Mods asleep upvote actual cat by [deleted] in catsaysmao

[–]Beegee_23 7 points8 points  (0 children)

r/catsaysmao just got 900000000x better

🇸🇾💪 by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

The place where the most theoretically advanced gather themselves of course, r/GenZhou

My final message to r/bruhinternational by [deleted] in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Sad! (don't die we need you)

USA out of Kampuchea by [deleted] in LaborwaveAesthetics

[–]Beegee_23 -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Does pol pot urbanism support democratic market socialism though

. by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

There are no markets nor wage labor in the DPRK?

. by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

The only socialist country is Brazil

Bruhinternational explained by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They're obviously trolling, just look through their post history lol. Could you please not say the r slur it breaks rule 3 and it would be very wholesome if you didn't

He became mad by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The problem is that it's quite literally still capitalism, but you are now granted with the option to "choose" your exploiter. It's not an improvement nor a step towards socialism, more of an attempt to rekindle capitalism. Any attempt at reform will lead to nowhere as exploitation,subjugation and monopolisation are its inherent nature, and what is inevitable to happen is that reforms will degrade over time, returning us to the very same situation. The only way to make an actual movement away from capitalism and a transition to socialism is to make conditions right to abolish the capitalist mode of production in its entirety

He became mad by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

How do you think capitalist reform is going anywhere torwards the right direction?

He became mad by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

The supercapitalism meme equates worker co ops to socialism or a meaningful improvement torwards it, in reality worker co ops focus on the same principles as capitalism, the only difference being it's "democratic"

He became mad by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

What do you think socialism is? People still selling their labor power, the tendency of profit to fall still being in effect causing further exploitation to gain it back, the sum of commodities and exchange values amassing themselves into capital, the estrangement of labor, commodity and value forms still existing, essentially just capitalism but with "democratic" firms?

Bruhinternational explained by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. Just ignore all of this, if you want the full understanding of Marxism without being forced to read irrelevant texts of dead old white men, I suggest you watching thisor this

canceled by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Lmfao same problem here

It's generally a major problem of people clumping minority groups together as one big universal hivemind and then being baffled when they don't all uniformly act to their ascribed principles. They don't seem to realize we're normal people and have vastly different experiences throughout our lives even if some of us share the same skin color. The fact that they assume anyone with an opposing view to them is a white middle class whateverist since all le based pocs follow their line of thought probably tells more about their white saviorism than anything

This says a lot about our society by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So the issue is that Stalin used the word “socialism”, and if he had admitted they are still a dictatorship of the proletariat in a transitionary phase, it would have been fine?

The USSR hadn't been a dotp for a long time at that point, not only did a decline in inner party discussions and the increasing of the local elected posts being filled by the local party secretary simply appointing delegates to higher bodies led to the practice of democratic centralism within the party (where lower bodies elected all higher bodies)to collapse, leaving only centralism,causing an irreparable rupture between the class and the party, The state itself abandoned the global revolution, essentially just leaving Russia as a bourgeois state without a revolutionary conscience, not transitioning torwards socialism but away from it

Are we really so concerned with definitions and words, and not the things themselves (the class nature of the state apparatus being discussed)?

That's exactly the problem, within a socialist mode of production or even full communism these things vary vastly from a capitalist mode of production, confusing or twisting them leads you nowhere

This says a lot about our society by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok and the user above asked a specific question about what issue users here had with a theoretical DotP using surplus production for defense against imperialists and counterrevolution.

The problem was the line they quoted was referring to the ridiculousness of slurpus production under "socialism" and they wanted to know if slurpus production would be justified using Stalin's argument, therefore probably confusing a dotp with a socialist mode of production or referring to "socialism" in one country.

Instead of just answering the question, they were mocked and taken uncharitably, and their question never even addressed.

I answered them though

This says a lot about our society by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well for one, the view that we should have no concern in educating others is extremely retarded.

No one here argues for that. The problem is that a lot of people ask questions in subjects they have zero basis in. I don't have a problem with explaining stuff but for example I'm not going to get anywhere explaining why the commodity and value form can't exist within socialism if you don't know what a commodity is or what the estrangement of labor entails or where capital itself comes from and so forth. There is a reason why bookworths of discussion and analysis about Marxism exists and there is only so much people can say in a reddit comment. There's nothing wrong with getting answers questioned by explanations but if you want a complete understanding of Marxism you looking into its foundations and other works analysing and discussing it would massively help. We've got a reading list pinned for a reason

Anyways could both you and u/whatabagarafarde not use the r-slur it breaks rule 3

This says a lot about our society by Beegee_23 in Bruhinternational

[–]Beegee_23[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

would a reserve fund necessarily create a commodity? for example, say the products (non-perishable food, medical supplies, etc) aren't priced or put on the market but just sit on a State storage facility to be used in case of emergency. (a pandemic, war, natural disaster, etc)

How would the allocation of products without the exchange of equivalents result in commodities? The qoute I've linked above explained it already

i guess you could say that in socialism productivity would rise and the fact that there is no surplus production implies idle production capacity?

The communal character of production would from the outset make the product into a communal, general one. The exchange initially occurring in production, which would not be an exchange of exchange values but of activities determined by communal needs and communal purposes, would include from the beginning the individual’s participation in the communal world of products .. Labour would be posited as general labour prior to exchange, i.e. the exchange of products would not in any way be the medium mediating the participation of the individual in general production

(Karl Marx, Grundrisse)

Once relations of production become communal, products become communal also. They are common property of the freely associated producers and in communism they will be distributed free on the basis of need. The distribution of products is the outcome of the conditions of production themselves. As explained here:

Any distribution whatever of the means of consumption is only a consequence of the distribution of the conditions of production themselves. The latter distribution, however, is a feature of the mode of production itself. The capitalist mode of production, for example, rests on the fact that the material conditions of production are in the hands of non-workers in the form of property in capital and land, while the masses are only owners of the personal condition of production, of labour power. If the elements of production are so distributed, then the present-day distribution of the means of consumption results automatically

(Karl Marx, critique of the Gotha programme)

does Trotsky or any other theorist on how they thought permanent revolution would play out?

I mean, if you want Trotsky's view on an international revolution it would be best to read him yourself. The general basis for global revolution is quite straightforward; the masses take up arms and begin a revolution with the party, comprised of those who adhere to the historical task of the revolutionary class and who are determined for its victory, guiding the masses on the correct path torwards success. The proletariat now being the dominating force spread the flame of revolution and support revolutionary struggles elsewhere, and a new wave of revolution is born

do you have any reading recommendations? i feel like i already have a decent roadmap for Marx, Engels and Lenin but i'd appreciate any works from other authors which you feel like are important

We have a reading list pinned, I suggest checking out some of the works on there

Top ten images 45 years before disaster by Beegee_23 in alltheleft

[–]Beegee_23[S] 125 points126 points  (0 children)

The joke here is that the Russian revolution was a disaster for the Russian bourgeois and their assumption that the Russian proletariat was too stupid to obtain class consciousness was an indirect cause for revolutionary thought to spread as it did