The biggest rebutal I see in the eyes of the average person to "socialism" and "communism" is that it's utopic, that it relies on bad assumptions, that it doesn't work in reality etc. In essence, that we're advocating for something that can't be and that we have no alternative to capitalism.
And, to that effect, what are we even advocating for ? It appears to me that we have a bunch of different movements with many different goals that don't actually ressemble one another. Yet, despite this, very few of these movements have actual "models", it just seems like they want to reform or do a revolution for the sake of action rather than purpose.
Shouldn't we concentrate on clear objectives and goals before having all this talk about how marxism-leninism-maoism-gonzalo thought is superior to cybernetic-trotskism-councilism in achieving [we run into the problem here]?
>inb4 abolition of private property, abolition of capitalism, abolition of alienation
We can't actually base our objectives around these vagues goals though, or at least not at the current time and at the forefront. Abolition of private property doesn't mean anything if there's no framework to offer an alternative or to replace it. Marx laid us many goals but, given that he didn't specify what or how, shouldn't it be up to us to conceptualize the type of system which we want in accordance with the relevant theories he proposed.
Apart from small intellectuals scattered everywhere (Cockshott, Schweickart etc), there seems to be an evident lack of clear model that actually adresses the critique of marx's ambitions and dismisses its apparent utopianism.
38 posts and 11 image replies omitted.>>2577835Labour vouchers are for retards of course I don't mean that
>>2577801You are dancing around the question. Concretely, how will a person involve himself in production? What social relations, are involved in the organisation and process of production?
I like Marx and Engels of course, but what you are doing is saying what attributes could describe communism. Like saying capitalism is exploitive, highly corrupt etc.
How does production actually happen? Under capitalism it is private property, wage labourers produce goods to exchange on the market for which they are reimbursed their own cost of reproduction.
>>2577836>>2577841chatbot or zero reading comprehension?
>>2577843Wants to discuss actual social relations of communism productive organization and not just basic principles, must be bot.
God you are worse than reddiors
WTF is that first reply.
>>2573875>Marx decisively made sure to never leave a direct manifesto on what to do, it should be noted however he derided labor notesMarx and Engels literally wrote the Communist Manifesto (with ten points (quoted by
>>2577801) and they were tentatively in favor of labor notes, as can be inferred from Critique of the Gotha Programme (quoted by
>>2576132) as well as a few other comments ("no more “money” than a ticket" - Volume I "These vouchers are not money" - Volume II).