before or after
Where? They always pull shit out of their ass when it come to this topic.
I'm an ML but I liked reading the Mutual Aid because it gave me more insights onto human behavior. Also i'm a burger so being a "collectivist post-modern neo-marxist" is basically suicide.
Not unless you use the correct definitions for shit like private property. There's a reason burgers and other retards think were coming for their toothbrushes
Outside of America rightists who aupport, at least rhetorically, pure Koch brother individualism are in the minority. Even the Brexit party and UKIP, despite being fundamentally neoliberal, use the language of "we're all in this together" and so on. New Right groups in France and Germany along with other parts of Europe have done this since at least the early 2000s (look at where support for Le Pen and Alternative for Germany is coming from its where traditionally socialist or social democratic voting blocs usesd to be before neoliberalism and globalization institutionalized cosmopolitanism and atomization as a virtue in every developed nation im the 80s and 90s)
Even in America there is a sort of Right social democracy forming. Bernie Sanders has tons of support from Republican voters cuz shit like Medicare for all has finally become destigmatized. Same with tulsi gabbard. Tucker Carlson used to be a huge neoliberal neoconservative shill and he turned into an antiwar welfare conservative right around trumps inauguration and now has the highest rated show on the most watched news network in America. I could go on but I think you get the point.
Simply scientifically proving collectivism is more natural and despooking people about individualism isn't enough. Without a sober and realistic praxis and way forward along with a well organized and disciplined vanguard it's too easy for the ruling class to use these "radical facts" to lead the masses into false consciousness.
Fascists have always been most effecti e at recruitment when their propositions and analyses contain a nugget of truth
Socialism is more popular among burgers than it has literally ever been. You are giving the dying class of baby boomers way too much credit and believing their propaganda that gen z will be even more reactionary than they are which there is no hard evidence for
That's entirely true. When I start talking to other burgers about anything past muh social democracy = socialism and get to the real juicy stuff they tend to hesitate quite a bit or shut down. Most (young) Americans thing socialism is still capitalism but muh gubernment is coming in to save the day.
Americans hate communism more than fascism but like socialism more than fascism because the whole muh gubernment shit. I could try and explain revolutionary praxis but its hard because normally the people I talk to know either rudimentary history of leftism or what they think is leftism or have no idea what leftism is at all. If there was a way to start a campaign to end the whole "muh starving gommie" meme, maybe we could radicalize all the zoomers.
The problem is the manifesto uses terms which in regards to the language and the times don't factor well contextually to the modern era. For example, the term abolish in German also means to override or supercede. But in English, when someone reads about the "abolishment of the family", they assume so literally and won't read it as "superceding or overriding the bourgeoisie conception of the family". This is how you get retarded burger speak about destroying the family from both boomers AND high-school radlibs. And that's not to mention the statements about property and the middle class.
This is the shit i'm talking about. Thanks for explaining it better.
This isn't ideal but it's a sea change from boomers who literally think the government doing anything ever is literally the Holodomor
Look man I understand your frustration with Americans but keep 2 things in mind
1) a lot of people (like op) are open to socialism just not to being associated with weird sjw types. As you say many Americans literally just don't understand what socialism is. Some of them are a lost cause but many are open minded enough to at least hear out a good faith argument regarding socialism, marxism, Lenin and the Soviet union and what it is and isn't etc and while they might the stupid shit at you if you get at least one person interested enough to keep looking into it and become a Marxist you've won a victory even if it is small.
Keep in mind that Lenin literally though the same thing about Russia as many American socialists do about America right up until the second revolution happened and much of his radical optimism was constructed after the fact
This might seem cringe and demoralizing but this is literally what memes are for. Zig Forums was able to get so many young people on their side by producing shitposts and low effort satire that, while retarded, contained a nugget of truth. The left is already and will get better at mirroring this soon enough I think
When it comes to people like OP I assume they are acting in good faith and thus trust them to at least investigate if their spooky assumptions are correct or not. As for people who don't want to put in that effort that is literally up to us. We have to explain, no matter how tedious or how mich we have to oversimplify, socialism in such a way that at least half of the ignorant masses come around
Just read Marx friend, he didn't care much about hierarchy or equality either. That, and Althusser.
the soviet union stopped famines in the area after the 1950s so muh starving gommeis is mostly a myth from the transformation of a backwards feudal society into a international superpower. unless yore referring to 1917's to 1950's USSR. The implication is socialism makes you starve indefinitely and that's the problem i'm having to weed out of other burgertards.
if we build upon this board we can create our own shitposting factory.
When I said Zig Forums memes contain a nugget of truth I was referencing their critiques of globalization and "woke" Capitalism/corporate virtue signalling. I completely agree with you about muh starving commies but that's what I'm saying, Zig Forums Can and already has made several memes debunking this and we are slowly winning people over or at least accelerating the move away from "le ebin alt right provocation for the like xD" subculture many young people have been into since like 2014
Pic related is a nice example. Every time I post this on halfchan or similar places it provokes a discussion thay, while not always being fruitful in itself, I know leads to at least one user googling Holodomor and actually reading about it and discovering that even among liberal historians there is no consensus on whether it actually was a man made famine or not etc
I think when it comes zoomers planting the seed and cultivating it is more important than pure argumentation and information. If the latter was all it took so many of them wouldn't have fallen for Zig Forums shit out of a knee jerk hatred of predominant neoliberal cultural ideology
Were on the same page I guess and that's pretty rad. However the real question is how do we mass produce consensus on these ideas? Not only do we need to make memes but we need to spread them as far as fucking possible, especially because most redditfags are starting to go to halfchan for memes and ideology. I mean if we flood shit into r/dankmemes, maybe we could convert le zoomers.
That pic is fucking great ngl, its also the one that started me down the path of researching the Holdomor myself. I understand this now, we must meme socialism into the limelight to get burgertards and others to talk about it (especially because leftism isn't just idpol like most half boomer half zoomer autistss would normally think)
literally forced memes
There's a couple of spots on halfchan now that are fairly lefty tbh. /mu/ is about 50/50 and so is /int/
I mean sure, memes don't have to be forced but they should at least be spread as far as possible.
Exploitation is totally justifiable in the context of private property, since workers sell their labour power to the capitalists. It isn't stolen, similar to having to sell some of your important belongings just because you are broke. It's completely unfair, but there is no thievery since it respects property rights. We have to be critical of the idea of something strictly belonging to someone if we want to oppose exploitation
I thought the whole of halfchan just became more and more right leaning though. I mean there is people who hate Zig Forums shit, but it seems like there are at least 3 other anons giving him (yous) about Zig Forums being based and good, or them being an SJW for bringing up that Zig Forums likes to brigade everything.
The only spots on halfchan Zig Forums was able to fully colonize is /tv/. The rest of them are either a 50/50 split or "apolitical" for lack of a better word. Even/r9k/ is less reactionary than many think
sold under duress
No, it's fucking theft. Worse than theft, they're extorting you with threats of death and various other problems if you can't get money to buy shit you need.
So if someone mugs you, did you give them a gift under duress?
It's a short quick read written for 1800s peasants. It's the perfect intro to communism for people who aren't dorks.
I reccomend "150 questions for a guerilla" for the Chads who are more into practice than theory
But be sure to get a modern edited version with addendums or whatever, the original has some outdated tactics that are stupid to do nowadays
I'm just saying that unless they have precursor knowledge and an understanding of its context when reading it, they will end up making some critical misconceptions especially if they are new or a burger. It almost needs to be read with a Marxist nearby to clarify things or with notes at the bottom clarifying things like what abolish means when Marx uses it and other tidbits.
Definitely true, i know i gotta have my footnotes for texts more than 100 years old
The category of sold under duress in practice only extends to direct threats of violence. If we take the use of the concept to the extreme, I could easily argue against private property altogether, since it is transferred/created under threats of violence. But there is a reason why it is only used as an exception. It is only really a way to make the existence of property rights more bearable. I don't think we should stick to concepts which presuppose private property. The same goes for theft.
It is retard