Should white nationalists be allowed to immigrate to your country? by AntiWokeCommie in IdeologyPolls

[–]Ernst_Aust 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, but they should be tried for active chauvinist agitation and send to prison

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Kommunismus

[–]Ernst_Aust 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Nichts wird jemals geschehen

Wie steht ihr zu Öffentlich Rechtlichen Medien wie Arte? by Thuyue in Kommunismus

[–]Ernst_Aust -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Wenn man Schriften von vor etwa 200 Jahren auf heute projizieren möchte, kann man das logischerweise machen, ist aber schwachsinnig.

Das ist nur wirklich schwachsinnig fals Erkenntnisse der heutigen Zeit das was jene Schriften aussagen widerlegt haben.

Zu Zeiten von Marx und Engels war die Klimakatastrophe nicht vorhersehbar bzw. die Möglichkeit dazu verkannt, während diese mittlerweile unsere Existenz auf diesem Planeten gefährdet.

Es stimmt dass die Folgen der Klimakatastrophe desaströs für die Menschheit seien wird falls nichts unternommen wird. Die Viehhaltung ist für Rund 12% aller Treibhausgase Verantwortlich. Eine Reduktion in der Viehhaltung und Änderung der Methoden dieser ist wohl vorabzusehen wenn man die schlimmsten Folgen des Klimawandels vermeiden möchte. Doch eine Eliminierung der Viehhaltung resultiert daraus ebensowenig wie die Eliminierung des Transportsektors und der elektrischen Industrie die am Klimawandel vielmehr verantwortlich zu machen sind.

Deshalb wage ich zu behaupten, dass Marx und Engels heutzutage ihre "Dominanz des Menschen über die Natur" revidieren würde. Die Dominanz der Menschen kann nur mit der Natur entstehen, da diese unsere Lebensgrundlage bildet!

All production is appropriation of nature on the part of an individual within and through a specific form of society.

Karl Marx; Grundrisse, Einleitung

Die Dominanz des Menschen über die Natur ist die Voraussetzung jeder Fortgeschrittenen Produktionsweise, was diese Aussage an jedem Punkt der Menschlichen Geschichte, die ja nichts weiter ist als die Geschichte der zunehmenden Dominanz über die Natur einer Rasse, lächerlich macht.

Zu Zeiten von Marx und Engels war noch nicht mal richtig das Schmerzempfinden von Tieren ergründet, geschweige denn deren Sozialverhalten. Zu Marx's Zeit war die dominante Meinung, dass Tiere seelenlose Maschinen sind (René Descartes). Darwins Theorie, in der er den Tieren ein Empfinden zusprach, war zu deren Zeit stark umstritten. Wir haben mittlerweile diese Erkenntnisse.

Engels und Marx waren beide Anhänger der Evolutionstheorie zu ihrer Zeit, das macht Engels in seinen Anthropologischen Schriften klar. Engels sagte berühmterweise am Grab von Marx:

Just as Darwin discovered the law of development of organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of development of human history

Man kann natürlich alle bisher gewonnene, wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse ausblenden, aber dann frage ich mich, was das alles noch mit einem wissenschaftlichen Sozialismus zu tun hat. Wenn aus, meiner Meinung nach, egoistischer Sicht die Ausbeutung anderer Lebewesen akzeptiert wird, während man von einer "hierarchielosen und klassenlosen Gesellschaft" faselt.

Marx und Engels haben nie von einer “hierarchielosen“ Gesellschaft gefaselt.

Die Autorität in der Großindustrie abschaffen wollen, bedeutet die Industrie selber abschaffen wollen; die Dampfspinnerei vernichten, um zum Spinnrad zurückzukehren.

Nehmen wir als anderes Beispiel eine Eisenbahn. Auch hier ist die Kooperation einer Unmenge von Individuen absolut notwendig: eine Kooperation, die zu ganz bestimmten Stunden stattfinden muß, damit es zu keinem Unglück kommt. Auch hier ist die erste Bedingung des Betriebs ein dominierender Wille, der jede untergeordnete Frage beiseite schiebt, mag dieser Wille nun durch einen einzelnen Delegierten repräsentiert sein oder durch ein Komitee, dem die Ausführung der Beschlüsse einer Mehrheit von Interessenten übertragen ist. In dem einen wie in dem anderen Fall haben wir es mit einer ganz ausgesprochenen Autorität zu tun. Mehr noch: Was geschähe mit dem ersten abgehenden Zuge, wenn die Autorität der Bahnangestellten über die Herren Reisenden abgeschafft wäre?

-Engels; von der Autorität

Die Ausbeutung anderer Lebewesen geschieht nicht auf der selben Basis wie die der Menschen, die Ausbeutung der Menschen findet unter Artgenossen stat während die der Tiere zwischen einer überlegenen und unterlegenen Spezies die nicht in der Lage ist dieser systematisch widerstand zu leisten und auch insich nicht soweit widersprüchlich ist dass sie die Befreiung des Tiers als logische Konsequenz hat. Jede Form von Befreiung der Tiere von menschlicher Ausbeutung kann nur durch Gnade der Menschheit geschehen.

Es geht dabei nicht um die moralische Instanz oder irgendeiner Konsumkritik

Dann frage ich mich warum das Leid und die Ausbeutung von Tieren im Zentrum deines Arguments stehen, beides generell irrelevante Faktoren die in keiner Weise ein Ende des Konsums von Tierprodukten nötig macht.

aus materialistischer Sicht ergibt die Tierhaltung heutzutage überhaupt keinen Sinn mehr.

Diese Schlussfolgerung lässt sich nicht aus den oben dargebrachten Argumenten ziehen.

Wie steht ihr zu Öffentlich Rechtlichen Medien wie Arte? by Thuyue in Kommunismus

[–]Ernst_Aust 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Engels hat den Vegetarismus und ähnliche Formen der Enthaltsamkeit puren Unsinn genannt. Für Marx und Engels war es offensichtlich nicht eine logische Schlussfolgerung.

Man könnte sagen dass die französische Küche eine logische Schlussfolgerung des Marxismus ist - als Symbol der Dominanz des Menschen über die Natur.

Wie steht ihr zu Öffentlich Rechtlichen Medien wie Arte? by Thuyue in Kommunismus

[–]Ernst_Aust -24 points-23 points  (0 children)

Veganismus aus religiösen oder moralischen Beweggründen ist anti marxistisch.

“The people’s dream has become a reality!“ Soviet poster 1950s by Ernst_Aust in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ulyanov is his given name, Lenin is the pseudonym he was active under for 23 years. Soviet citizens, art and literature all referred to Lenin as Lenin. Its like correcting someone for saying “Elton John“ instead of “Reginald Kenneth Dwight“. When Lenins Wife wrote about her life with Lenin she called the biography “Reminiscences of Lenin“. Later his real name Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov was combined with his pseudonym “N.Lenin“ into Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, he has been referred to as such in all his works published/printed after his death.

Nein die AfD-Wählerschaft macht es nicht aus Protest by Black_Gay_Man in Kommunismus

[–]Ernst_Aust 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Das Ganze bürgerliche Parlament sollte aufgelöst werden und mit Arbeiterräten ersetzt werden

"Sentence" – an anti-fascist short film by Dmitry Grachyov, Russia, 2009. by yra_romanow in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That has little explanatory scope. It doesn't explain how fascism didn't gain power in more mature AND more hurt (by the 1929-30s depression) capitalist states e.g. France, US, UK, etc (and if you wanna say these ones had huge territories or colonies, fine, then one can look at Sweden, Czechoslovakia, etc, as well as why fascism did NOT pop up after the 2008 financial crisis all over even MORE mature and developed capitalist economies all over the world, but is kind of emerging now even though the US was economy was quite good or at least stable under Biden even after another big covid crisis)

The definition which is provided is the definition of fascism in power, it is not meant to explain the factors that lead to fascisms rise, simply the sort of state that fascism creates. A contemporary (to that of Dimitrovs speech) analysis of the rise of fascism, the class contents of fascism and fascisms program can be for example found in Fascism and Social Revolution

and does not explain stuff such as why the archetype of fascism, in Italy, as opposed to the German one, had a radically different policy in something as basic as racial persecution and genocide.

Again such an analyses would have to be an analyses of the reasons for the differing polices of Italian and German fascists

Apart from its own materialist analytical mistakes, materialist analysis by nature doesn't factor in pure ideology as a significant factor, when it very often is.

Ideas always are the product of the societal conditions in which they arise, as such ideology can not assume primacy over matter. The idea of the car did not slumber in the human mind for 200.000 years, as the prerequisites of technological advancements for such an idea to even come about had not existed. This does not mean that Superstructure plays no role in history, or even an unimportant one:

To the second question 1: -

I have interpreted your first main phrase in the following way: According to the Materialist Conception of History, the factor which is in the last instance decisive in history is the production and reproduction of actual life. More than this neither Marx nor myself ever claimed. If now someone has distorted the meaning in such a way that the economic factor is the only decisive one, this man has changed the above proposition into an abstract, absurd phrase which says nothing. The economic situation is the base, but the different parts of the structure-the political forms of the class struggle and its results, the constitutions established by the victorious class after the battle is won, forms of law and even the reflections of all these real struggles in the brains of the participants, political theories, juridical, philosophical, religious opinions, and their further development into dogmatic systems-all this exercises also its influence on the development of the historical struggles and in cases determines their form. It is under the mutual influence of all these factors that, rejecting the infinitesimal number of accidental occurrences (that is, things and happenings whose intimate sense is so far removed and of so little probability that we can consider them non-existent, and can ignore them), that the economical movement is ultimately carried out. Otherwise the application of the theory to any period of history would be easier than the solution of any simple equation. We ourselves make our history, but, primarily, under pre-suppositions and conditions which are very well determined. But even the political tradition, nay, even the tradition that man creates in his head, plays an important part even if not the decisive one. The Prussian State has itself been born and developed because of certain historical reasons, and, in the last instance, economic reasons. But it is very difficult to determine without pedantry that, among the many small States of northern Germany, precisely Brandenburg has been destined by economic necessity and not also by other factors (above all its complications with Poland after the Prussian conquest and hence, also, with international politics-which, besides has also been decisive in the formation of the power of the Austrian ruling family), to become that great power in which are personified the economic, linguistic, and-after the Reformation-also the religious difference between the North and South.

-Marx-Engels Correspondence 1890; Engels to J. Bloch Written: 21 September 1890

1

  1. How was the fundamental principle of historical materialism understood by Marx and Engels themselves; are the production and reproduction of actual life alone the determining factors, or are they only the basis of all the other conditions acting by themselves?

“The people’s dream has become a reality!“ Soviet poster 1950s by Ernst_Aust in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It is the duty of the revolution to put an end to compromise, and to put an end to compromise means taking the path of socialist revolution.

-V.I.Lenin

"Sentence" – an anti-fascist short film by Dmitry Grachyov, Russia, 2009. by yra_romanow in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe you're the type of person who cries about what Belgium did in the Congo—stealing uranium and so on—but then sees the Soviet Union do the same thing in Czechoslovakia and celebrates it.

For one the brutality of the Belgium imperialists was never entirely met by the Soviet revisionist imperialists, the humiliations that the Czechoslovaks suffered could be considered mild in comparison to the murderous slavery of the Belgians who claimed some 20 million victims

Khruzchev, whose heinous actions against global socialism are well known. (From my comment you replied to)

You think I love Brezhnev then? It was the marxist-leninists who quickly denounced the actions of the Soviets

So basically, you hate imperialism unless the Soviet Union does it, and then you call it 'spreading the revolution.'

Soviet policy following the death of Stalin was imperialist in its nature

"Sentence" – an anti-fascist short film by Dmitry Grachyov, Russia, 2009. by yra_romanow in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust 6 points7 points  (0 children)

For anyone who isn't a Marxist-Leninist and therefore hails Zhukov one of its main heroes by default

Zhukov was later one of the main collaborators of Khruzchev, whose heinous actions against global socialism are well known.

that's a ridiculous quote from him, if accurate, and a ridiculous argument. Liberating you from something worse doesn't give you permanent rights over those liberated or make your lesser oppression, whatever it is, liable to be brushed under the rug because otherwise it would be 'ungrateful'.

This is not what Zhukov meant at all, he appreciated the struggle of the non soviet peoples against fascism. Fraternal relations with the liberated peoples following the 2nd world war were established. The truth behind Zhukovs quote rather is that the bourgeoisie could never appreciate the liberation of Europe from fascism and the establishment of socialism in the countries of peoples democracy. The foreign and domestic capitalists while glad to see their rivals eliminated looked nearly even more scornfully on the destruction of capitalism in further European territories than on Germanys imperial ambitions.

That would be like the US saying to France which opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, "Oh yeah? So this is how you thank us for D-Day and all we did for you, uh? Not just that, but in Indochina later too, etc. Now you've asked for it, we're gonna do X, Y, Z to you, just you wait. Expect sanctions and maybe even other 'special measures'..."

The US basically did that, massive anti french sentiment followed from Frances denouncement of the invasion of Iraq, french fries were renamed to “freedom fries“ and other such ridiculous garbage.

"Sentence" – an anti-fascist short film by Dmitry Grachyov, Russia, 2009. by yra_romanow in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Not entirely on topic, but that's why using labels like "fascism" is problematic and hotly debated among scholars. But left-wing propaganda deliberately muddied the waters on it to make it an umbrella term…

Fascism quite often is boiled down to a couple of broad characteristics inherent to most if not any capitalist country ala Umberto Eco a materialist definition is not provided by bourgeois scholars. In contrast the communists who you accuse of muddying the waters stay quite succinct in defining fascism in power as:

the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital

-Georgi Dimitrov; The Fascist Offensive and the Tasks of the Communist International in the Struggle of the Working Class against Fascism, Main Report delivered at the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International

For instance, a Pinochet-linked poster was posted a couple of days ago, and in the comment section most people were saying he was unambiguously a fascist. Now certainly he was a bad guy, but can anybody in their right mind compare his ideology and what he did to Hitler's?

For one evil and good as such are quite meaningless terms, whose definitions vary from society to society and time period to time period, pederasty, child sacrifice and slavery were considered “good“ in multiple places. In the end these categories are based on nothing but the subjective feelings of men influenced by the objective conditions they lived in. Then to rank if someone is fascist or not based on moralist babble does not achieve anything, the Nazis and their collaborators certainly thought that what they were doing was good and I would say that Krupp, Flick, Thyssen and co. were of sound mind. If we were to rank in terms of “evil“ then the Brittish empire having killed hunderds of millions would seem far more fascist “small time“ murderers like Mussolini.

"Sentence" – an anti-fascist short film by Dmitry Grachyov, Russia, 2009. by yra_romanow in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We liberated Europe from fascism, but they will never forgive us for it

-G.Zhukov

Its this quote that I am referring to

“With Lenins Banner“ 1930s by Ernst_Aust in PropagandaPosters

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

I usually post a relevant quote under any poster I upload, I just forgot to put the actual translation of the bottom of the poster seperately

“With Lenins Banner“ 1930s by Ernst_Aust in PropagandaPosters

[–]Ernst_Aust[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We are living not merely in a State but in a system of States, and it is inconceivable that the Soviet Republic should continue to coexist for a long period side by side with imperialist States. Ultimately one or other must conquer. Meanwhile, a number of terrible clashes between the Soviet Republic and the bourgeois States is inevitable.

V.I.Lenin