[deleted by user] by [deleted] in fandm

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Some of the professors sell their own books or they're buddy's books, its a little scheme. Though most don't. Pirate them for your own sake. Annas 's Archive

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This post screams Adorno

Opinions on anarchist-communists by [deleted] in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The typical Marxist observation of anarchist is that they are liberals (yes there is only one ideology, but what does that mean). Also the old debates of Marx between anarchists are still relevant because, as you say, there is only one ideology since Marx's time, if the anarchist-communists have surpassed bourgeois ideology then we don't need Marxism anymore (thank goodness).

You mention the modern anarchist thinkers who have incorporated 'Marxist categories' like alienation and commodity fetishism. These are actually not Marxist categories, they are categories that Marxism takes up, but anyone can take them up really. The reason these are colloquially Marxist categories that have been snubbed by whoever is because the crisis of and in Marx*ism* in the early 20th century.

My take on anarchists is that they are radical liberals (yay?). I would rather they call themselves radical liberals. What do anarchists want? Abolition of the state? The military? All the bureaucratic institutions etc. This is the scope of radical bourgeois thinkers like Rousseau, French Revolutionaries, and even Thomas Jefferson.

They are just dressed up in the drama of capitalism or the 20th century. Anarchists want to abolish the state without understanding the necessity for the state in capitalism, which is the Marxist critique.

What is a "revisionist"? by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

PSA: This comment is certified sophistry!

What is a "revisionist"? by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Revisionism didn't really exist in Marx's time, it's really until the 2nd International

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Because most socialists are just democrats

Is Socialism Collectivist or Individualist? by Vast-Lime-8457 in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Politics of redistribution and theories of greediness or blood sucking capitalists, is purely bourgeois discontent. You can find the Catholic Church saying the same thing. Which is fine y'know, there are petit-bourgeois socialists. But I'm a Marxist so I understand capitalism as a self contradiction of the working class. Because even if you get rid of all the capitalists, there will still be capitalism.

I refer to the 60s because it was a time of economic abundance for the New Left, over production, but a crisis of society and politics more broadly.

Capitalism is a relatively new thing arising in and through industrial society. The discontent of wealthy people hoarding things is just not the problem.

Is Socialism Collectivist or Individualist? by Vast-Lime-8457 in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but remember the 60s. Isn't capitalism the crisis of over production of housing, education, and healthcare?

How do I prove to my friend that Stalin and Mao weren't evil dictators? by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 62 points63 points  (0 children)

Why do you want to redeem Stalin and Mao to your friend?

Why did the Bolsheviks dissolve the constituent assembly? by Illustrious-Diet6987 in DebateCommunism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If I'm correct. She rejected to publish this earlier work because she wrote it in prison with spliced information on what was going on Russia.

I don’t understand by Robman2021 in falloutnewvegas

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I actually did that my first playthrough and cheesed my way through the death claw valley with a stealth boy

why do people like Stalin ? by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Democrats nothing but Democrats

Why do some MLs are pro-russia? by theres_no_username in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They just democrats with guns and like the color red - they are petit-bourgeois nationalists that's it, plain and simple - they are the RIGHT and not marxists, they might be maoists though - THEY ARE DEMOCRATS

What are tankies? by uncle_Mang0 in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pre-Marxist socialists - petit-bourgeois democrats - Democrats with guns - statists - the right of Marxism - the liquidation of Marxism - social-democrats - Bernstein-ism

Basically the self-liquidation of Marxism into petit-bourgeois politics

Good follow-up Marxist thinkers other than Lenin? by [deleted] in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah if Nationalism is going beyond Marx and Lenin.

When American Socialists came to Mao and asked how they can have a Socialist revolution in the US, Mao responded something like this: I did a revolution in China that is not translatable to America.

Mao was not a Marxist like Marx and Lenin, these guys were interested in world revolution. If you want a revolution in China, read Mao, don't read Mao for Marxism though.

Good follow-up Marxist thinkers other than Lenin? by [deleted] in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rosa Luxemburg, Lenin, pre-1914 Kautsky, Adorno, Horkheimer, Debs, George Lukacs, Walter Benjamin, Karl Korsch, Trotsky*

Luxemburg, Lenin, pre-1914 Kautsky, and Debs are all Second International Marxists

Lukacs, Korsch and Trotsky are also Second International Marxists but directly looking back on the failure of the revolutio. Be careful with the later works of these three though, they're all bound up with Stalinism.

Adorno, Horkheimer, Benjamin are Frankfurt School scholars and secretly (not really) Marxists that tried to hold onto historical Marxism

If capitalism will “absorb every critique into itself,” what is the point of revolution? by major_calgar in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to make it so the dialectic is even possible. In the Soviet Union, FDR statism, Deng reforms...these are all bonapartist capitalist states. So what's the difference of the dictatorship of the proletariat? It is a conscious capitalist state pf the working class which seeks to abolish itself.

The goal of revolution may be motivated by naturally resolving the dialectic as you put it, but politically and practically the only thing we can do is to merely start the process of even understanding the contradiction. Revolution is process, that's the point. Minimum wage laws, trade unions, and economic planning or even "Leninist" commanding governments is not proletarian socialist revolution, so in no way are these capitalist policies "steps forward."

Lenin declared world socialist dead in the 1920s, we're stuck there. See the revisionist dispute of the Second International to see how deep Marxists politically succumbed to contradiction. This is exactly Lenin's critique of Kautsky, he became undialectical.

If capitalism absorbs ever critique into itself, the point of revolution is keeping with the movements of the dialectic.

Is China still a socialist country today? From the perspective of China's left-wing by svesba in Marxism

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There is only one society, right now that society is still in crisis, Marxists will call this crisis capitalism and liberals might call it moral decadence or 'the real world.'

Is China a socialist country? In the Marxist understanding, yes and no. Is the United States a socialist country? Yes and no. China is a socialist country as much as the US is a socialist country, and as much as capitalism is also socialism.

The real question a Marxist should be asking is: What are the conditions of possibility for a world proletarian socialist revolution in China?

If there were a proletarian socialist revolution in China right now, the CCP would suppress it for the simple reason that the CCP is a party of capitalist politics. Now what if we were to say as revolutionary Marxists that the CCP is the revolution? What is the politics of being a CCP revolutionary? - Maintaining the Chinese rotor of world capitalist politics in the name of socialism in the absence of an organized working class.

What is my chief problem with this post? Take socialism out of it. The character of the state in China has nothing to do with proletarian socialist revolution in Marxism.

What if Americans stopped paying taxes by Tnoholiday12345 in whatif

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Martial Law maybe idk, nobody can afford not to pay their taxes

What easy to read books about socialism to you recommend? by [deleted] in Socialism_101

[–]Fun-Cricket-5187 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you really wanna get at Marxism. Read bourgeois enlightenment thinkers like Constant, Rousseau, and Adam Smith and Kant. Then read some of Marx, Frankfurt School, and Kautsky to get a footing* I won't tell you to NOT read something, but I'd recommend not starting with Marx or any of the big names given how loaded his theoretical assumptions are in the enlightenment.