Pop Quiz (cite sources in answers): . . 1. Is this image Marxist or something else? . 2. Does Marx distinguish between personal and private property?. 3. Is home ownership petty bourgeois even if it is not used for profit?. 4. Are AES states Marxist o

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Options
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Verification
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1771727329050.png (396.27 KB, 602x602, ClipboardImage.png)

Anonymous 22-02-26 02:28:49 No.2699968

Pop Quiz (cite sources in answers):

1. Is this image Marxist or something else?
2. Does Marx distinguish between personal and private property?
3. Is home ownership petty bourgeois even if it is not used for profit?
4. Are AES states Marxist or something else?
5. Is the DPRK constitution article 24 right-deviationist for recognizing private property of the workers?

Anonymous 22-02-26 02:32:12 No.2699974

Also include my small business where all members are either family, friends, or cooperators.
Under communism, we will all be libertarian small business owners.

Anonymous 22-02-26 02:34:34 No.2699978

File: 1771727674173.png (318.58 KB, 640x360, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2699974
>Under communism, we will all be libertarian small business owners.
Cooperativismo

Anonymous 23-02-26 00:03:54 No.2701042

This is the first time I've heard personal and private property used as something other than synonyms. It's meaningless to me.

Glownonymous 23-02-26 00:12:59 No.2701050

File: 1771805578713.jpg (14.99 KB, 547x561, 1712849374420.jpg)

thats some bullshit discussion only anarchists/libs engage in lol. all property is being done away with to lead to mere possession bud

Anonymous 23-02-26 01:15:20 No.2701124

File: 1771809319587.png (303.12 KB, 571x551, toothbrush.png)

>>2701042
I've heard it for over a decade in response to "communists will take your toothbrush"

Anonymous 23-02-26 02:03:25 No.2701178

>>2701124
Was always taqiyya, there's no qualitative difference between personal and private, between toothbrushes and factories, only quantative

It's just that it's pointless to do economic calculations on individual toothbrushes

Anonymous 23-02-26 05:53:06 No.2701407

>private property / personal property
I don't recall Marx and Engels ever making that distinction. I would rather use language that distinguishes between property rights and usage rights.

Glownonymous 23-02-26 05:58:43 No.2701408

>>2701407
uh oh, rights only make sense under bourgeois society too

Anonymous 23-02-26 06:01:33 No.2701410

>>2701408
Written law predates capitalism.

Glownonymous 23-02-26 06:14:22 No.2701419

>>2701410
classes predate capitalism too and im pretty sure those are going away along with capitalism :)

Glownonymous 23-02-26 06:16:40 No.2701421

>>2701410
>>2701419
also not only appealing to "thing existed before so it shall be Eternal" but also trying to retroactively turn bourgeois rights into some transhistorical concept makes you a certified retard

Glowing Senator Armstrong 23-02-26 06:44:50 No.2701438

File: 1771829089798.jpg (2.9 KB, 183x127, neil armstrong.jpg)

1. Who cares.
2. No, Marx didn't give a fuck about either gimme that shit.
3. No, although it is bourgeois decadence.
4. Marxism is a spook: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1890/letters/90_08_05.htm (paragraph 1)
5. The DPRK isn't even nominally "M-L" anymore, let alone Marxist or Leninist.

Anonymous 23-02-26 06:48:17 No.2701443

>>2701178
>Was always taqiyya
but the communists disdain to conceal their aims? was that also taqiyya?

Anonymous 23-02-26 06:56:35 No.2701445

>>2701443
Taqiyya of the taqiyya
Think dialectically

Anonymous 23-02-26 07:09:25 No.2701447

>>2701050
>all property is being done away with to lead to mere possession
>mere possession
??? isn't the definition of property something which one possesses???

Unique IPs: 9