/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>It's impossible
<Why is it impossible?
>UH BECAUSE IT JUST IS OK?????
Riveting.

Deniers should get new material. This shit is so boring I don't even care about refuting it

>>2813589
you are probably one of the reactoids I once used this very gif on, and you were so impressed you saved it LOL

>>2813642
it's literally one guy LLM who just doomposts every day
>fuck you, fuck communists
>marx is a drunk
>fuck politics
>it's never happening
>fuck you, only brown bears deserve communism
>it's not a phase mom
he does this every fucking day. he once admitted he was a petty bourgeois failson taking out his anger.

>>2813646
It's more possible than ever with modern tech where you only need like 1 working day per week to cover your needs and you just fucking do whatever the other 6 days

>>2813650
>he once admitted he was a petty bourgeois failson taking out his anger
Many such cases

>>2813598
underdeveloped societies have a wide gap between classes which gives them a revolution potential
however the new post-revolution elite is bound to repeat the mistakes of previous elites because underdeveloped = lacking social discipline
developed societies don't have a wide gap between classes therefor there's barely any revolution potential
for a communist revolution you'd have to have a society that expiriences a slump but doesn't get decadent nor loses potential for self-defence and doesn't turn to fascism
that's a lot of crapshoots

>>2813663
Suck my fucking dick PMC

>>2813673
I hope it’s done drunk just like driving the forklift

>>2813668
Look at income inequality under neoliberalism and rethink your thesis

<Unless you rotate which sector sets the government agenda

You are referring to the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT) and its foundational political philosophy known as the Law of Social Cycle. It was posited in 1959 by the Indian philosopher and spiritual leader Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (also known as Shrii Shrii Ánandamúrti), who founded the socio-spiritual movement Ananda Marga.The core of this theory relies on a rotating wheel of rule determined by a specific "separation of labor" and human psychology.

Also Marx was German, Germans are lying scum, every man, woman, and child

>>2813683
sar please no sar.

>>2813688
CPI Marxist already lost elections in Kerela, Rss rules you

>>2813682
Got a pdf about it?

>>2813679
nothing else stirs reactionary sympathies like neoliberalism

>>2813693
I think he’s Thai but I’m not sure

>>2813690
>Principles from the social thought of the Indian philosopher P.R.
Sarkar are employed to show that there exists an optimal level of economic
inequality that joins the values of economic justice and efficiency. Sarkar
favored establishing a living wage as well as a maximum wage that allows for
work incentives. It is argued that the primary justification for inequality is to
provide incentives for individual productivity, and that the value of those
incentives should not exceed the economic contributions they produce. To
determine the relative importance of income incentives in motivating individual
economic contributions, it is found necessary to develop a multifaceted model
of human productivity. Such a model is developed using concepts from
humanistic psychology. A Sarkarian individual productivity curve is introduced
in diagrammatic analysis to demonstrate the existence of an optimal level of
inequality, and also to explain the persistence of extreme income inequality.

it's just Indian feudal socialism.

>>2813695
Sounds way more workable than marxoid nonsense

>>2813697
ok retard.

>>2813699
Keep believing you’ll drive a forklift by day, astronaut at night, and a professional weed smoker inbetween without being defined by any of them

>>2813700
Find a friend IRL instead of shitting up imageboards so that people will respond to you

>>2813703
I do have them, I’d prefer to take this toxicity out on the bots here than my loved ones in real life

>>2813589
Planning the economy is not a complicated process for workers. You only need to transfer input and output from local people's councils to the supreme national people's council to write the plans, while smaller people's councils adjust the data locally. This is more efficient and consumes less energy than speculating in the financial market.

Now you want to know what a socialist economy is like? Then I'll quote Marx for you:

<Let us take, first of all, the words "proceeds of labor" in the sense of the product of labor; then the co-operative proceeds of labor are the total social product.

<From this must now be deducted: First, cover for replacement of the means of production used up. Second, additional portion for expansion of production. Third, reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents, dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc.

<These deductions from the "undiminished" proceeds of labor are an economic necessity, and their magnitude is to be determined according to available means and forces, and partly by computation of probabilities, but they are in no way calculable by equity.

<There remains the other part of the total product, intended to serve as means of consumption.

<Before this is divided among the individuals, there has to be deducted again, from it: First, the general costs of administration not belonging to production. This part will, from the outset, be very considerably restricted in comparison with present-day society, and it diminishes in proportion as the new society develops. Second, that which is intended for the common satisfaction of needs, such as schools, health services, etc. From the outset, this part grows considerably in comparison with present-day society, and it grows in proportion as the new society develops. Third, funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is included under so-called official poor relief today.

<Only now do we come to the "distribution" which the program, under Lassallean influence, alone has in view in its narrow fashion – namely, to that part of the means of consumption which is divided among the individual producers of the co-operative society.

<The "undiminished" proceeds of labor have already unnoticeably become converted into the "diminished" proceeds, although what the producer is deprived of in his capacity as a private individual benefits him directly or indirectly in his capacity as a member of society.

<Just as the phrase of the "undiminished" proceeds of labor has disappeared, so now does the phrase of the "proceeds of labor" disappear altogether.

<Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. The phrase "proceeds of labor", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning.

<What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society – after the deductions have been made – exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.

<Here, obviously, the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities, as far as this is exchange of equal values. Content and form are changed, because under the altered circumstances no one can give anything except his labor, and because, on the other hand, nothing can pass to the ownership of individuals, except individual means of consumption. But as far as the distribution of the latter among the individual producers is concerned, the same principle prevails as in the exchange of commodity equivalents: a given amount of labor in one form is exchanged for an equal amount of labor in another form.

<Hence, equal right here is still in principle – bourgeois right, although principle and practice are no longer at loggerheads, while the exchange of equivalents in commodity exchange exists only on the average and not in the individual case.

<In spite of this advance, this equal right is still constantly stigmatized by a bourgeois limitation. The right of the producers is proportional to the labor they supply; the equality consists in the fact that measurement is made with an equal standard, labor.

<But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.

<But these defects are inevitable in the first phase of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society. Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby.

<In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

<Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm

>>2813710
This doesn’t sound better or more rational than the status quo, in fact the struggle between blue and white collar labor would replace the captialist/worker distinction. Why should any faggot in an office take value from MY WORK?

>>2813714
The difference in the value of one worker's labor compared to another is not as great as you seem to think. When education, health, transportation, food, tools, community, and leisure are socialized to meet the needs of the workers, then the inequalities and what each worker earns do not become very different. As greater abundance in production is acquired and workers acquire greater discipline, then characteristics of the higher stage of communism will appear. People will receive according to their needs and according to the motto "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work" in lower-stage communism, becoming "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" in its advanced stage.

The issue of public employees is already written in the Bolshevik program if you read the revised 1917 program:

<The party fights for a more democratic workers’ and peasants’ republic, in which the police and the standing army will be abolished and replaced by the universally armed people, by a people’s militia; all officials will be not only elective, but also subject to recall at any time upon the demand of a majority of the electors; all officials, without exception, will be paid at a rate not exceeding the average wage of a competent worker; parliamentary representative institutions will be gradually replaced by Soviets of people’s representatives (from various classes and professions, or from various localities), functioning as both legislative and executive bodies.

<V. I. Lenin, Materials Relating to the Revision of the Party Programme, Chapter 4 Draft of Revised Programme

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/reviprog/ch04.htm

I would say it seems like you are unaware of the term socially necessary working time.

>>2813714
People in offices already take most of your labour, in socialism it would at least be better

>>2813776
I don’t trust faggots in offices, period, end of sentence

>>2813774
I don’t trust white collar workers or their families

>>2813782
you spam this pic a lot. does it stir something inside of you?

>>2813589
I don't care if it's impossible, it's still true understanding of how the capitalist system works and I will die trying to bring it about even if it is sisyphean