[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / cafechan / eris / g / tingles / vg / vichan / vietnam ]

/marx/ - Marxism

It makes you smart

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 62rd Attention-Hungry Games
/eris/ - Wherein Is Explained Absolutely Everything Worth Knowing About Absolutely Anything.

November 2018 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
Verification *
File *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: 1428936027574.jpg (235.44 KB, 951x659, 951:659, enver_hoxha_republic_decla….jpg)

 No.2397[Reply]

Hello, I am the new leader of /marx/.

I will continue the status quo: this board is for those who identify as Marxist-Leninist in some form, whether they uphold or otherwise identify with the Stalin-era USSR, the post-Stalin era, China under Mao, Albania under Hoxha, Cuba, the DPRK or whatever. Non-MLs are allowed to ask questions and the like.

I have a forum with a political forum area for registered users (although the forum itself is for forum games users think up and run.) If you want to get in private contact with me via PM, or if you just want to use the political forum area for whatever, feel free: http://eregime.org/index.php?act=idx

83 posts and 34 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at

 No.10456

File: ba3a2a0ee303f84⋯.png (882.68 KB, 1000x2264, 125:283, A425CBFD-C53E-465E-88E2-EE….png)

>>10429

This infograph gives the basic gist. I’m not sure if this is just drama over a small change or if it will actually be bad (or when this will even occur)




File: c62e7f34225e649⋯.jpg (350.24 KB, 573x773, 573:773, Untitled.jpg)

 No.10096[Reply]

Old thread: https://8ch.net/marx/res/8560.html

As the title says. I figure a general "ask me questions" thread is good. Can be questions about socialism, US history, the Marxist position on religion, or whatever else.

458 posts and 56 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.11038

File: 8d9fe03fa0d79c2⋯.png (204.21 KB, 1080x1386, 60:77, IMG_20181211_094834.png)

I wonder if you anons have an answer for this question, or whether another instant and permanent ban is coming my way for asking it?

How is marxism not identity politics?

(Substitute 'class' with 'race', and you don't sound much different from /pol/)


 No.11039

>>11038

It's in your class interests to fight for socialism even when you don't "identify" with other people of your class in any way. However, it's not in your interests whatsoever to fight for "your race" (outside of an identitarian perspective) since that only benefits the ideology of the national bourgeoisie.


 No.11040

>>11038

Well, what do you mean by "identity politics"?

According to the Webster dictionary definition, "politics in which groups of people having a particular racial, religious, ethnic, social, or cultural identity tend to promote their own specific interests or concerns without regard to the interests or concerns of any larger political group."

That doesn't describe Marxism. The working-class aims to unite all exploited and oppressed segments of society under its banner by recognizing that capitalism is the main obstacle to be overcome.

One of John Brown's associates wrote of him that he "condemned the sale of land as a chattel, and thought that there was an infinite number of wrongs to right before society would be what it should be, but that in our country slavery was the 'sum of all villanies,' and its abolition the first essential work."

By struggling against an exploitative system, Brown was able to draw the sympathy of broad sections of the people (to the extent that he, a devout Christian, was effortlessly able to enlist Jews and agnostics by his side.)

By the time slavery was abolished, the struggle against it was joined by practically every segment of society, from the industrial bourgeoisie to Marxists (both of whom could be found in the Republican Party at that early date.)


 No.11041

>>11039

It's the process of "othering" that is the issue. Marxists will put capitalists against the wall as readily as natsocs will put jews against the wall. (and has anyone connected the dots to your common bogeyman, yet?)

>>11040

>According to the Webster dictionary definition, "politics in which groups of people having a particular racial, religious, ethnic, social, or cultural identity tend to promote their own specific interests or concerns without regard to the interests or concerns of any larger political group."

That doesn't describe Marxism

Apart from the social identity.

Proles vs bourgies. Nazis vs jews. If you're not with us, you're against us.

Pick your own dichotomy.

I really don't see much difference.


 No.11042

>>11041

>and has anyone connected the dots to your common bogeyman, yet?

There are no connections. The Nazis attacked Jews as Jews, whether the latter were workers or capitalists. Meanwhile the Nazis had no problem serving the interests of "truly German" companies such as I.G. Farben and Krupp, which enriched themselves off of war and concentration camp labor. Anti-Semitism was used to help perpetuate capitalism in Germany.

As for dichotomies, to return to my earlier example, slaves versus slaveowners was an entirely legitimate distinction to make. The world versus the Jews isn't.

Your attitude is akin to pacifists who hold all acts of violence equally wrong regardless of context.

Post last edited at



File: 58837d671d897f7⋯.jpg (1.14 MB, 878x1275, 878:1275, It is Lenin.jpg)

 No.10645[Reply]

Old thread: https://8ch.net/marx/res/4702.html

If you have a question about Soviet history or about specific policies enacted in the USSR, feel free to ask them here.

80 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.11026

>>11025

Is it true weather played a part as well? Is it true that the famine extended across many parts of the Soviet breadbasket, all the way to to the Kazhak SSRs and so on?


 No.11027

I've heard of a referendum in the early 90s about the dissolution of the USSR, what can you tell me about it? Is it true the results where overwhelmingly in favor of retaining the Union and the socialist system? Was it a fair and free election, or was it tampered with?

Speaking of referendums and elections, what kind of political elections were there in the USSR in general? And were they generally free and democratic, or did the state have a hand in them?


 No.11028

>>11026

>Is it true weather played a part as well?

It is possible.

>Is it true that the famine extended across many parts of the Soviet breadbasket, all the way to to the Kazhak SSRs and so on?

From what I recall reading, there were food shortages in other parts of the USSR, but only in the Ukraine did it assume the dimensions of a famine.

>>11027

Yes, there was a March 1991 referendum: http://i.imgur.com/xXS4jN0.jpg

It wasn't a question of retaining the socialist system, just the Soviet Union under a "renewed federation" (in other words, Gorbachev's proposal for a Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics.) I haven't heard of the vote being tampered with.

>what kind of political elections were there in the USSR in general? And were they generally free and democratic, or did the state have a hand in them?

As I recently wrote on another thread,

>To quote one bourgeois analyst, "The LaFollette Progressives could not have desired an electoral law which on paper provides for a more direct expression of the wishes of the electorate with the most modern safeguards for preventing a perversion of the national will than that presently in operation in the USSR."

>Of course, it's the "on paper" part that's ultimately important. In practice the CPSU stage-managed the process. There was some liveliness and meaningful participation on the local level (towns, villages), but on the national level the ordinary Soviet citizen simply voted because he or she was expected to do so. Apathy was widespread.

As for how they worked, very briefly, there would be nomination meetings held in public places (factoriesPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


 No.11034

>>10950

>From a Spart pamphlet (obviously inclined to bash the Soviets, but still), "Why the U.S.S.R. is Not Capitalist," 1977, pp. 41-42:

If a Spart pamphlet is actually the only source for this claim you're aware of, I'd say that makes it pretty dubious, no?


 No.11036

>>11034

>If a Spart pamphlet is actually the only source for this claim you're aware of

I didn't claim it was. In the very next reply I made, I cited a bourgeois academic discussing it: >>10955

And again, Soviet sources themselves speak of the law.




File: 20626f63f1b3bcb⋯.png (8.36 KB, 200x200, 1:1, Hammer_and_sickle_red_on_t….png)

 No.8736[Reply]

I've made a few steps for how to gain power:

1. Make loads of propagandist. Make videos, Posters, Print out fucktons of leaflets, etc. Do not stop for whatever reason, the propaganda must flow. Start by putting up a poster in A nearby billboard for example. Do not hold back.

2. Make a political party

Make a shitty political party and invite your friends. Continue the stream of propoganda, but orientate it towards this party

3. Merge with larger parties.

Merge with other tiny communist parties. Gain more members, and merge your ideologies. Combat Sectarianism. Keep on merging till you have a reasonably big party

4. Get shit done

Make homeless shelters, give money to charity, give free first aid courses. Help the proletariat and expand your cancer-like growth. Continue the propaganda stream.

5. Get ready

Once you have a reasonably big party, stock up on supplies. Build bunkers, and plan your moves. Purge Infilitrators, continue the spread of propoganda and expand your Paramilitary.

6. Revolution

Begin by enciting riots. Get well-placed allies in the military to enact your plans, And Engage in open fighting with the establishment. Learn strategy, and Build more bunkers to hide you and your party from Bombers.

3 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.8846

This is it.


 No.8852

>Posters, Print out fucktons of leaflets

What decade do you think this is?


 No.9078

>>8852

Posters are only important if just one group has a monopoly in it. Allows you to show off some of that fancy Communist aesthetic people love too.


 No.10975

>>8740

tbh because most people are armchairs


 No.10976

>>10975

>bumping a nearly 6 month old thread

kys




File: 38635e8bd1975d0⋯.jpg (79.56 KB, 790x444, 395:222, 58de4fc3c4618838398b4585.jpg)

 No.10967[Reply]

As we all know, accusations of lack of democracy is one of the main ways western countries demonize other countries and justify sanctions and war against them. But what is the state of democracy in the countries considered enemies of the west actually like? For example, the DPRK, Iran, Cuba, Syria, Venezuela, Russia and China. As far as I know, every single one of these countries holds elections of one sort or another, but it's still common knowledge that these countries are all dictatorships, and the elections fake (or something). What's the truth here? Which of these countries have legit elections and which are 100% dictatorships?

On a related note, I've noticed that liberals often treat democracy as a binary thing, an on/off switch. Either a country is a democracy (which usually coincidences with being good friends with the US) or it's a dictatorship, but it's obvious to me that democracy, rule of the people, exists on a spectrum. The US, "a democracy", has elections but also has a bunch of problems which compromise the legitimacy of the democratic process, such as normalization of huge amounts of money in politics, voter fraud, a few media companies having complete control over the access to information, etc. Conversely, if you study Stalin era USSR (an obvious "totalitarian dictatorship" to most people) you find that even that society had democratic elements to it. Categorizing countries into democracies and dictatorships is mostly a way to signal which countries are "good" and which deserve sanctions and military intervention imo.

 No.10969

>Categorizing countries into democracies and dictatorships is mostly a way to signal which countries are "good" and which deserve sanctions and military intervention imo.

Yeah, for Marxists democracy and dictatorship are not antithetical when talking about the state. The dictatorial element is always the main function, and democracy is always limited in some way by what class is in power (bourgeois democracy limiting the influence of the vast majority of the population, proletarian democracy limiting the influence of exploiting elements.)

I can't comment on Iran, but the DPRK has a modified form of the Soviet electoral system. To quote one bourgeois analyst, "The LaFollette Progressives could not have desired an electoral law which on paper provides for a more direct expression of the wishes of the electorate with the most modern safeguards for preventing a perversion of the national will than that presently in operation in the USSR."

Of course, it's the "on paper" part that's ultimately important. In practice the CPSU stage-managed the process. There was some liveliness and meaningful participation on the local level (towns, villages), but on the national level the ordinary Soviet citizen simply voted because he or she was expected to do so. Apathy was widespread.

I wouldn't be surprised if the DPRK has a similar problem.

As for Cuba, it has changed its system a fair bit since the early 90s. There are two books on its electoral system:

* http://b-ok.cc/book/2482948/67174c

* http://b-ok.cc/book/2548797/920457

As for Russia, Venezuela and (at least since 2012) Syria, their systems seem to meet the criteria of bourgeois democracies insofar as there are opposition parties. The argument is that the ruling parties have numerous in-built advantages (e.g. state media which gives them preferential treatment) which all but ensure their victory, but at the samPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Post last edited at

 No.10970

>>10969

Thank you!




File: f02cb009aa99a0b⋯.png (754.67 KB, 1554x1180, 777:590, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.10916[Reply]

It's literally always the same thing with you politispergs

Ancuck: (cap)

>me? i'd be an bussiness owner, not a slave like 99% of the population

<goverment is evil!

Ancuck: (com)

>me? i'd be a bussiness owner, not a slave like 99% of the population

<goverment is evil!

Cumskin tranny mod:

>me? i'd be an card-carrying member of the party, not a starving slave like 99% of the population

<goverment is a nescessary evil!

American/nazi:

>me? i'd be an white, unlike 99% of the population

<goverment is a nescessary evil!

Molarph:

>me? i'd be an aristocrat, not a serf like 99% of the population

<goverment is a nescessary evil!

Fascist:

>me? i'd be an citizen, like 100% of the population

<goverment exist to serve the people, not the other way around.

literally always the same

1 post omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10919

You realise that being a member of the CPSU wasn't even mandatory in the USSR and being a member was basically just a thing if you were part of politics

Most citizens weren't "Higher up party members" and they didn't starve to death


 No.10920

>>10919

Being a CPSU member actually had more duties and downsides than not being one. Members paid a sort of due-tax on their income to the CPSU, CPSU-affiliated managerial workers and so on accepted meager salaries in comparison to non-CPSU members, you were to do party work during the evenings, you were to be an inspiration and a model to other workers, and thus meet higher quotas, be away less from work, and so on.


 No.10922

File: 3b8441bd6f3b777⋯.jpg (151.57 KB, 2045x1215, 409:243, 06b617cb0a30d6ad693eb09ec1….jpg)

File: d780852cd3c6826⋯.png (1.84 MB, 2000x3236, 500:809, 8aa41aec35490a7b48ca4fcdde….png)

File: 56b5fe2018da516⋯.png (778.03 KB, 630x1714, 315:857, 56b5fe2018da516e66fe4502a0….png)

>me? i'd be an bussiness owning, card-carrying member of the aristocratic Kool Kids Kommunist Party for whites like the rest of the population

<government is a nessecary existing to serve the people!

NAZBOL GANG STRIKES AGAIN


 No.10923

>>10922

NazBol is so stupid.


 No.10953

File: 6d2886e226f7319⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 113.42 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, 6d2886e226f7319bbf45123512….jpg)

>>10923

t. uncultured swine




File: 23c5e8a52fe902b⋯.png (631.08 KB, 702x813, 234:271, communist__emancipation_by….png)

 No.10911[Reply]

I'm wondering if there are books that describe in detail the organizational structure of the Bolshevik / RSDLP party from 1907-1917. Particularly democratic centralism and how to build a party.

 No.10912

There's two books that deal with how the Bolsheviks approached participation in elections to the Tsarist Duma:

* https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1ZP6ZurgOg-TWZkakp3b0VYZEE/view (the author being a Bolshevik participant in said Duma)

* http://b-ok.cc/book/2517417/664f75 (a modern academic account)

I can't think of any books directly answering your "describe in detail the organizational structure of the Bolshevik / RSDLP party" though. Very briefly, the Central Committee operated in exile and gave instructions to regional committees inside the Russian Empire, which were responsible for establishing local Bolshevik organizations and cells, setting up study groups among workers, collecting funds for strikes, etc.




File: 44291a908dc90ec⋯.jpg (42.08 KB, 252x311, 252:311, Marien Ngouabi.jpg)

 No.10377[Reply]

*coolest African leader from cold war era*

Nothing Personal, Kid

15 posts and 8 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10872

>>10871

Some questions. Is it better than Zaire? Is the Economy well off? Is the literacy and life expectancy rate is higher? Is it actually socialism or a opportunist state? What its foreign relations on other countries? What are the successes and failures of Nguouabi and how the Congolese see him today?

Also what books you have about the country if you're willing to talk about them.


 No.10873

>>10872

>Is it better than Zaire? Is the Economy well off? Is the literacy and life expectancy rate is higher?

You presumably meant to type "was," since Zaire hasn't existed in two decades and Congo-Brazzaville dropped any socialist aspirations even earlier.

But yes, Congo-Brazzaville was a better place to live in than Zaire. Jonathan Kwitny, whose book "Endless Enemies" is a good exposé on US foreign policy, writes the following on pages 400-402:

>Government boards [in Zaire] claim monopoly rights to all mineral resources. Marketing constraints discourage agricultural production. The controls can be beaten, if at all, only by those rich enough to bribe their way through. The Zairian form of government was described by one Peace Corps volunteer there as a "kleptocracy."

>By contrast, the Congo allows considerable free commerce. "There there is no trouble," say Jimmy [a Zairian national], who has been in the paint business in Africa for thirty-eight years. "The government encourages investment. Here I am a socialist and a communist and a capitalist. The people are"—and up goes his thumb. He is so happy in the Congo, he says, that he recently bought a bar and restaurant in the capital city of Brazzaville, and has encouraged his son, just finishing school in Europe, to settle in Brazzaville.

>True, over the years the Congo has cooperated with the U.S.S.R. It funneled arms to the MPLA movement, later the government, in Angola (which has its own questionable pro-Soviet label). But Congolese citizens don't look furtively about for secret police when they speak, the way Zairians do. As Nicole Brenier, economic officer at the U.S. embassy, puts its, "They are Marxists, but not living like Marxists. Nothing is Marxist in the culture here. They are living like capitalists." Adds John Archibald, another U.S. diplomat in the Congo, "It's like day and night with Zaire. The economy here is knowing. The people are happy. The policy is very pragmatic They're not dumb. Who needs enemies?" . . . .

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
Post last edited at

 No.10878

>>10872

Well Congo which used to be M-L has HDI of 0.606, while unfortunate Congo which remained western colony trough the cold war has HDI of 0.457 . Imperialism, not even once.


 No.10903

Is he the African Bordiga?


 No.10904

>>10903

No, Ngouabi had no problem with socialist countries, whereas Bordiga cut himself off from the international communist movement with his sectarianism.

Also Ngouabi was the leader of a country, Bordiga wasn't.

Also Bordiga "as Bordiga" (aka when he started crafting his own ideology) was irrelevant.




File: e0aee9296053278⋯.jpg (30.03 KB, 960x893, 960:893, e0aee9296053278668002440c2….jpg)

 No.10422[Reply]

Can someone explain to me the ML consensus on what's been going on regarding the woman's role in society the last 100 years?

>was it technology or activism that made women enter the workforce?

>did women not work prior to the world wars because they were told not to, because they had to work unpaid obligatory labour like washing (which became much easier after the advent of the washing machine)?

>when the washing machine came, why did women even want to join the workforce?

>how did women get to vote?

Did the social relations change themselves or did the material conditions facilitate it?

 No.10423

While this isn't an answer, chapter III of the following work talks a bit about women's struggles in US history, including for suffrage and in organized labor: https://archive.org/details/HumanRightsUSStyle

Marxist historian Philip S. Foner also wrote a two-volume history of women in American labor from colonial times up to the 1970s. I have PDFs of them if you're interested.

I don't think there is a ML consensus (e.g. there's no Marxist analysis of the American women's suffrage movement that I know of, let alone a definitive work covering other subjects you mention.)


 No.10424

>>10423

Could you perhaps tell me their main points about how women gained rights?


 No.10426

>>10424

I haven't read the Foner books yet, and the first book I linked to I read years back.

But basically, they gained basic political rights like anyone else does: organizing into groups, protesting, running or endorsing candidates in elections, braving threats and violence, etc.

It also helped that, as with other movements, there were always bourgeois and petty-bourgeois figures who urged white and/or male capitalists to grant basic rights so that oppressed people wouldn't turn toward increasingly radical solutions to their problems.


 No.10890

>was it technology or activism that made women enter the workforce?

daily work gotten easier, household work has gotten more automated and that capitalists needed cheaper labor.

>did women not work prior to the world wars because they were told not to, because they had to work unpaid obligatory labour like washing (which became much easier after the advent of the washing machine)?

Work outside of a store, cleaning or cooking was very taxing so mostly men did those jobs.

>when the washing machine came, why did women even want to join the workforce?

lots of propaganda most women worked until they had children but now you need two incomes to stay a float.

>how did women get to vote?

that is the problem with democracy. the people allowed to vote always expands, this happens in every democracy not just the US.

>Did the social relations change themselves or did the material conditions facilitate it?

Material conditions influenced social change and porky's need to destroy the family to make better consumers


 No.10891

>>10890

>that is the problem with democracy

How is wider suffrage a problem? Or am I misunderstanding you?




File: bec269498242591⋯.jpg (64.04 KB, 447x601, 447:601, 1460131773459-1.jpg)

 No.8531[Reply]

Questions about China today and in the past

38 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10596

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y5-0llHaZDs

>Muh Jaywalking Cameras

Nothing to do with social credit

>Muh trains

<Telling people not to smoke on the train is literally Muh 1984 Muh Black mirror

>not being able to board Planes trains or Buses if labelled as dangerous

Literally just a no fly list

Any American who critisizes this is an Uber hypocrite

>If you get high social credit you get rewards like better interest rates and dating sites XD

Not true at all.

Even the article he shows (a snippet) of points out that this is part of Seasame credit which is basically just a customer loyalty scam by Alibaba which gets you low interest and sheit by shopping with them

>Uyghers are forced to give their current location at all times to the Chinese goverment

No citation given

No evidence for this I could find at all

Those are just some basic falsehoods I saw in this abysmal video

It would be good if Ismail could point out anything else false he notices


 No.10597

>>10596

lmao I fucking love when people like PJW call China communist whenever they report about its alleged atrocities, but call it capitalist whenever they talk about its economic success.

I've even seen people call the USSR capitalist whenever the industrialization and the rise in living standards came up, but called it a communist dictatorship when talking about its flaws.


 No.10780

china is cool but I don't like what they do to dogs :(


 No.10841

what confuses me is leadership in China. i know you had Mao, but then Deng wasn't technically a general secretary but a "paramount leader" or something and then after that it gets super confusing. who succeeded Deng? are there any notable leaders after him (excluding Xi Jingping)? also how popular is Deng among Chinese people?


 No.10842

>>10841

Briefly:

* After Mao died, Hua Guofeng became his successor and worked with Deng to defeat the Gang of Four.

* Hua portrayed himself as the loyal follower of Mao, his policy being known as the Two Whatevers (basically saying the CPC will uphold whatever Mao wanted.) Deng, however, criticized the Two Whatevers as incompatible with Marxism, and many were dissatisfied that Hua was more interested in simply ending the Cultural Revolution rather than radically reforming the economy.

* Deng defeated Hua Guofeng in 1980, replacing him with Zhao Ziyang and Hu Yaobang who were responsible for carrying out Deng's reforms.

* Zhao ended up having a falling out with Deng in 1989 due to some unpopular liberal economic policies and also his unwillingness to take decisive action against the counter-revolutionary forces in Tienanmen. Zhao is replaced with Jiang Zemin.

* In 1992 Deng toured Chinese provinces which were at the forefront of economic reform. Deng emphasized that the process of opening up the economy should continue. With that he basically retired from political life. Jiang Zemin, General Secretary of CPC since replacing Zhao in 1989, also became President in 1993. From that point on all the "actual" leaders of China (Jiang, Hu Jintao, Xi Jinping) have simultaneously served as President and General Secretary.

>also how popular is Deng among Chinese people?

There was no personality cult built around Deng, so no one is like "DENG IS THE MOST GLORIOUS SUN WHO LIGHTS OUR LIVES" or whatever, but he's pretty much universally liked except by liberals who get mad over Tienanmen.

Post last edited at



File: 39333c4e02de75f⋯.jpg (158.48 KB, 1174x738, 587:369, bolshevik-jews.jpg)

 No.7600[Reply]

How does /marx/ respond to the talking point of the Nazis whenever talking about Marxism as some "Jewish conspiracy", then citing that the Soviet Union's government officials was made up of 95% jews. They often like to double down on Trotsky as well for some reason even though he was purged from the party thanks to Stalin. What is the official /marx/ist response to "Jewish Bolshevism" which Nazis often like to cite as anything to the left of Adolf Hitler, including moderate liberalism.

165 posts and 65 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10818

>>10732

> you acquired such ideas in Jewish-created and Jewish-controlled MATERIAL CONDITIONS.

uh, no I didn't, I only interacted with a handful of Jewish people in my life as far as I'm aware


 No.10825

>>10809

>>10808

Ok Ismail lets concede to his worldview a sec and PRETEND that Jews all want le spooky world without borders or some shit

That still Dosent link it with Marxism as two different ideological systems having similar aims in ONE area does not equate a universal link between the two


 No.10826

>>10825

Yeah, I recently had someone claim that one of the goals of the Illuminati was to abolish private property, ergo Marx was an Illuminati shill.

I pointed out that even if Adam Weishaupt really did seek the abolition of private property (I couldn't find any sources that weren't "the Illuminati still exists and rules the world"), that doesn't prove anything. Gerrard Winstanley wanted to abolish private property a century before Weishaupt. Even Plato thought that private property had harmful effects and that the rulers of society should live communistically to best serve the rest of the population.

And of course I pointed out that there's no evidence linking Marx to the Illuminati (which had long ceased to exist by the 1840s), that he opposed secret societies, etc.

Post last edited at

 No.10834

>>10818

>I only interacted with a handful of Jewish people in my life as far as I'm aware

This doesn’t change the fact that kikes control the levers of power and have created a Jewish cultural environment


 No.10895

>>10834

>Jewish cultural environment

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.




File: 1aba33ae097dc87⋯.jpg (30.71 KB, 258x300, 43:50, 1-karl-marx-russian-school.jpg)

 No.7739[Reply]

Seeming as /leftypol/ is useless for the this kind of thread, this will be the designated Capital reading thread. The gist is that people new to Marx, like me, will be able to ask here questions specifically regarding the volumes of Capital.

Starting on page 63 (in the PDF arranged by marxists.org), I run into this long and confusing paragraph:

>In a given country there take place every day at the same time, but in different localities, numerous one-sided metamorphoses of commodities, or, in other words, numerous sales and numerous purchases. The commodities are equated beforehand in imagination, by their prices, to definite quantities of money.

So far so good.

>And since, in the form of circulation now under consideration, money and commodities always come bodily face to face, one at the positive pole of purchase, the other at the negative pole of sale,

>it is clear that the amount of the means of circulation required, is determined beforehand by the sum of the prices of all these commodities. As a matter of fact, the money in reality represents the quantity or sum of gold ideally expressed beforehand by the sum of the prices of the commodities. The equality of these two sums is therefore self-evident.

What exactly did he mean by "determined beforehand" and "ideally"? As some platonic sum of prices that should be if it's converted to money or the literal equality of value of the the amount of prices to the circulating currency? Judging by the paragraph on the next page I'm inclined to think of the former.

>We know, however, that, the values of commodities remaining constant, their prices vary with the value of gold (the material of money), rising in proportion as it falls, and falling in proportion as it rises. Now if, in consequence of such a rise or fall in the value of gold, the sum of the prices of commodities fall or rise, the quantity of money in currency must fall or rise to the same extent.

>The change in the quantity of the circulating medium is, in this case, it is true, caused by the money itself, yet not in virtue of its function as a medium of circulation, but of its function as a measurPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

104 posts and 21 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10663

P. 543-4

>In its further development money-rent must lead -- aside from all intermediate forms, e.g., the small peasant tenant farmer -- either to the transformation of land into peasants’ freehold, or to the form corresponding to the capitalist mode of production, that is, to rent paid by the capitalist tenant farmer.

So here's a particularly interesting passage. I would say possibly one of the most important ones in the entire book. Further down Marx goes over this intermediate form and how it develops into the capitalist mode of production, while also, if I remember correctly, discusses how peasants' freehold ties into both. I don't remember how much he discusses the latter, my memory of this part (and really any specific part of this book) is fuzzy and general, but if I'm not mistaken he mostly -or only- talks of the tenant farmer. What I infer from this passage is that peasants' freehold is a possible alternative mode of production to capitalism, which in a way could be compared to his description of the Australian conditions of production at the end of volume 1 (although capitalism eventually triumphed, through what I would assume importation of the necessary conditions - capital, reserve army of labor, credit, etc - from Britain).

But even if I'm wrong and peasants' freehold really is just another phase, does Marx suggest anywhere how the development of a mode of production could take different routes (on a general scale obviously, not everywhere, pockets of archaic or peculiar modes would continue to exist, which he doesn't deny)? How do dialectics tie into this?

P. 551

>We have seen that, in the case of a given ground-rent, the price of land is regulated by the interest rate. If the rate is low, then the price of land is high, and vice versa.

Someone explain this.

P. 595

>Of course, if wages are reduced to their general basis, namely, to that portion of the product of the producer’s own labour which passes over into the individual consumption of the labourer; if we relieve this portion of its capitalist limitations and extend it to that volume of consumption which is permitted, on the one hand, by the existiPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


 No.10697

One last thing which I forgot.

Marx talks at a certain chapter about how to conceive of prices as wage+profit+rent is nonsensical because it's circular logic. He also asks how could the laborer buy his product if the wage is below the sum of the prices? Reproduction could not take place. But isn't in the end the same thing is with the LTV? How could the laborers buy the entirety of the product of society, given the capitalists either save or invest, rather than blow it all on consumer products?

Maybe he explains it somewhere else and I just missed, like in the chapters on circulation in vol. 1 & 2. If that's the case someone please point it out to me. Otherwise, if he doesn't solve that, it seems to me that the fact that the laborer can't buy out his product in its entirety is what leads to overproduction and then a crisis.


 No.10795

>>10663

>This paragraph seems unintelligible to me.

The paragraph right before that one is about how under capitalism, an independent producer with his own land is basically his own worker and boss and landlord, and how this seems to show how capitalism is natural, since he can still reckon in the typical capitalist categories (though it's a bit weird): his salary and profit and rental income. But the reason these categories still make sense to the independent guy is because, even while not having a boss or landlord above him, he is still living in the capitalist class society. A post-capitalist society wouldn't have profit and capitalist investment, but it would still have a notion of what's necessary to cover the physical minimum, and that some work should go into a safety buffer and developing technology.


 No.10803

>>10663

<...ingeniously developed communism of the Peruvians...

>Anyone got a source on this? What does he mean and where can I read on it?

Google provides some articles, and when you skim over the Wikipedia article about the Incan economy, you can see:

1. The Incas had a centrally planned economy with no domestic exchange, just foreign trade

2. The Incas had labour vouchers which they accounted for with labour time, they made knots in strings hanging from a central building in the village for every single hour of work done


 No.10822

>>10655

>>(Note for later elaboration.) A specific form of credit: It is known that when money serves as a means of payment instead of a means of purchase, the commodity is alienated, but its value is realised only later. If payment is not made until after the commodity has again been sold, this sale does not appear as the result of the purchase; rather it is through this sale that the purchase is realised. In other words, the sale becomes a means of purchase.

IIRC Marx distinguishes means of purchase/circulation and means of payment in that means of purchase/circulation is the term for direct real-time correspondence between paying for an item AND receiving the ownership right AND physically obtaining it AND (I think) using it, consuming it. Means of payment is the term for just the money changing hands and other aspects can happen in a delayed way. So...

>when money serves as a means of payment

The money changes hands, but the thing is not immediately consumed on the spot.

>the commodity is alienated

The item changes ownership legally, perhaps also physically, but we are not talking about consuming it.

>but its value is realised only later

It is only used later, it probably hasn't reached the person that will actually consume it (or if we are talking about a machine that is used in production, the machine hasn't reached the business that will actually physically make use of it).

>If payment is not made until after the commodity has again been sold, this sale does not appear as the result of the purchase

Person A gives ownership rights of an item to B (perhaps the item also moves physically from A to B). If payment by B to A is not made until B has sold the item to C, B selling it to C does not appear as the result of B buying it from A...

>rather it is through this sale that the purchase is realised

...rather it is through B selling to C, C being the one actually using/consuming the item, that B's purchase from A is realized. Value is only realized inPost too long. Click here to view the full text.




File: 40c99d8c30a650e⋯.jpeg (93.19 KB, 628x800, 157:200, marx.jpeg)

 No.10708[Reply]

howdy folks

13 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.10722

File: ef4905a617e5290⋯.jpg (98.46 KB, 957x1390, 957:1390, groucho-marx-actor-marx-br….jpg)


 No.10723

File: 23661c2b1c94ee3⋯.jpg (72.09 KB, 400x488, 50:61, Groucho-Marx-Last-Will-&-D….jpg)


 No.10724

*Insert laugh track*


 No.10767

Apparently Groucho was an anarcho-socialist. Nice.

https://www.skeptic.ca/Groucho_Marxism.htm


 No.10800

>>10708

Uphold Groucho-Marxism




File: 5cf68060f398fa0⋯.jpg (26.49 KB, 400x400, 1:1, CM.jpg)

 No.10761[Reply]

Hey, /marx/

So, I've been watching this guy for about a year, he's passionate in what he talks about, so I wanted to know what are your thoughts on him?

 No.10771

He is a complete revisionist, claims that Libya's or Iran's economic system are not different from the USSR because they have a few nationalised industries.


 No.10774

I've listened to a few of his talks with Unruhe. He's much more intelligent and less autistic than the roo for sure, but some of his views are totally dumb. Like what >>10771 mentioned about Libya and Iran for example.


 No.10790

>>10774

>Libya

Wasn't Gaddafi a Ba'aathist which is technically Arab Socialism and Arab Nationalism? Or am I mistaken here?


 No.10792

>>10790

Gaddafi wasn't a Ba'athist. He actually persecuted followers of the Ba'ath party.

He was inspired by Nasser, and eventually created his own ideology, hence the Green Book. He definitely counts as an Arab socialist though (Ba'athism being a different variety of Arab socialism.)




File: 2f4fbe8dafa77c7⋯.jpg (483.25 KB, 706x839, 706:839, Mr Jones Goes to Washingto….jpg)

 No.10430[Reply]

Today is the 40th anniversary of the mass murder-suicides at Jonestown.

I intended to publish a big ol' article on Jim Jones, Peoples Temple and Jonestown, but I got busy and kept on finding new sources, so my quest to write a Marxist overview of this utopian cult shall have to wait another day.

To compensate, here's excerpts from one of many books I've read (based largely on interviews with a survivor named Odell Rhodes):

(pages 89-90, Rhodes was a heroin addict who agreed to join)

>Rhodes. . . was introduced to the Temple's version of social services: an appointment with a specialist to check his chronically inflamed leg; another spe­cialist to check his eyes; a trip to the dentist. He was given money to buy a special orthopedic shoe, new eyeglasses, and new clothes. "I couldn't believe it, anything you needed, all you had to do was ask for it. It wasn't just that you didn't have to pay, it was the difference between trying to get something out of welfare, standing in lines and filling out forms, and just asking for what you needed."

>At night, there were Temple meetings, but with Jones away in Cuba [touring it to report its achievements back to the Temple], the meetings were bland discussions of routine Temple busi­ness punctuated by an occasional testimony—someone thanking Jim Jones in absentia for that particular day's blessings. . .

>A few days later two counselors. . . called Rhodes into an office and went over a short list of Temple rules. When they came to the prohibition against alcohol, drugs, and tobacco, they slowed down and took special care to explain the reason behind the prohibition. Rhodes, who thought he had heard it all before, was surprised to learn that the People's Tem­ple's objection was on the grounds that mind-altering substances were means by which the ruling class controlled and exploited the poor. Rhodes simply nodded and filed the explanation away for fu­ture reference, but he was beginning to realize that this "church" he had joined was somehow different than other churches.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
5 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at

 No.10446

What is the best book to read on Jonestown that’s actually informative?


 No.10449

File: 6344e6514468d0e⋯.jpg (213.8 KB, 515x623, 515:623, Jim Jones holds two kittie….jpg)

>>10446

"A Thousand Lives" by Julia Scheeres is probably the best overall intro, and is an average length of 250 pages. You can find it in EPUB format here: http://b-ok.cc/book/1289547/bfc852

"The Road to Jonestown" by Jeff Guinn is the most recent. It's good, although early parts drag a bit due to Guinn's desire to reveal as much about Jones' childhood and the activities of his parents as possible. EPUB: http://b-ok.cc/book/2957275/d4d71f

"Raven" by Tim Reiterman was published only a few years after the mass murder-suicides but remains a must-read if you're interested in the subject (emphasis on the word "interested," because it's 600 pages.) EPUB: http://b-ok.cc/book/3413338/873d26

There are many other books on Jones, the Temple and Jonestown from ex-members, academics, and journalists, but the first three I gave should be sufficient if you're just curious to learn more. If you ever want info on a certain book though, feel free to ask since I've made it a goal to read as many on the subject as possible.

Post last edited at

 No.10705

Did Jones write anything?


 No.10706

File: c0105b73cbb3340⋯.jpg (44.46 KB, 768x503, 768:503, Jim Jones at rally.jpg)

>>10705

Not really. His main text is a pamphlet pointing out inconsistencies in the King James Bible, which isn't a particularly remarkable accomplishment.

On the other hand, Jones did have many of his sermons recorded (as well as many speeches made in Jonestown.) The one I always show people is in his California days where he answers the question "What is the greater antagonism, is it race, is it religion or is it class?": http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/nas/streaming/dept/scuastaf/collections/peoplestemple/MP3/Q929.MP3

While his answer is somewhat simplistic by Marxist standards, it isn't difficult to see how he could captivate an audience which knows nothing about socialism.


 No.10754

>>10706

Fantastic speech. Thank you for sharing.




Delete Post [ ]
[]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / cafechan / eris / g / tingles / vg / vichan / vietnam ]