No.1736290
Okay, so I believe that Capitalism is a fundamentally flawed system that will destroy the world and the human soul. However, one of the reasons why I cannot fully "get" with Communist ideology is due to their unwavering belief that once Capitalism will collapse their political system will eventually triumph globally. and I don't get the assurance,
Like Marx had some valid ideas, he was a human with limited knowledge like everyone else. In the field of psychology, Freud laid the foundation for modern psychoanalysis, but many of his theories are now considered invalid. why can't the same apply towards Marx, Additionally, many of Marx's predictions were incorrect, as Communist revolutions occurred in unindustrialized nations first, and his theory that worker militias could defeat professional armies has been proven false in every situation
It's the same thing with the Palestinian activism I'm seeing, so I'm 100% supportive of the Palestinians but I don't get the assurance that Israel will fall, cause it's moorally wrong, the Mongolswere morally wrong didn't stop them,
It's the same thing with the current Palestinian activism I'm seeing, so I'm 100% supportive of the Palestinian cause, but I don't get the assurance that Israel will fall, because it's morally wrong. The Mongols were in the wrong, yet that didn't stop them, because they had a stronger strength of arms.
No.1736293
Boring. Try having an original thought, OP.
No.1736295
Well marx was a product of his time. Marx's vision was set in industrial england during the 19th century. Now we're in the 21st with the internet.
Things have changed but some critiques are still valid. His analysis of capital remains true, as a system of the exploitation of labour, which destroys itself over time by automating out workers and so reducing its profitability.
The rate of profit is falling each year, new frontiers of expansion are closing down. The world is becoming insulated; connected. We are seeing eachother face to face - this is our global self-relation, where the wotrld speaks for what it wants.
The end of capitalism doesnt have to be "communism", but what else can it be?
No.1736298
> cannot fully "get" with Communist ideology is due to their unwavering belief that once Capitalism will collapse their political system will eventually triumph globally
I don’t really know what you are talking about tbh. Most of what I’ve seen is that leftists are in agreement that if capitalism falls the chances are extremely high that something worse can take its place if people are not ready and have very little class consciousness. “Socialism or barbarism” was a slogan for a reason.
No.1736300
>>1736295>The end of capitalism doesnt have to be "communism", but what else can it be?anything that can survive and fulfil the base needs of at least a section of the population.
No.1736302
>>1736300Well sure, but if we look in history its been a long slew of slavery. Do you think the masses would accept that today?
What makes capital sustainable (as much as its self-destructive) is that it is an exponential power, while slavery is something entropic; wasteful. Thats why there have only ever been few masters but many capitalists.
So a post-capitalism that serves a small population seems like a type of slavery, which is politically impossible without frightful cultural regressions, like a total anti-intellectualism and so forth
No.1736311
>>1736302>Well sure, but if we look in history its been a long slew of slavery. Do you think the masses would accept that today?probably, if you could provide a decent standards of living to majority of people, most would justify it.
No.1736314
>>1736290I agree with you…while there are issues with capitalism that doesn't make it guaranteed to collapse nor communism or anarchism or some other ism guaranteed to win.
In the end you have to be the one to contribute to your ideal victory otherwise it might never happen.
No.1736363
>their unwavering belief that once Capitalism will collapse their political system will eventually triumph globally. and I don't get the assurance
no one says this. we could just as well revert to a combination of feudalism and slave economies. look at Libya
>his theory that worker militias could defeat professional armies
where does Marx write this?
>I don't get the assurance that Israel will fall, cause it's moorally wrong
it won't fall because it's wrong. it'll fall because the US is falling, and Israel is nothing but the US' military base in the Middle East
No.1736369
>>1736363>it won't fall because it's wrong. it'll fall because the US is falling, and Israel is nothing but the US' military base in the Middle Eastnot OP but I think I know what he means, unless there is a capable military force in close proximity that poses a genuine threat, then Israel will remain secure and not fall.
No.1736380
>>1736369for now, yes. in 20 years? less likely
No.1736394
>>1736290>their political system will eventually triumph globally. and I don't get the assurance,It wont be easy or quick but it will happen eventually
You don't see any people advocating for a return to feudalism(except for terminally online chvdcels) like they did 100-200 years ago when capitalism was in its early stages
Reactionary thought will still persist in communism but after many generations in the future there will be no use for reactionary sentiment and such individuals will have to adapt themselves to their new material conditions
Imagine this, what use is there for a return to capitalism and its inefficiencies when you have star trek levels of productive forces where everyone has abundance and you can create anything you desire easily?
No.1736461
OP is retarded
No.1736463
>>1736394no offence dude, but you sound the same as any religious Christian or Islamist who thinks their faith will win in the end cause it was ordained and there are signs, personally speaking I think people are gonna let any system rule over them as long is provides the base needs for it's population and there are no other options.
No.1736475
>>1736290This is another case of:
>EVERYTHING IN OP IS WRONG 😞😭😭Okay, so…
>Capitalism is a fundamentally flawed system that will destroy the world and the human soul.Capitalism brings automation. Automation brings less and less surpluss value. Less and less surplus value brings communism.
It's literally that simple.
>Freud laid the foundation for modern psychoanalysis, but many of his theories are now considered invalidBy big pharma, mind you, big pharma that is doing a genocide on unsuspecting people.
Freud is 100% valid. You need someone to talk to. End of story. """"Fixxxing your brain chemistry"""""" is a neoliberal hoax, and the ""scientists"" who implore you to do so have stock$ in every new pill that gets produced. The DSM ks pure pseudo-science. The DSM is compiled backwards: a pharma company shidded out a new "drug" - we need an illness to match it!
No.1736478
>>1736461It is your communist duty to unretard him.
No.1736505
>>1736475
>Automation brings less and less surplus valueBut at that point capitalists would just stop to increase the automation process and keep it at the maximum possible state to mantain net profits. It's human occupation that will fall. And then the final battle between classes will begin.
No.1736664
>>1736380>>1736363It's the same thing with Henry Kissinger dying. Like, I'm glad the bastard is dead, but celebrating his death is hollow because he got to live to see his will manifested. It wouldn't have mattered if he died at age 80 or 120
No.1736687
>>1736290Marx was never interested in “predicting” he wasn’t some seer that could see into the future or predict the future. Marx was only interested in what was going at the time and what that could possibly mean for the future and he was largely correct, labor movements eventually became a catalyst for wage rates jumping up and became a catalyst for a new economics. People here and everywhere else don’t realize how big Marx was in the late 19th century and early 20th century. When it came to economic policy things like the 8 hour day or progressive taxes or pensions, these things were associated with socialism and socialist movements. People in the 21st century take for granted that these things were indeed socialist and in many ways socialism did win out in the end. What I guess no one could have “predicted” is that capitalism would incorporate this socialism into its society just fine. In fact it’s only just recently in the past neoliberal decades that welfare has been getting “reversed”. The irony is that for capitalism it looks like our productivity is lagging behind and so forcing people to work longer both hours wise and age wise just to survive seems like the solution to our productivity issues but that’s not the issue. The issue is we have excessive underemployment, a chronic underemployment that is willfully done. In terms of economics this means that capitalism is trying to squeeze as much as it can from marginal labor with the highest profit, basic economics. Capitalism couldn’t do full employment of labor so it requires that extra political push from socialists.
In any case Marx wasn’t predicting shit.
No.1736699
>>1736475I am tired of this myth that the profit rate is this thing that will reach 0 like some doomsday clock. What the shorter profit rate means is that the marginal profits become more smaller especially in developed nations but the profit rate can never and will never reach zero, that’s impossible. Just as the speed of light is the natural speed limit of the universe and nothing can exceed it, profit rates cannot go to 0. The trend in a developed nation with deep capital markets is towards rent seeking which is what we are seeing. Karl shawbe has a point when his ideology says “you will not own anything”, rents seeking is the future of production and services and goods. Even thought he marginal profits have gotten much smaller, they can rent out and earn a lot that way.
It’s pretty fascinating in that like taxes it is a regulator of spending power.
No.1737882
>>1736314I mean it will collapse the same way a fire will burn out, but I disagree with the whole “Socialism or barbarism” idea, I think it'll be any system and group of people that can organize effectively enough and mantain and establish some law and ord
No.1738246
>>1736300>anything that can survive and fulfil the base needs of at least a section of the population.so, communism
No.1738303
>>1738246or feudalism, religious theocracy, fascism or a less retarded form of capitalism, there's no divine law that communism will succeeded.
No.1738399
read mark fisher
No.1738477
>>1738303History has been a downward spiral of power being dispersed into larger and larger groups of people. Eventually it will reach what is considered by most people as Communism. You don't need Marx to point out an obvious trend in history that leads to an obvious conclusion. Which is why saying "How can we know Communism will win" is basically like saying "How can we know that humanity will keep techonlogically advancing", Sure its impossible for us to predict the future but any basic analysis of history tells us all we really need.
No.1738492
>>1736290You really think AI and automation wont change the system fundamentally into something that can no longer be described as capitalism? You should read more about historical materialism.
No.1738500
>>1738486Ok go ahead and make a conclusion then, we can test if it can be proven with "historic links with most anything". Instead of being a dumb cynic make an actual claim and we can discuss the merits of it. Because discounting my claim that history has shown that it has dispersed power through the ages because you think its wrong based one a screenshot isn't an actual arguement. Maybe reddit is more your speed my dude because you are sounding mighty idealist.
No.1738503
>>1738500>Maybe reddit is more your speed my dude because you are sounding mighty idealist.Someone should put that on a t-shirt
No.1738524
>>1738500I'm not an idealist or a cynic; I'm just being a bit pragmatic. If or when it collapses, it will be those who can appeal to the masses and provide security and basic standards to the majority of the population that will take power. We saw this with Iran
No.1738865
>>1738486"Socialism or barbarism" only applies to first world liberal democracies thinning out their profit margins.
First worlders are going to be subservient to fascism as long as their consuming pacifiers are still available, third worlders don't have that comforting option, literally the only thing they have to lose is their chains
No.1739742
>>1738865this feels like a glorified nobel savage rhetoric, I'm from a third world nation, we've been at a total collapse numerous times and you know what happened, a military junta took over and resorted law and and order the people went along with it, cause people want security and order for themselves and their families
No.1739745
>>1739742military juntas that are usually backed by the usa so in order to suppress anti imperialist, red or etc movements.
No.1739746
>>1738865>>1739745I posted this before, but Third Worldists who try to explain why the First World proletariat weren't successful was because they're comfortable in their position in the supply chain. When in reality, it comes down to the difference between strong and weak states with capable armies
Example, Leftist revolutionaries in Imperial Russia at the end of WW1 faced a military that had been gutted by Imperial Germany for years and would make a much easier opponent than let's say, this is not the case for modern America, where even a relatively moderate movement like Occupy Wall Street quickly had the NYPD trucking people into their camp and getting infiltrated, To use another example, Venezuela, in 1992 then Colonel Hugo Chavez was able to organize over 2300 soldiers to almost succeed in a coup against the Venezuelan government.
In the United States this would not happen due to the overwhelming capture of the United States military by politically rightwing actors. An actual leftist would never make it to Colonel let alone General and even if they did, if they attempted a coup against the United States Government, they would most likely be detected while organizing their soldiers and that's assuming they could find any soldiers to follow their orders.
organizing a leftist revolution in a country with a strong government with a united military and competent surveillance infrastructure is Nightmare Difficulty compared to some weak South American or African government that can be seriously challenged by organized peasants with AK 47s, but even in the scenario if the government is still capable enough to wield a unified army it will last.
No.1739751
>>1739746>but even in the scenario if the government is still capable enough to wield a unified army it will last.yeah pretty much this. Also add in us support too. A good example being suharto indonesia.
No.1739757
>>1738524NTA but pragmatic is what cynics love to identify as.
No.1739760
>>1739742Because American imperialism is still fucking over the Third World. Even military junta don’t last forever. Thailand’s military is confronting challenges to its power while Myanmar has its junta being crushed by the democratic forces.
No.1739763
>>1739757Telling people not to waste their time and resources fighting a battle that they will lose 99% of the time is being pragmatic. Live to fight another day as they saying goes. Even Islamists (religious fanatics) understand this fact better than most communists. Muhammad and his allies didn't fight the Quraish tribe because they knew they would lose; instead, they scattered, built up resources and a following, and later an army of their own. They absorbed lesser tribes and chipped away at the caravan routes, and finally, after a decade, they fought back and defeated the Quraish tribe
No.1739764
>>1736290>I cannot fully "get" with Communist ideology is due to their unwavering belief that once Capitalism will collapse their political system will eventually triumph globallyProbably because that is contrary to the belief of most prominent marxist writers. Have you actually read any or just baiting?
No.1740776
>>1738492Not OP but I think there is a significant chance that porky as a whole will soon realise the potential disruptive effects of mass adoption of AI and will attempt to slow the development through some kind of regulation, sure there are the tech types who say "it will be fine, we'll just make a UBI scheme or something and all the masses of people who have lost their jobs to AI tech will just chill at home and consoom" but I think that the smarter bourgs realise that such a situation would carry with it a level of risk of social upheaval
(revolution) that they find unacceptable. There is of course the option in which they just say "fuck it" and go full steam ahead with adopting AI tech and automation to the point that it puts millions if not billions of proles out of work in the space of a decade or so and then just hope that they'll be able to throw people (especially those in the first world) a bone in the form of some kind of fascistic ideology and political movement and hope that will make things work out okay for them.
No.1740792
communism in the unpolitical system
No.1741533
>>1736290Communists that think capitalism will necessarily be replaced by communism are so wrong they are even wrong according to their Godhead (Marx)
More realistically what will proceed capitalism is many post-capitalisms, with communist societies based on communal solidarity to survive a difficult future being among them
No.1741535
>>1739742It is glorified noble savage rhetoric, and also feeds into the flawed belief in immiseration theory, that people revolt when they are facing the most wretched conditions, which isn’t actually true. What’s more accurate is that people revolt when they think there is something significant to gain and that they stand a decent chance at winning. Revolutions also occur around periods of crisis or increased political engagement, such as during wars, economic crises, political crises among the rulers, or elections. Finally, revolutions usually have a specific inciting incident that connects the general grievances of the revolutionary class to the rhetoric of the revolutionaries within said class.
No.1741544
>>1741467i actually identify as a marxist-leninist, not an anarchist thank you very much
No.1744113
>>1741544then why did you post a childish response?
No.1744129
>>1744113It's leftypol. childish responses are the norm.
No.1744133
The inexorability of communism is a hotly debated subject among marxist theoreticians. The idea that everyone thinks it's inevitable with the certainty of faith is a bit exaggerated. There are really two main schools of thought on the topic IMO.
The historical dialectical/evolutionist school. This school of thought holds that capitalism, like all forms of class-based political economy, is an inherently unstable and temporary phase. The seeds of its own destruction are contained in its own internal contradictions, and so socialism, and ultimately full communism, will naturally "evolve" from it, like a snake shedding its own skin. In this view, a revolution isn't necessarily required, though it can speed up the process. Instead, structural conditions and the rapid developments in the means of production will converge to render capitalism obsolete.
This is the whole idea that the conditions for pure communism would develop in the most advanced societies first. Which I think is only partially incorrect. Conditions for communism will develop in advanced societies *last*. At the time of Marx's writing, he couldn't possibly foresee how much room for technological development and advancement in the sciences of production had left to go. So it was very easy to call it prematurely.
Nothing is promised. The sun could burn out tomorrow for all we know. I think the commercial mainstreaming of AI could accelerate the development of post-capitalism
The situationist, revolutionary contingency school: This school of thought maintains that unless militant labor organizes and forcefully overthrows the capitalist powers, capitalism will remain until human extinction . Socialism etc is contingent on a revolutionary movement. Some members of this school may maintain that a revolution is an inevitability, because capitalist oppression will simply grow too unbearable, but even then, there's no guarantee it will succeed.
No.1778384
>>1739742Convince me why a military junta is not the best form of governance out of all the choices.
>Unlike monarchism, you are not being ruled by an inbred spoiled brat.>Unlike liberal democracy, you are not being ruled by politicians that pander to all the retard voters.>Unlike theocracy, you are not being ruled by religious authorities who corrupt/subvert their religion to justify their rule.>Unlike oligarch rule, you are not being ruled by faceless corporates that sell out your country and abandon it when things go bad.Military junta is the best out of all these options. You get stable rule from battle-hardened military leaders who fought for the country. They will maintain order and defense without pandering to corporates or religious fundies or the average low-autism score voter.
No.1778388
>>1778384> Unlike oligarch rule-retard
No.1778390
>>1736290Marx didnt invent communism and hes not the fucking prophet of communism. Marxoidism is just one flavor of communism.
No.1778391
>>1740776>porky as a whole will soon realise the potential disruptive effects of mass adoption of AI and will attempt to slow the development through some kind of regulationLuddites are nothing new but if there is profit to be made by adopting AI and other advanced production methods it will be done and the gears of capital will keep turning.
No.1778392
>>1778384>Unlike oligarchHow the fuck is a Junta not an oligarchy
That aside, there are two main objections: as long as there exists capital, it doesn't matter who's in power, they will be inherently corrupted by it. Be it explicitly through (for example) military suppression of unions and strikes, be it hidden through any kind of involvement of business in government.
And second, a free civilian life is incompatible with military discipline. Give them all the meme sensitivity training you want, where there's a "peacekeeping" army there are horrible crimes.
No.1778428
>Additionally, many of Marx's predictions were incorrect, as Communist revolutions occurred in unindustrialized nations first, and his theory that worker militias could defeat professional armies has been proven false in every situation
Why THE FUCK do you think theorists post-Marx were compelled to write theory? Yes, it was fucking because Marx was fucking WRONG, because history is not a static process. Would you say,
>ah yes mendel was fucking wrong with whole inheritance thing shame no one else took it up and expanded it to be more correct
Because this is what you are doing you fucking retard.
No.1778432
>>1778390>Newton didn't invent gravityNo shit.
No.1801995
I believe that Nazism won't be coming back(at least for now) but Fascism(and I mean actual Fascism) will be a threat many nations the world will have to deal with, I believe liberal democracies won't be able to overcome them, that's why communism is necessary .
No.1802020
>>1778390only relevant not completely pointless and bullshit version of communism is marxism
Unique IPs: 45