/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2581850
good job cutting off the rest of what I said and ignoring it

>>2581850
Actually the Bolsheviks were majority proletarian and the october revolution was a revolution of the peasants and proletarians, that's why their symbol has both a hammer and sickle on it. Unfortunately the USSR was eventually defeated and dissolved, but still they were the longest lasting and most advanced experiment in socialist construction, proletarian dictatorship and revolution in history.
Hope that clears things up for you <3

>>2581830
You should use opera instead of chrome or firefox as it is owned by a Chinese megacorp so all your data will be owned and sold by proletarian managers

I have a feeling that you can't be anti-dengist without critizicing all other Warsaw pact countries. Like East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Poland had firms that weren't publicly traded, but had join-stock ownership. For example the SDAG Wismut was a 50% German and 50% Soviet joint-stock company.

>>2581846
>Well it seems to be, i didn't bring in any personal arguments, it was you who brought up ego and whatever else. Unless you're saying it's my tone that brings in the ego, but I would say that's more of a you issue
>Hm yeah I mean you might be a super special boy who lives outside of history with his big brain that just takes in information and objectively analyzes it, who'd have been a marxist even if the bolsheviks didn't take power
Stop coping
>Im simply saying that it is Lenin and the Bolsheviks that popularized and made Marxism historically relevant, in actual history
And I am simply saying that’s egoistical Leninist bullshit
>They were only able to do this because Marxism is correct, independently of them
It was also popular and international independently of them.

>Idk I haven't been on 4chan in years
I find that hard to believe, but sure
>from what I remember they'd mostly just talk about how Marxism is a jewish thing
They do that too
>idk where this idea of yours comes from that 4channers are Leninists
That isn’t what i’m saying. It’s not an idea either. They this exact phrase:
<muh "real" socialism
>or that they would say that the pontification of "real" or "actual" socialism is idealism
That’s easy to answer. If socialism hasn’t been tried, none of the accusations stick.
>or how this 4chan comparison is relevant
Because you gave me the same exact fucking brain dead response they gave me, and expect me to treat it like its some cosmic revelation Reflect on how your arguments are basic and dumb?
>Reflect on how your arguments are basic and dumb?
I’ve reflected, and I've come to the conclusion that my arguments are in fact not basic and dumb, and that you are still a fucking dumbshit for posting this 4channel tier crap regardless of the reason.
>But you did say that, which implied that you don't believe it was real socialism
Yeah, I did. And I didn’t imply, I said it.
>(that's what actual socialism means)
No the fuck it isn’t.
>That you only care about Marx and Engels because of the Bolsheviks?
Exactly that Leninist.
>It's most likely true tho
That’s complete bullshit
>before them they were a relatively small sect
At one they were small (they were never a sect)
>I mean marx himself had only died a couple decades before that and there was no practical reason to elevate him over any other socialist theorist
He is the literal OG
>especially no reason to view him as the grandfather of the communist movement.
He is the literal OG
>He and his theories were just one of many.
He lived a very unique and interesting life, and his theories were objectively correct.

>Well that makes sense because that wasn't my argument
>That you only care about Marx and Engels because of the Bolsheviks?
U serious m8?
>it resulted in Leninism
It threw up Leninism by accident
>which in turn solidified the relevance of Marxism to the entire world
The relevance of Marxism never needed solidifying in the first place.
>Bruh and you're here talking about my ego
Yes we’re talking about your fucking ego. You have the fucking audacity to treat the literal fucking communist OG himself as some fuck off random shitty dime store author so can glaze your revisionist successful liberal revolutionary even harder.

>>2581853
I agree
>>2581861
>Actually the Bolsheviks were majority proletarian
The leadership was, support was not.
>and the october revolution was a revolution of the peasants and proletarians
leaning peasants.

>>2581334
Do you understand that when prices fall (deflation) so does the price of labour power?

>>2581904
<Hm yeah I mean you might be a super special boy who lives outside of history with his big brain that just takes in information and objectively analyzes it, who'd have been a marxist even if the bolsheviks didn't take power
>Stop coping
Sure I did call you a special boy, but hidden in there is an argument about us all being connected by the thread of history and that your interest in Marxism is invariably interlinked with Leninism, no matter how much you claim it to be a result of your pure logical reasoning "they’re some of the only political figures and theorists that actually makes complete sense to me without fail, which is something Lenin and his vanguard party failed to do." as you said.
>It was also popular and international independently of them
Nowhere near to the extent that it was after the Bolsheviks took power lol, get real. Just think about it like a fucking materialist man. Think what a state like the USSR can do for the prominence of Marxism as a school of thought, for its global relevance, translation and distribution of the works, etc. They had whole institutions dedicated to this shit dude.
>That isn’t what i’m saying. It’s not an idea either. They this exact phrase:
><muh "real" socialism
This is an anonymous imageboard like 4chan, people use the "muh" formatting all the time. I wouldn't know how much they still use it on 4chan, again I haven't gone there in years. You seem to spend quite some time there however, seeing as you're so concerned about it
>That’s easy to answer. If socialism hasn’t been tried, none of the accusations stick.
Im not asking you to answer it, your answer is dumb, the response would be that any attempt at socialism would result in said accusations. Im saying retards on 4chan don't care about socialism "real" or otherwise to consider these things or have this kind of discussion about it and so your contemplation on said 4chan likeness is a completely irrelevant cope on your part.
>I’ve reflected, and I didn't reflect at all
Shame
<you did say that [it wasn't actual socialism], which implied that you don't believe it was real socialism
>Yeah, I did. And I didn’t imply, I said it
<that's[real socialism] what actual socialism means
>No the fuck it isn’t.
?

>Exactly that Leninist.
>That’s complete bullshit
No it isn't, why are you taking this so personally? Lmao
>At one they were small (they were never a sect)
So pedantic. Yes they were not a "sect", but they were a small and obscure current in the mostly western left.

>He is the literal OG
>He is the literal OG
And in a lot of ways that is because the bolshis you despise so much made him that way my man. They were naming streets after him and erecting statues in his honor. But yeah none of that probably had any effect at all on your understanding of the man, you're above such things.
>He lived a very unique and interesting life
Many people did lmao, this means nothing
>and his theories were objectively correct.
I agree
<That you only care about Marx and Engels because of the Bolsheviks?
>U serious m8?
Yeah that's not the same argument as claiming Marxism "needs" Leninism in some kind of way objectively, maybe some other people in some other country could have led a revolution as Marxists, but as it stands in the real world that revolution was the one with Lenin. I'm saying it's relevant to you through Lenin and the Bolsheviks because that is what objectively happened in history.
>It threw up Leninism by accident
idealism
>The relevance of Marxism never needed solidifying in the first place.
What do I even say to this? Who cares about what you subjectively think "needs" to be or not be solidified?
>Yes we’re talking about your fucking ego. You have the fucking audacity to treat the literal fucking communist OG himself as some fuck off random shitty dime store author so can glaze your revisionist successful liberal revolutionary even harder
What's with the weird binary thinking and veneration? Also the weird insistence on Marx "being the OG" lmfao? I would never claim or imply Marx to be some dime store author. His work is of tremendous significance both historically and as a works of theory in their own. The question is thought, why would you ever want to look at something through such a narrow scope, as in a theory "in it's own" while claiming to be a fan of Marx's work?

>>2581909
Both the leadership and the organization itself was mostly proletarian. Of course support and the revolution at large leant towards the peasants, but they were also the vast majority of people. They couldn't have done basically anything without the proletariat and the communist party. It's imo a bit pointless to get in the weeds about it too much, like are we gonna compare percentages and stuff?

>>2580452
Honestly I dont even care about socialism and shit I just want to see China win

>>2580376
99% of Dengists/MLoids simply do not care about these facts.
You have to understand these people have convinced themselves China can undertake any hyper-capitalist actions it wants to, just so long as China claims it's for the good of improving the infrastructure and material conditions of China.
You see, China simply needs to utilise the people's landlords and the people's billionaire CEOs who are "revolutionaries on the economic front" in order to generate enough power to finally press the magic "transition to socialism" button.
They believe China is too poor, weak, and underdeveloped to have a socialist economy yet. "Just keep waiting! The time isn't yet ripe!" they will cry for centuries more to come if they can have their way.
The hard truth is that Dengist capitalist roaders won power over the CPC and ever since the notion of a socialist economy is just portrayed as a distant utopian ideal to sing about in songs, rather than a realistic goal to gradually move towards.

Who even fucking cares at this point 😔, I’m at the point why America is so fucking dystopian with its mass-social-murder and late stage capitalist that even if china was a social democracy (Which it’s not, I don’t agree with you) I would support it over the US.

Very funny how as soon as Japan starts building new military bases right off of Taiwan and threatens a invasion of China, all of these Western Leftists break out in unified chorus about how evil China is, how it's actually not real socialism, how it needs to be overthrown, and so on. Very coincidental Im sure!

>>2582010
>Sure I did call you a special boy, but hidden in there is an argument about us all being connected by the thread of history and that your interest in Marxism is invariably interlinked with Leninism
Stop coping
>Nowhere near to the extent that it was after the Bolsheviks took power lol, get real
I am getting real. You overstate the importance of the Bolsheviks greatly.

>Think what a state like the USSR can do for the prominence of Marxism as a school of thought, for its global relevance, translation and distribution of the works, etc.
We live in that reality already. The answer was very little.
>They had whole institutions dedicated to this shit dude.
And now those institutions are ancient history to their former citizens have become ever more reactionary since it’s collapse.
>This is an anonymous imageboard like 4chan, people use the "muh"
I said that exact phrase. Not just muh. That exact phrase, muh included.
>your answer is dumb
No u
>the response would be that any attempt at socialism would result in said accusations
With a lack of historical weight behind them. The usual accusations won’t work so well on a more freshly presented communism.

> Im saying retards on 4chan don't care about socialism "real" or otherwise to consider these things or have this kind of discussion about it
Well, they do. And I already told you that you can see for yourself, quite easily even.
>and so your contemplation on said 4chan likeness is a completely irrelevant cope on your part.
Stop coping
>Shame
Stop coping
>?
I am not surprised by your confusion.
>No it isn't
Yeah, it is. Your little mythology about Marx being some random Hobo in a sewer until god king Lenin himself decides to uplift him into the heavens didn’t happen Lenoid. He wasn’t some global giga superstar, but he was far from irrelevant.

>why are you taking this so personally? Lmao
Everything is more personal than it seems Lenoid.
>but they were a small and obscure current in the mostly western left.
Were
>And in a lot of ways that is because the bolshis you despise so much made him that way
Hush with the bs. He was OG before they were even in diapers.
>They were naming streets after him and erecting statues in his honor
That ain’t shit
>But yeah none of that probably had any effect at all on your understanding of the man
Unironically yes.
>Many people did lmao, this means nothing
he lived a interesting life in relation to communism, which many people didn’t.
>revolution was the one with Lenin
Nuh uh
>I'm saying it's relevant to you through Lenin and the Bolsheviks because that is what objectively happened in history
It’s not
>idealism
Not what that means
>What do I even say to this?
Nothing.
>Who cares about what you subjectively think "needs" to be or not be solidified?
You.
>What's with the weird binary thinking and veneration?
Wake up, cause that isn’t here
>Also the weird insistence on Marx "being the OG" lmfao?
You have the weird instance of him not being an OG
>I would never claim or imply Marx to be some dime store author.
Not explicitly
>His work is of tremendous significance both historically and as a works of theory in their own.
Yeah
>The question is thought, why would you ever want to look at something through such a narrow scope, as in a theory "in it's own" while claiming to be a fan of Marx's work?
I don’t though

>>2582011
>Both the leadership and the organization itself was mostly proletarian
True.
>the organization itself was mostly proletarian. Of course support and the revolution at large leant towards the peasants, but they were also the vast majority of people.
True
>They couldn't have done basically anything without the proletariat and the communist party
Still more peasant than anything though.
>like are we gonna compare percentages and stuff?
Absolutely not.

>>2582023
I'm not an American or Chinese but let's say *hypothetically* for the sake of arguement that both were capitalist super powers.
One is openly funding genocide in the middle east and preparing for another big oil war, while allowing millions of its citizens to be homeless, be in medical debt, die from lack of healthcare and from mass shootings.
The other one forces people to use VPNs to get online and also gets kinda butthurt about some artificial islands or something?
Neither are great, but one is pretty objectively worse both domestically and globally.

>>2582025
It is in fact possible to have nuanced opinions on things. It isn't black and white, China vs the West. 3rd Worldism is extremely stupid and reductive. No, we don't need to shut off our brains and give uncritical support to any state.
In fact, it's both possible to criticise China's ecomomic policies and oppose US-backed military presence off the coast of China. Wow, crazy!
Plus I don't see a single person calling to overthrow China. It is not realistic nor beneficial for the Chinese people at all. The best outcome is a more left wing faction of the CPC arises and takes power.

>>2582029
>Stop coping
Nothing to cope about, sorry you took such offense to my cheeky phrasing
>I am getting real. You overstate the importance of the Bolsheviks greatly.
But you're not getting real at all, you seem to think that the Bolsheviks were completely irrelevant to the spread of Marxism
>We live in that reality already. The answer was very little.
Ridiculous. A rejection of the facts of the matter.

>I said that exact phrase. Not just muh. That exact phrase, muh included.
So? Again it's a common way to paraphrase an argument so if you're using the same dumbass arguments about real socialism on other anonymous imageboards you're going to receive the same sort of phraseology. I feel like Im talking to a retard having to explain this to you
>No u
You have yet to establish that
>With a lack of historical weight behind them. The usual accusations won’t work so well on a more freshly presented communism
Yeah nothing that lives entirely in your head can be accused of anything happening in the real world that's true, but that doesn't really matter because it's a refutation of reality. Even retards on 4chan seem to be easily able to call you out on this cope, which is probably why you are so bothered and bringing them into this conversation
>Well, they do. And I already told you that you can see for yourself, quite easily even.
I have no desire to refamiliarize myself with that place, you can have it
>Stop coping
>Stop coping
Projection
>I am not surprised by your confusion.
please explain rather than posture <3
>Yeah, it is. Your little mythology about Marx being some random Hobo in a sewer until god king Lenin himself decides to uplift him into the heavens. He wasn’t some global giga superstar, but he was far from irrelevant.
I already agreed His work stands on its own friend, you're arguing with figments of your imagination. I already stated that the bolsheviks were only able to do what they did because of the validity of Marx's work, which of course they were also not the only ones tuned into lol.
>Everything is more personal than it seems Lenoid.
Meaningless posturing
>Were
Yes that is what I said, we already went over what happened after that
>Hush with the bs. He was OG before they were even in diapers.
So?
>That ain’t shit
No I think it's actually quite significant and being only the tip of the iceberg if anything. Sound like a lot of coping on your end friend.
>Unironically yes
Unironically cringe if you actually believe this lol
>he lived a interesting life in relation to communism, which many people didn’t
No there's still thousands of people at least who fit that category
>Nuh uh
Alright, where's your socialist revolution? Can I see it?
>It’s not
You deny history
>Not what that means
It is, you are an idealist.
>Nothing.
Then why say it friend?
>You
No Im not interested in knowing that at all
>Wake up, cause that isn’t here
It is, your vision is very black and white
>You have the weird instance of him not being an OG
No, it's not weird because I've never heard somebody repeating being the OG in relation to Marx this many times. It's clearly something you have a particular interest in
>Not explicitly
Nor implicitly
>Yeah
Glad we agree, now no more coping
>I don’t though
That is what you argue for, you seek to divorce Marxism from its history

What Chinese stock should I buy to become porky in a few years?

>>2582056
>>2582029
make another topic retards

>>2580404
day trading is also restricted to porky in the united states

>>2581084
he also praised him in comparison to eg kautsky

>>2581416
nah they still would be they would just make up arbitrary early marx late marx bs like they already do

>>2581476
The only difference between Marx and Lenin is the material conditions. Lenin = Marx.

>>2581523

>1.Vanguard Parties
>You aren’t supposed have them period.
3. Marx’s hope for russia
>because reasons.

As capitalism experiences a crisis of profitability, two things can happen. Either the concrete members of the bourgeoisie, petit-bourgeoisie and professionals surrender to monopoly capitalism by allowing themselves to be cannibalised by monopolies and/or seeking employment from these monopolies. What is technically counted profit is really from the standpoint of the economy as a whole functions as monopoly rent. This is primarily facilitated by stock markets in our day, where value flows from the real economy to the fictitious economy and monopolies.

The other option is a socialist revolution. This has already happened in China. The Chinese government holds a huge stake in the economy and has the political power and will to nationalize companies that seek to turn into monopolies. This is described by President Xi as the fight against "the disorderly expansion of capital". Look at how Jack Ma's attempts to break the state monopoly on banking was handled or how the recent real estate crisis where the companies responsible were forced to take the fall instead of getting a bailout and allowing their monopolistic behaviour to continue.

The Chinese stock market does not facilitate the outflow of value from the real economy. As a whole it doesn't appreciate in value, it always stays constant. Its only function is to force companies to be accountable to the general public, as the ratio of small investors is much greater and to allow people to legally gamble.

>>2582022
who cares

>>2582106
>The only difference between Marx and Lenin is the material conditions.
Oh sure, if you look at literally fucking nothing about what they write or how they lived.
>Lenin = Marx
Delusional
>>2582107
>You aren’t supposed have them period
Yeah, and that remains true completely and utterly despite what you posted. Communists can serve as a vanguard without their own vanguard party. They are supposed to do that while in proper communist parties.
>because reasons.
AKA no material reason
>>2582073
I’m leaving this conversation outright. Other guy is more stubborn than a mule in their thinking. All I’m really asking here is for them to step off with making their deviant leader the center of the ideology instead of the guy who made it, and they just won’t. It’s ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous.
Waited several hours to post this because I was too tired to bother responding at that point. Now I’m out. This conversation sucks.

>>2582011
all those peasants were proletarianized or drafted by 1939 anyway

>>2582022
> hyper-capitalist
what is "hyper" capitalism and why is a state controlled by as communist party managing a slow transition from state capitalism to socialism, just as Engels predicted would happen, somehow "more" or "hyper" capitalist compared with bourgeois dictatorships in the west, especially when that communist party first took power in relatively semi-feudal conditions? Why are "Dengoids" and "MLoids" wrong when they show you Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, all saying the same thing, that once a DOTP is in power they have to practice stewardship over a transition at a national level, based on material conditions they find themselves in, by using state capital?

>>2582307
Oh yeah and it was an absolute delight talking to your retarded ass, who cannot engage in basic arguments or defend their position at all, rather just gasping exasperatedly and referring to some kind of seniority that must be upheld without explaining why that matters at all. The fact that you're asking for anyone to be centered, rather than view history and the development of Marxism into the current day as a continuous whole that you are also subject to, is the problem. This conversation does suck, because you are a retard and I was stupid enough to think you might actually engage with anything being put forward instead of complain about 4chan. I'm out too, fuck you and the waste of time it was arguing with you anon

>>2582022
>facts
>doesnt post any source

Ok, buddy.

>>2582307
>Other guy is more stubborn than a mule in their thinking
the irony is palpable

>>2581449
So if communism isn't an ideology, and it isn't a state of affairs, what the fuck is it?

>>2582904
Contradiction between the development of the productive forces and the mode of production.

Maoist-Bordigist Alliance (do total economic transition right now!!!) VS the Dengist-Stalinist Alliance (10,000 years of McDonalds and Stock Markets until we press the socialism button!!!) in this thread and neither side will convince the other it seems.
What does it achieve?

>>2582904
>and it isn't a state of affairs
A state of affairs to be established. Communism in practice already manifests today as the proletarian association and struggle, as dormant as it is.

>>2582932
There's almost no difference between Mao and Deng, lol. Mao already favored the peasantry and national bourgeoisie, what Deng did is just the inevitable conclusion.

>>2582034
>I'm not an American or Chinese
How iz dat possible?!?!

>>2582504
>because god forbid subhuman orientals do capitalism better than the herrenvolk
Isn't that the problem? Why would a socialist not living in China celebrate Chinese capitalism?

>>2581986
the price of labour power is the price of subsistence, i.e. the price needed to keep a prole alive, sheltered, and capable of reproduction, so it's good when that price goes down.

>>2583912
>Isn't that the problem? Why would a socialist not living in China celebrate Chinese capitalism?
it is a mystery

>The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as "an immense accumulation of commodities
/thread

>>2595920
I'll do my part to establish socialism by trading stocks. Every time I make money by moving it around, the proletariat grows stronger

>>2596603
only if you are doing that as a non western person in a non western country since as we know marxism is as conservatives think, about destroying the west but actually thats a good thing

China is in phase D of capitalism as described by Engels in Anri-Duhring

>>2597447
can you summarise the phases please

>>2597449
Nah

>>2581493
>sovereignty
Idealism to the max

>>2581344
This quote is about Taylorism not re introducing markets in an already socialist state