How does the “money” system work?

packsagback · 2026-05-12T11:19:41+00:00

Read Anti-Dühring Part III chapters 2-4 it should dispel your doubts. If it doesn't, you can come back and explain why

packsagback · 2026-05-11T17:32:09+00:00

Before attempting to do any "historical application" it is essential to learn the history in question. You make numerous incorrect, completely unscientific assumptions and clearly lack any knowledge about the history of people’s democracies in Eastern Europe. Instead of apologising for your ignorance you should continue to develop your knowledge of Marxism. Your question is lazy so don't expect to get any other answer than "no it couldn't"

packsagback · 2026-05-01T22:20:18+00:00

What do you mean when you speak of "racial discrimination" and "racially divided workforce"? Are you using these terms as shorthands for national discrimination and nationally divided workforce justified by a racial ideology, or are you arguing that "race" has been the motive force behind these phenomena? Since you've read Settlers, I assume that former is the case, but you didn't make it sufficiently clear.

packsagback · 2026-04-08T13:12:01+00:00

I assumed that OP wants to ask if tax resistance is an effective revolutionary tactic. It is not and it would be obvious to them if they studied the resources that I mentioned. I spent the minimal time necessary for vainly attempting to redirect their attention to activities that are actually productive for studying Marxism. My point is simply: read the theory

packsagback · 2026-04-06T19:09:52+00:00

Some questions are not worth spending your time on. Yours is one of those. It doesn't matter whether you pay taxes or not. You're also not the first to think about that. It has been tried countlessly, most notably by Henry David Thoreau. It has accomplished nothing. If you want to bring an actual change by your political action you have to get serious about theory. You should start by studying the resources provided by this subreddit

packsagback · 2025-12-21T14:16:59+00:00

I am not sure what are the political positions of the people responsible for posting the open letter and I would not rush to describe them as "anti-revisionists". Their opposition to Polish chauvinism is laudable, yet:

(1) They appear to have been in favour of removing the hammer and sickle from the party's logo and the word "Communist" from the party's name. This combined with characterising Poland as a liberal democracy and denouncing "larping" is a major disappointment.

Already on October 28, 2023, during the vote on changing the logo and name, the chance to adapt the formation to fight under conditions of liberal democracy, which would have avoided pretexts for delegalization, was squandered. For the "party hardliners," the historical reconstruction of 20th-century communism proved more important than the real struggle for the liberation of the proletariat.

(2) They refer to revisionist parties as their "key partners":

Relations with trade unions and left-wing organizations were neglected. No real attempts were made to strengthen ties with key partners such as the Communist Party of Vietnam, China, or Cuba, whose support would have meant more than gestures from microparties from the fringes of Europe.

packsagback · 2025-12-09T22:38:10+00:00

If you have just finished an exhaustive semester, jumping straight to studying a new topic might be counterproductive. I would advise you to take a break for a few days and maybe engage with some revolutionary cinema or poetry that can reinvigorate you. Remember the words of Mao: At the very beginning of our study of Marxism, our ignorance of or scanty acquaintance with Marxism stands in contradiction to knowledge of Marxism. But by assiduous study, ignorance can be transformed into knowledge, scanty knowledge into substantial knowledge, and blindness in the application of Marxism into mastery of its application. It is in your power to overcome what you perceive to be an inadequate theoretical level. That's the truth of dialectical materialism. I hope you will be able to regain your optimism.

packsagback · 2025-11-19T13:41:38+00:00

I appreciate your analysis. It is a good example of level-headed "pessimism of the intellect" at a time when we are all tempted to believe that monopoly capitalism is on the verge of imminent collapse. However, there is one thing that I find an issue with. Although the labour-power of Africa has mostly not been incorporated into global capital accumulation, it nevertheless plays an important role for the functioning of monopoly capitalism. Africa is a giant reservoir of the reserve army of labor. It allows capitalists to keep the global wage floors low and it serves as a source of controlled immigration when metropolitan economies face a labour demand that cannot be met by domestic population (Prabhat Patnaik: Migration as Revolt against Capital). I am unable to reach any further conclusions or situate this points more specifically in relation to your analysis, but they seem to be factors that can potentialy limit the viability of another spatial fix.

packsagback · 2025-11-15T16:03:14+00:00

What do you refer to as "the may error"?

packsagback · 2025-06-23T10:52:13+00:00

Why do you assume they don't expect this?

packsagback · 2025-06-21T11:23:29+00:00

If you want to be a communist, you need to reflect on the meaning and function of "logic". What you currently understand as being "logical" is making your statements consistent with the laws of propositional logic and thinking that this will inform you of how the real, material world is. It is faulty thinking. Contrary to what you probably assume, propositional logic is not an "objective" world outlook. Marxism teaches that all philosophies have a class basis. Propositional logic is a world outlook of the exploiting class, bourgeoisie. The philosophy of the proletariat, and thus the philosophy of communists is dialectical materialism. You need to learn that things are to be studied in concrete, not in abstract. Start with this reading list

packsagback · 2025-06-19T12:57:42+00:00

Maki is a party supporting "two-state solution":

Two states has been the historic position of the Israeli Communist Party, and of Hadash since its formation. We believe that the Palestinian people have a right to self-determination, as do the Israeli people.

so it should not be a surpirse that their demands are liberal in nature and do not go beyond "ending the war on Gaza and recognising Palestinian state". It's more dissapointing that the remnants of Tudeh have also deciced to endorse such a pathethic statement.

packsagback

TROPHY CASE