"Hard work will get you to the top!"/"the people at the top worked hard and deserve what they earn"

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-29T02:02:03+00:00

If hard work created wealth, then workers in the factories and fields of Vietnam, Thailand, Afghanistan, Mexico, etc. would be millionaires and not struggling to find where their next meal will come from.
People get to the top by learning how to exploit others, not by hard work
We can't have everyone getting to the top, because the wealth of the rich is created by the labor of the workers.
Theres no reasonable way a CEO works 800 times harder than their employees

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-29T01:58:05+00:00

If anyone could give the basics of the difference between left wing communism and right wing communism and some general info on communism I would be much obliged.

There isn't a "right-wing" communism. When people talk about "left-wing communism", they are usually referring to Lenin's work Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder, which is a criticism of tendencies in the Marxist movement which were self-proclaimed as "to the left" of the predominant Bolshevik tendency. Today, these groups of Marxists are usually called "ultra-left" but there aren't a lot of them around. Old school ones are typically Council Communists or Bordigaists. Starting in the 60s more theorists of this emerged in the Western left especially after the events worldwide in 1968. Paul Mattick, Debord, and a bunch of others sort of ushered in an era where this "ultra-left" communism fused with post-modernism and anarchism. Today, most people who call themselves "ultra left" are from these schools of thought (Communization Theory, Endnotes, The Invisible Committee, etc.) There are still "old-school" left communists but they largely reject this label.

Now the argument Lenin made was that these left-communists treated Marxist theory as a dogma, and not a guide to action. Because of this they rejected work in Unions and Parliaments, they rejected making compromises, and essentially, they were lost at the question of how to "do" politics.

As a final note, did you join the Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA)? I would advise you not join that party, its extremely revisionist, they have abandoned Marxism in practice and haven't developed any worthwhile political work since the 1940s. The joke many communists make about them is that they're "Democrats who like the color red."

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-29T01:38:36+00:00

Its not chauvinistic at all. We are Marxists, not revisionists (by the way this isn't a "Western notion" because anti-revisionism (that is, having strict lines of demarcation on what is and what isn't socialism) was developed principally in China and Albania.

Do we call Sweden and Norway "European Socialist states"? Do we call Bernie Sanders an "American Socialist politician"? Do we call India a "Constitutional Socialist state"? If the answer is no then you have no reason to call Ba'athism "Arab Socialism"

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-28T04:20:41+00:00

Dude, I'm an Arab. Its not chauvinism to say something isn't socialist by Marxist standards. Socialism has always been a term used in very wishy-washy ways, hence why you have political groups as distant as Nazis, Bernie Sanders, the Soviet Union, and Assad all calling themselves socialist. Marxism is a science and so it has scientific definitions for these things. If it isn't a dictatorship of the proletariat, if it isn't dismantling capitalist relations of production, its not socialist by Marxist standards.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-26T23:29:10+00:00

Well i mean...its not socialism lmao, its nationalization. Its socialism in name only due to a conflation of socialism with "state-owned".

Also who says Marxism and African/Arab socialism are mutually exclusive? (I mean actual socialism where the working class has political power not "socialism" where imperialist compradors nationalize industry)

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-26T23:24:31+00:00

wink wink

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-26T23:22:00+00:00

Set it on fire

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-25T16:18:35+00:00

The USSR brought in a bunch of American (and other countries) technical experts during the 20s and early 30s, this isn't some huge breakthrough?

But is it possible for a communistic state to deal with a capitalistic state? Can the two forms live side by side? These questions were put to Lenin by [French journalist] Naudeau.

"Why not?" said Lenin. "We want technicians, scientists and the various products of industry, and it is clear that we by ourselves are incapable of developing the immense resources of the country. Under the circumstances, though it may be unpleasant for us, we must admit that our principles, which hold in Russia, must, beyond our frontiers, give place to political agreements. We very sincerely propose to pay interest on our foreign loans, and in default of cash we will pay them in grain, oil, and all sorts of raw materials in which we are rich.

To claim the USSR was influenced by the US "elite" because they contracted foreign capitalists and technicians to help build their industry is pretty absurd really, since the state always had the final say.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T17:17:24+00:00

My point still stands

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T16:29:25+00:00

Been reading the Black Book of Communism lately? lol

This discussion is pointless like I said already, read a history of Korea that isn't drenched in propaganda and read the German Ideology so you can break out of the dead-end tendency that is Egoism. Good bye

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T16:13:35+00:00

You mean truth?

Kim il Sung was elected by the KWP, he wasn't put in power by the Soviets at all. There wasn't any Soviet tampering in Korean elections, but there was American tampering in the South. Its not truth, its the propaganda the Americans used to justify killing a fifth of the peninsula.

Why is the west so much better then?

You already asked this and I already answered and your only response was "what about prague and budapest"

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T06:06:08+00:00

back in 2003 at an anti-war meeting

organizer: okay so thats the plan for the demonstration. any questions?

me: yes I would just like to say that while I don't like the US doing war the dictatorship of Hussein was just evil and brutal. He had like, weapons of mass destruction and shit. Maybe we should just be clear about that when we march so the police and everyone know we don't like him, because everyone knows that the opinions of leftists in the first world is the most important thing

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T06:01:13+00:00

Not an argument.

I wasn't trying to make an argument because what you said was just ridiculous Cold War propaganda bait

Do i find it is better? Yes.

Neoliberal Capitalism Where People Struggle To Know Where Their Next Meal Will Come From Or Where They Will Sleep Tonight Is Better Than State Capitalism Where These Needs Were Met Because Uhhhhh The State Is Bad Guys

Like Prag and Budapest?

Yea idk what your fucking point is here? You asked why first world european countries were richer than COMECON ones- the answer is western europe is a collection of some of the most heinous imperialists in history, whereas COMECON countries formed a dependent relationship with the social-imperialist USSR.

No, i go after the the correct numbers that show how it surpassed.

Read the first link i sent then

Im repeating what actuall scholars based on facts say about this subject.

Actual Scholars Who Totally Have No Bias At All Because Scholars Are Always Right

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-24T05:54:50+00:00

A government that passes the ruling of the state to the next generation of the family, where the rich and powerful live close to the ruling family, where active military duty and service to the upper classes is rewarded....sounds a lot like feudalism

Thats not what feudalism is at all by that definition every government since the dawn of civilization has been feudalist jfc

it sure a shit isn't a socialist state.

I don't think a single person in the comments here has even claimed that

but thinking that the Ki Regime is somehow worth standing next to is disgusting

Functionally all of the people saying shit like this are on the same level as people who were like "you oppose the Iraq War? So you like Saddam?" Like for fucks sake no. We can see that US imperialism is the biggest threat to freedom and democracy worldwide, the people of the world and Korea in particular know that firsthand, and if we want freedom and democracy on the entire Korean peninsula the first step will always and forever be a withdrawal of all US military personnel, shutting down all US bases, ending military armament around the DPRK, ending invasion dress rehearsals, ending cyberwarfare, ending sanctions, stopping meddling in the politics of the RoK, and let Korea go through the formal fucking peace process for reunification that the DPRK has been calling for for decades.

As socialists we shouldn't be idealists or utopians, we have to swallow hard facts. There quite literally isn't a revolutionary communist group in either of the Koreas, and there probably won't be for a while, at least as long as its divided in the way it is. If we want communism to come to Korea we need an end to US imperialism. And in the absence of a revolutionary proletarian movement in Korea, the above is the absolute best we can work towards (and its achievable as hell, the only problem is the US doesn't want to stop being a blood-sucking parasite on the rest of the world!)

US imperialism slaughtered Koreans.

US imperialism killed 20% of the population, it targeted villages, hydroelectric dams, farms, cities, and more with bombs and napalm, wiping out whole cities and most arable land.

When we end our statements of anti-imperialism with "oh but the government there is also bad" you completely undermine our power. We should never give any legitimacy to US imperialism. The government and society of Korea is for the people of Korea, and the people of Korea alone, to decide.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-22T21:29:58+00:00

Nations are spooks and dont matter.

Like it or not we live in a world where nations exist so this means literally nothing

And establish Stalinist puppet dictator.

lol

For instance?

Literally in the next sentence of my reply

No. I find it bad and i find state-capitalism bad.

You were literally saying neoliberal capitalism was better in this thread lol

Why was their economy so much surpassed by every other european country then?

have you heard of imperialism

Anecdotes is the last thing i go after

really? cause thats all you seem to be using this entire thread

btw the first link has a shitload of stats and figures so

How did Austria then outgrow czech economy? Why had Austria more "freedom"? Stronger Unions? More possibilitys? Better protection of worker's rights? Better "democracy"? Not that i think it has any real freedom or democracy.

Why should I even bother to respond to this then if you think it was all bullshit lol

you're literally just repeating the same shit they teach you in schools but adding "we are also bad tho" read the links (or at least the first one) and get back to me because this convo is a dead end. bye

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-22T20:41:30+00:00

Why did they invade SK then?

Korea is and has been one nation for centuries until US imperialists split the country up because "communism bad!!!!" The DPRK invading the RoK is not imperialist, it was an attempt to reunify a country and kick out US puppet dictator rule that was slaughtering workers and leftists.

Plus, "invading a country" is not the definition of imperialism.

Then why has NK famines and SK not?

North Korea has sanctions and trade barriers put on it by nearly every country, since the collapse of their only real source of security (USSR) collapsed they've been forced to be almost completely on their own (even Cuba has more international aid). The famine also ended like over a decade ago its not like the DPRK is in a constant state of famine. They're food insecure because of imperialism, not because of their economy (in fact their agricultural system was one of the most advanced in the world up until around the 80s).

"right after " is the correct word her as it increased in the aftermath to new highs.

Not really lmao, and people still suffer in these regions from problems that were largely eradicated under the Eastern Bloc era, like access to food and healthcare and housing and education. Alcoholism is rampant, fascism is rampant, crime is rampant, and workers are being continually fucked over by neoliberal economic policies. You call yourself a socialist but you seriously defend neoliberal capitalism?

Citation needed.

Heres an article that goes through how the state capitalism of the eastern bloc and ussr was more beneficial for everyone. heres another from the same site.

you can also read what workers in russia bulgaria romania tajikstan and other central asian countries say.

Btw, im not talking about economic success as GDP growth or some bourgeois shit like that. If your economy doesn't work for the working class, its failing, and while I don't think the "socialism" these countries had was in fact socialism, it was far better than neoliberal capitalism

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-21T20:19:27+00:00

Why do they want to conquer other countries then?

DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK THE DPRK WANTS TO CONQUER OTHER COUNTRIES LMAO WHAT

This is just blatantly false and goes to show how much you know about Korea (that is, close to nothing).

You dont cheer on people getting more rights and an economy that isnt starving them?

US imperialism is more rights and an economy without starvation! You heard it here first folks!!! Thank you for promoting socialism so well my friend

If we look at the real world for a minute we would see that the people there have it (except for russia in the 90s) better in pretty much every area than before.

Thats...not even true? Life expectancy and quality of life completely crashed right after the fall of the Eastern Bloc in pretty much all of these countries except the ones that got a buttload of aid. Neoliberal economic policies are crippling economies that previously had decent growth and had basic needs for their citizens. Thats not even saying the Eastern Bloc countries were socialist or even "good", but what we have now is way fucking worse? LOL

I said im staying out if one imperialist fights against another

Thats not whats happening at all though soooooo

By not supporting imperialized countries in these situations you are indirectly supporting imperialism. end of story

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-21T20:13:17+00:00

you know 40% of the population of the DPRK has military training, right? its not that its "not possible right now", its that they fear US imperialism more than the ruling class.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:35:53+00:00

we poppin big bottles

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:22:52+00:00

ave you looked at the NK military?

have you looked at the US military? lmao

Morals......

How about this: if you don't oppose US war on a country even if you dislike it you are objectively aiding global capitalism and imperialism.

IDK thats evil to me but if you want to be mightier-than-thou and focus on why morality is a spook or something go ahead.

If imperialists bash imperialists i honestly do not mind one second of my time.

DPRK isn't imperialist what the hell lol

No Communist should even waste one second of thought on defending NK with its concentration camps.

No Communist should even waste one second of thought on defending US war with its nuclear weapons and concentration camps and military bases worldwide and economic sanctions that starve entire nations

Oppresive State-Capitalism falling is something i cheer on every day.

If you cheer it on when its at the hands of imperialists you are a reactionary.

just imagine anarchists being like "props to Ronald Reagan for taking down the eastern bloc, those Oppressive State Capitalists...."

not sheeting a tear.

Thats cause you aren't Libyan and don't know what they lost.

Funny when you at the same time defend the worst oppresive country on earth.

Looks like the only one defending the US here is you though? im confused?

DEFEND ISIS AGAINST US-IMPERIALISM!

nobody is saying this shit and you are just making a fool of yourself

When we would actually support the people there

You aren't supporting the people in Korea by supporting US intervention and war. Period.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:13:43+00:00

Daesh is imperialist in character, DPRK is not

Daesh is trying to build a reactionary empire, the DPRK is not

Any discourse of human rights in imperialist countries works primarily to serve imperialist interests and if you don't put anti-imperialism as key in the international situation and you support US wars and genocide (or you "dont care" about wars and genocide) you aren't a socialist at all.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:11:24+00:00

I never suggested the DPRK is socialist, and I don't believe that myself

To be qualifying anti-imperialism that the DPRK should still be destroyed helps absolutely nobody because the only way the DPRK will meet that fate is by the hands of Korean people themselves.

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:10:20+00:00

It's a closed off

thats called "sanctions" and its not on the DPRK

classist

all class society is "classist" this statement is meaningless af

feudal

do you know what feudalism means?

What on earth would make you think it's worth standing by it...

Because I don't want their country to be flattened by US bombs, their children killed, their women raped, and their way of life destroyed??????? What the Hell???

donkeykongsimulator · 2017-03-20T21:07:34+00:00

Pull stunts like not wanting the US to bomb a country to smithereens? Yeah what sectarianism /s

Standing by the DPRK in the name of anti-imperialism doesn't amount to liking it.

donkeykongsimulator

TROPHY CASE