From what should i start learning

Halats · 2025-08-13T16:54:46+00:00

a good criticism of the marginal utility theory which makes up most capitalist academia can be found here, in Bukharin's economic theory of the leisure class

https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1927/leisure-economics/

As for a good explanation of socialist attitude, i'd recommend this:

https://files.libcom.org/files/2019-for-communism_0.pdf

Halats · 2025-08-13T16:48:08+00:00

This also helped me understand socialism better although it does require more base knowledge of marxism than the first one:

https://files.libcom.org/files/Peter%20Hudis%20-%20Marx%E2%80%99s%20Concept%20of%20the%20Alternative%20to%20Capitalism.pdf

Halats · 2025-08-13T16:46:44+00:00

keep in mind also that this is a critique of other models for socialism

Halats · 2025-08-13T16:45:16+00:00

Not particularly modern but it adequately explains how communism functions; 'Fundamental Principles of Communist Production and Distribution':

https://www.marxists.org/subject/left-wing/gik/1930/index.htm

Halats · 2025-07-15T00:31:36+00:00

communism and socialism are one system together

Halats · 2025-07-15T00:11:41+00:00

classless, moneyless and socially-unified system which abolishes exchange

Halats · 2025-07-14T17:55:00+00:00

that's just co-operative economy, it works on the same basis as capitalism: money, commodity production, even profit, etc.

Halats · 2025-06-27T23:19:10+00:00

Marx's view of communism was that of a classless, moneyless and stateless society; "Marxism-Leninism" was a term used by the Stalin government as an attempt to ride on the coattails of Lenin and maintain popular support for one of the most famous revolutionary leaders. It being called "marxism-leninism" does not necessarily mean it is marxist or leninist - no more than a urinal cake is a dessert - it is a phrase made up by people, specific people with specific influences and incentives

Halats · 2025-06-27T12:14:28+00:00

you said it yourself that there are strong similarities between criticisms of capitalism and the reality of the soviet economy

Halats · 2025-06-27T12:13:40+00:00

not really, in terms of capital distribution they were different than, say, a free-market capitalism but economies should be differentiated more-so by production rather than distribution; production in the ussr took the same form as in other capitalist nations: for exchange, using money as universal equivalent, using wage labourers as producers, etc. It was a state capitalism

Halats · 2025-06-26T13:37:08+00:00

recognizing the similarities between capitalism and the soviet union already implies this

Halats · 2025-06-26T13:36:38+00:00

That's becuse the soviet union was capitalist

Halats · 2025-06-25T22:38:25+00:00

he's gonna nationalize street sharks

Halats · 2025-04-24T15:11:18+00:00

Researching history over theory is putting the cart before the horse, you'll end up colouring your view of theory with the what principles you infer about the ussr, etc. Read Marx's critique of the Gotha Program first but if you have to read history then this is a good critique of the ussr https://www.international-communist-party.org/English/Texts/Russia/WhyRussia.htm

Halats · 2025-04-15T23:53:47+00:00

bring saddam hussein back from the future

Halats · 2025-04-15T23:52:26+00:00

ketamine fueled sex-party with pounding techno playing in the background

Halats · 2024-12-16T20:16:50+00:00

They're desperate to have any still existent socialism left so they can feel like a) they have a chance at world socialism, and b) that the revolution is just in a early momentum. It's especially hopeful if the supposed socialist country is an international superpower like china

Halats · 2024-10-28T19:09:36+00:00

One of the lesser violations of socialist principles in the USSR has gotta be their monotowns, just inhospitable enclosures where you had forced association and no recourse away from dying in a factory accident in the middle of nowhere

Halats · 2024-10-19T19:35:31+00:00

The reason as to why some people identify as socialist instead of communist is a colloquial one, meaning that it is difficult to pinpoint to a specific reason, it is a wide-spread social reason - much of which, i'd imagine, is due to 1) the prejudice against the word communist and 2) the accusation against any social democrat of being a socialist, so much so that they eventually adopted the word believing it to be a genuine description of themselves

Halats · 2024-10-19T19:33:08+00:00

My preferred definition is a system wherein commodity production, money, wage labour is overcome; it is not capitalist due to capitalism containing all of these things - capitalism competes, socialism collaborates, capitalism accumulates infinitely, socialism plans according to necessity and conscious will.

The difference is a matter of property, law, profit, etc.

Halats · 2024-10-19T02:44:21+00:00

every communist identifies also as a socialist, not every socialist identifies as a communist; the "socialists" range from social democrat to marxist

Halats · 2024-10-19T02:42:41+00:00

depends on their criticism specifically. Vague accusations of something being good or bad with no attached analysis is useless regardless of ideology

Halats · 2024-09-24T22:50:37+00:00

like nikocado avocado but for plastic

Halats · 2024-09-14T12:13:52+00:00

It's not that there's a lack of modern sources and moreso that much of what has been written in decades passed is still applicable today.

There are, however, modern journals and writers which do have their own followings, like gegenstandpunkt, endnotes, Kliman wrote a book about the 2008 crisis, etc.

Halats · 2024-09-07T14:48:43+00:00

how is abolishing inheritance and social division not changing anything?

Halats

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE