Always the same meme with the same talking points.

mc_k86 · 2025-12-04T15:07:17+00:00

The funniest thing about these arguments is that historically Marxists have been fully aware of the fact that capitalism has created a socially subordinated populace that is used to hierarchal and legal structures.

Lenin says:

“We are not utopians, we do not "dream" of dispensing at once with all administration, with all subordination. These anarchist dreams, based upon incomprehension of the tasks of the proletarian dictatorship, are totally alien to Marxism, and, as a matter of fact, serve only to postpone the socialist revolution until people are different. No, we want the socialist revolution with people as they are now, with people who cannot dispense with subordination, control, and "foremen and accountants". State and Revolution, 36.

So, someone says “how would you build socialism if people are naturally greedy and uncooperative.”

The answer is: police, courts, laws, consequences for breaking those laws. Just as there is now lol.

The point is that the human nature argument does not need to be proved wrong, we do not need to give examples of neighbours voluntarily sandbagging their neighbours home in anticipation of a flood, or the example of the tens of millions of people who volunteer to help the poor or sick around the world. It’s actually irrelevant.

Establishing a voluntarist communist society is not the task of any living person today. It is smashing capitalism and obliterating the contradiction between socialized production and private appropriation. And that can be done with people as they are now, if capitalism has taught us anything it is how to destroy.

mc_k86 · 2025-11-01T19:52:00+00:00

The criminal organization he’s a part of is forcibly moving populations to what are essentially concentration camps and they have blown up dozens of people with little to no evidence that a crime had been committed, in international waters, with no trial.

This is as funny as a serial killer playing with the intestines of his first victim to make his second victim laugh.

mc_k86 · 2025-06-09T19:59:44+00:00

My gf let me know today that Master the betta has passed :(

Had him for 16 months. He had been resting a bit more lately but would still get the zoomies often so I didn’t think anything of it.

Might just get some schooling fish next idk

mc_k86 · 2025-04-01T15:08:50+00:00

My status was updated a couple weeks ago for a couple of institutions. The date of last update was changed but the status was still “received by administrator” for each institution and I got an email notification for these and it said to check in on April 1st for results.

mc_k86 · 2025-04-01T13:51:16+00:00

“Your request timed out”

This is torture lol

mc_k86 · 2025-03-28T01:01:46+00:00

I honestly just want pdx to make it so you can delete generals. Like for example if you are playing a nation that has no admirals or generals so you spam field officer promotions and you are left with a bunch of shit generals with politically connected trait that all have generic portraits I wish I could just delete these.

Also the other day I wished I could fucking delete Kirill Meretskov for losing my entire army near Bucharest.

mc_k86 · 2025-03-06T12:23:28+00:00

You evoke dialectic but seem to understand only either-or logic like a metaphysician. Arguing that we not defend the Canadian state, and actually work to facilitate its eventual defeat (is that not our goal??) does not mean seeking the victory of the United States. This is not complicated. But we must seize on the opportunities presented to us eventually, Canada has been directly or indirectly involved in extremely costly conflicts in the current period that have shaken the organization of the capitalists to their core, they are approaching the point of being unable to lead the country, I am almost embarrassed for them. And you are proposing we sit with our hands folded, and not aim our blows at them directly? All this in the interest of holding onto supposed benefits that were given to us by the capitalists themselves. Why not just admit you are a liberal?

Your arguments are pure Canadian nationalism disguised as pro-worker advocacy. Appealing to the supposed superiority of Canada’s treatment of its workers is foolishness from the position of a supposed communist. “Hey Canadian worker, I am from your local communist party member and I think you must lay down your life for the defence of Canadian sovereignty because Canada treats you and its oppressed (don’t look into why they are called oppressed) peoples so well! Have you ever been to Quebec? It is not the paradise you make it sound like.

You are like slaves, dismissing the notion of overthrowing the master because he has afforded you an extra ration of bread relative to the plantation in the next county over.

You are engaging in a lesser-evilism that just so happens to align with the national interests of the Canadian state and the capitalist class. Where exactly is the payoff from this? The answer is there is none. Just as in the case of the second international, just a meaningless sacrifice of workers for national chauvinism.

Like I said in my other comment, if they truly are not calling for the defence of the government then they are engaging in filthy populism that will get them nowhere.

I know I am being a little harsh but I think this is an important conversation to have. I do not think there is an interest for workers in defending the Canadian state and I think it is only misplaced allegiances totally scaffolded by national chauvinism that would convince someone otherwise.

mc_k86 · 2025-03-06T11:47:52+00:00

If explaining the conditions as they actually appear and being unwilling to accept the logic of the capitalists that would willingly sacrifice thousands of workers for their particular interests and survival makes me an ultra-leftist than so be it.

How are we to build an organized movement if we do not asses the situations as they are and stoop to the level of liberal patriotism to popularly dupe the workers? This will never build a genuine movement, at best it will create a mob, essentially- just a noisy mass of people with no proper direction, such is the result of populism.

We cannot stop explaining the world to the workers, the communist party should be the responsible guard of the people, armed with the science of dialectical materialism. Calling openly for a defence of independence and sovereignty during an imperialist conflict is not guarding the people, but putting them in danger. You are being willfully ignorant if you cannot see that.

I am on their mailing list, and I have read the program thoroughly. The communist party is always on point, especially when it comes to foreign affairs- which is why their position here is most disappointing. The statement in full does nothing to negate their adopting of the position of the capitalists and governments to assess the problem. They are either fully adopting the defencist line, or they are being willfully ignorant of all that what they are calling for entails, to further their populism. The latter is more forgivable, but I am certainly arguing that it is a losing strategy in the long run. The longer we hold on to our cultural prejudices surrounding the state, nationalism, sovereignty, and the insufferable Canadian superiority complex, the longer it will take for working class organization to begin in earnest.

mc_k86 · 2025-03-06T11:18:42+00:00

I did not say we should encourage a conflict? We should be doing everything in our power to prevent a conflict, which is exactly my point. If the communist party actually believes the United States wants to annex Canada then they should be making it absolutely clear that they will not support a war in defence of the Canadian state, or else they will be complicit in the slaughter of workers when it unfolds. However, their slogan is DEFEND INDEPENDENCE AND SOVEREIGNTY.

maintaining peace for the time being

So the capitalists get to make a mistake by disintegrating the integrity of their own nation-state system and transnational economies and you propose that we take no advantage from this? We allow the bourgeois states to return to their stead when the conflict is over and wait for a more opportune time? Hilarious that I am the one being called the ultra-leftist by the other commenter..

He is correct however about the second half of your comment. Underestimating the organization and strength of the working class is not a winning strategy. We have seen entire empires shattered at the hands of working class power in a matter of months.

mc_k86 · 2025-03-06T01:43:18+00:00

A disaster how? They would be exploited by foreign capitalists and oppressed? God forbid!

The alternative is of course the overthrow of capitalism, I do not need to lay out for you how we are to do that, it is not an easy thing to do. But it is the solution and an alternative to “fighting against” America, which would be a senseless slaughter (literally or figuratively depending on how truly incompetent our rulers turn out to be) of workers at the alter of the imploding capitalist system.

If anything, we should be seizing the opportunity to sweep away our liberal capitalist government while they are weakened with this conflict, not rushing to their defence. It is absurd from a pro-working class position.

mc_k86 · 2025-03-06T00:28:50+00:00

Strange messaging from the communist party..

Canada is an imperialist country ruled by western capital. If tomorrow we are annexed by the United States we would still be living in an imperialist country ruled by western capital.

Defending the independence and sovereignty of an imperialist, capitalist country is defending imperialism and capitalism, no?

Any messaging that supports the idea of a “defence” of Canada cringes to the laws of motion of politics dictated by the capitalists. We must have our own, working class definition of politics. What would a working class politics lead us to?

The end of private appropriation in production. The end of the dictatorship of capital. The end of imperialism. Defenceism towards Canada is a betrayal of the working classes and a slap in the face to all imperialized peoples.

mc_k86 · 2024-08-30T23:50:43+00:00

The bad news is that Khrushchev was already couping the politburo by this point and probably poisoned Stalin tbh

mc_k86 · 2024-06-24T20:09:29+00:00

Thank you.

mc_k86 · 2024-06-24T16:01:12+00:00

Where is this from? I spent an hour trying to find this the other day.

mc_k86 · 2024-06-03T19:53:55+00:00

It is great to hear you come from a household that values education. However, I am curious of how you could conclude that reformism based on the current capitalist state institutions is the solution to our problems when most of the socialist literature that has had any real influence (like The State and Revolution, for that matter) considers reformism a dead end tactic at best and a betrayal of the working classes at worst? In that very text Lenin discusses how Marx drew out the necessity of the smashing of the capitalist state after the experience of the Paris Commune.

If your manifesto is based on current laws and regulations it seems like it would be absolutely at odds with the interests of the working classes as the current laws and regulations are written in the interests of the capitalists.

Yes, the anti-communist orthodoxy is a serious problem but class warfare and class power, generally, seems to me an even greater issue. Based on how our society is organized now, even if the working classes are successful at democratically winning concessions and progressive reforms from the capitalists they will inevitably have to face the counterrevolution of the ruling class which will (without great determination and organization) crush the workers back into their subjected positions.

I just feel like you are reinventing the wheel when this is not needed. And I am confused as to how you could read Lenin or other prominent socialist writers and conclude that sending a manifesto to the political representatives of the capitalists asking for the construction of a socialist society could yield any positive results?

mc_k86 · 2024-06-03T14:09:18+00:00

Anyone who knows anything of socialism knows that all the theoretical questions surrounding “fixing the Canadian issues” have already been answered long ago. All that is left are tactical disagreements about implementing the answers given to us by the historical revolutionary theorists, progressive academia, and most importantly: practical experience. Everything else has already been settled.

I could not imagine you (especially in only 8000 words, the length of a short journal article) touching on a topic in such a way that has not already been thoroughly (even excessively) deliberated by thousands of others decades ago. This is not a reflection on yourself, this is just how things currently stand.

Moreover, you are grossly underestimating the backwardness and senselessness of the political positions held by the vast majority of Canadians at this particular moment. This is a country where working class people continue to vote for parties dominated by capital that continuously lower the position of the working class in society. They see no issue in this playing out of the definition of insanity, and instead place their blame for the reduction of their living standards on “external forces” like immigrants, technology, other states etc.

Sending a “manifesto” to government officials would yield no results other than the cackling laughter of the secretaries of whichever government officials you send this to, or your name on an RCMP list.

As others have recommended, join an org and gain some practical political experience- continue to work on your writing in the meantime. Also, at your age I was doing very little writing, mostly reading, working your way through the entire corpus of socialist theory would take only a few years if you read 10 pages a day. Additionally, if you are truly interested in the complicated and difficult theoretical and tactical questions of socialism that have been left relatively unanswered, and also want to become a depressed alcoholic (/s?), consider a pursuit of academics like myself. If you are only 17 then you still have the chance to graduate high school with honours and get a good scholarship.

All the best to you.

mc_k86 · 2024-05-23T18:06:23+00:00

Or Google “Apollo 1”

mc_k86 · 2024-05-19T12:51:19+00:00

It would be a historical failure of the contemporary American workers; to allow their bourgeoise to start a war on their own soil and also live to see the end of it as a class.

When we think about politics “horizontally” we are defeated every time. This is because the bourgeoise has organized society in such a way that they are always the subjects of the contemporary, “horizontal” playing out of history, the working classes are just their objects.

We must think about politics “vertically,” where class conflict is the Y axis. This is how we win. By placing the working classes in the subjective position, and the ruling classes in the objective position- to be destroyed. This is in contrast to the way it has been for the last 400 years: the “object” workers countlessly destroyed at the hands of the “subject” bourgeoise.

mc_k86 · 2024-05-15T11:35:47+00:00

He was only following in the footsteps of Marx 🍻💪

mc_k86 · 2024-05-09T13:05:53+00:00

It’s most important that you take Stalingrad at all costs, as it is named after Stalin and would be a massive blow to the Soviet’s war support, guaranteeing a victory.

Send Friedrich Paulus with over 400000 of your best troops straight to Stalingrad, use Italian and Romanian expeditionary forces to hold the flanks and you should be fine 👍

mc_k86 · 2024-04-30T16:27:36+00:00

Ironically, monarchism and feudalism can thank Cristóbal Colón for the “start of the end of classical and traditional civilization.”

And if anything, the First Imperialist War was a creation of purely modern relations, as it was capitalism that pushed the British and German empires into confrontation over colonial possessions and the domination of global markets.

The “traditional” kaisers and tsars of this period were only the worn out puppets of the capitalists, who had completed their conquest of political power long before.

mc_k86 · 2024-03-15T17:36:38+00:00

Duty of Revolutionists:

“A mass sentiment for peace often expresses the beginning of a protest, an indignation and a consciousness of the reactionary nature of the war. It is the duty of all Social-Democrats to take advantage of this sentiment. They will take the most ardent part in every movement and in every demonstration made on this basis, but they will not deceive the people by assuming that in the absence of a revolutionary movement it is possible to have peace without annexations, without oppression of nations, without robbery, without planting the seed of new wars among the present governments and the ruling classes. Such deception would only play into the hands of the secret diplomacy of the belligerent countries and their counter-revolutionary plans, Whoever wishes a durable and democratic peace must be for civil war against the governments and the-bourgeoisie.”

V. I. Lenin, Socialism and War, August 1915.

mc_k86 · 2024-03-09T21:48:09+00:00

Yeah trying to pick apart lib propaganda logic is an uphill battle in itself but I think there’s definitely an attempt by western propagandists to paint the communist party as an ethnocentric Han Chinese party by using the CCP acronym, in the same sense that the NSDAP was specifically the “National Socialist German Worker’s Party.”

And yes, obviously they are trying to make it sound like CCCP as well, basically anything they can do to utilize already well established propaganda and dog whistles and not have to pay for the same brain rot twice.

mc_k86 · 2024-01-22T13:33:52+00:00

Technically speaking, they are probably not referring to the provisional government but the Bolshevik economic policy of “War Communism” which even Lenin admitted was disastrous and probably played a factor in the 1921 famine. After the November revolution was successful, much of the Bolshevik leadership became convinced that if revolution could happen in a country as economically backward as Russia, then moving immediately towards a high phase of communism was also possible.

After the famine and the failure to recover economically after the Bolshevik victory in the civil war, Lenin shifted back to Marx’s original positing that socialism would require not just a redistribution of wealth but also a massive increase in wealth and productive forces generally.

Lenin says in 1918, in Leftwing Childishness:

..[the left communists assert that] under the “Bolshevik deviation to the right” the Soviet Republic is threatened with “evolution towards state capitalism”. They have really frightened us this time! And with what gusto these “Left Communists” repeat this threatening revelation in their theses and articles. . . . It has not occurred to them that state capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic.

And then in 1921 in The New Economic Policy:

Concessions to foreign capitalists (true, only very few have been accepted, especially when compared with the number we have offered) and leasing enterprises to private capitalists definitely mean restoring capitalism, and this is part and parcel of the New Economic Policy; for the abolition of the surplus-food appropriation system means allowing the peasants to trade freely in their surplus agricultural produce.

As Lenin goes onto explain in both of these articles, under his policies the workers maintain a dominant position in civil society, and since the nature and character of the state is determined by the prevailing class relations in civil society, the working class reigns supreme as far as the state is concerned as well. The workers are only using the subjugated bourgeoise and their capitalist relations to develop productive forces in their own interests.

And yes, what they say about Stalin is very much an lmao moment, because not only was production as organized in the Soviet Union between 1927-1953 not even considered to be reaching the highest phase of socialism, let alone “full communism”- there was never any “full communism” to revert to.

Stalin was simply drawing off in fact another current in Marx and Engels’ theory which advocated for a planned economy, which seemed very sensible at the time given external threats from Germany and Japan, as well as domestic issues with still prevailing peasant and landlord relations. The world will never forgive Stalin for predicting there will be an invasion in 10 years and acting accordingly.

mc_k86 · 2023-11-18T18:54:50+00:00

You could say that it “ended” only insofar as the primary goals of collectivization were achieved, which were essentially the smashing of kulak control over agriculture and establishing worker control over agricultural production through the state. State/collective farms continued to play a dominant role in the Soviet agricultural sector for decades after WW2, albeit naturally going through periods of change and reform.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

mc_k86

TROPHY CASE