Why are so many modern communists obsessed with liberal concept of indigenous rights? When communists dont believe in land ownership or inheritance.
>Body too short
>Body too short
>>2838819We actually don't care, nation liberation is struggle against colonialism and imperialism which is what we care about.
>>2838821
>zionism, more land theft, more
Nothing to do with communism.
>>2838824>colonialism No reason for anyone whos nationalis to care which person belonging to which ethnic group owns what land under a capitalist system.
>imperialismCompletely irrelevant to communism as much retarded ML's (mostly liberals) believe it does.
Only liberals care that the working class is exploited by foreigners and want it to be exploited by the local capitalist class instead.
Why do you faggots always have to have your arguments across multiple threads?
>>2838834*Not a nationalist to care
>>2838819Because it is not a liberal concept.
The indigenous people did not have a concept of Capitalism so they owned their land collectively, but colonizers stole the land from the people and turned it into private property.
Either you didn’t know this OP or you are an FBI agent.
>Why are so many modern communists obsessed with liberal concept of indigenous rights?
They aren't, they're concerned with the Leninist concept of self determination and liberation for oppressed nations.
>>2838842>Because it is not a liberal conceptIt is if you're going to take it away from the peopel currently living there and giving it to someone based on their ethnicity.
If a socialist society would be established all this land would be owned collectively and social relations like settler and would be irrelevant anyway.
You're all just liberals and ethnonationalists masquerading as marxists.
>>2838842ok but the land theft was historically necessary because it leads to capitalism -> socialism
landback seeks to restore primitive communism which is going in the wrong direction
>>2838846
get a life.
The feds had to switch up their angle. The meth Juche schizo posts weren't moving anyone, so now they're trying whatever they can to sow division within the united front of third worldists. It's not going to work.
Has anyone else noticed the Juche angle died down, and now it's third worldist this, third worldist that, and then you have threads trying to make Maoists hate Anarchists? They're talking about the same type of leftists in their glowie brains just rebranding the target name.
>>2838877How come the feds understand communism better than you do?
Because they are liberal LARPers
because the westerns "leftists" have been co opted by IDpol
>>2838925
meds now
may I see these modern communists obsessed with indigenous shit?, I don't know any parties or public figures doing what OP is describing but maybe I just live under a rock. internet bullshit doesn't count
>>2838859>land theft was historically necessaryMarxists agree with Adam Smith and Locke but leftists aren't liberals trust me bro it's a radical sublation you'll see.
Because moralism. But it's not 2019 anymore and i rarely see any of this now.
>>2838842>so they owned their land collectivelyDo you uighurs really believe this? A Tibetan lama could make the exact same fucking argument.
>>2864117Just because society takes the form of patriarchal family doesnt mean it wasnt based on property in common. Not sure if indian community was patriarchal
Ethnic group aint same as nation though
>>2864123>Not sure if indian community was patriarchalDude….
>>2864130Well assasins creed 3 showed be a granny being the head of the tribe so…
>>2864141>Yet a lot of prominent Native American academics still write as if their communities are living off the land and practicing traditional beliefs, when in reality most are either Christian or agnostic.CAUSE IT?S ALL 20th CENTURY GHOSTS. LIKE RETARDS WHO THINK MODERN "FARMERS" ARE LIKE 20TH CENTURY PEASANTS INSTEAD OF THE LANDOWNERS/SLAVEOWNERS THEY TRULY ARE.
>>2838858I never said that there should be reverse-ethnic-cleansing or whatever, and OP never said that either.
>>2838859What are you talking about?!?! It was cruel and unnecessary!
>>2864117Okay but would that Tibetan Lama be correct? No! Because Tibet was feudalist before it was annexed, the majority or Indigenous tribes were communal, the Aztecs had Calpullis for example
>>2838845>oppressed nationsProletarians you mean? The nation is nothing more than the apparatus of the bourgeoisie.
>>2838845American Indian tribes are by definition not nations
>>2864196By what definition?
>>2864195No it isn't. National distinctions predate bourgeois rule and continued to exist after it. As Marx says nations will one day disappear under higher stage communism, but until then nations and nation states are the existing political units within which class struggle must be carried out. Lenin further elaborates on this by identifying how imperialist capitalism relies on national oppression to maintain profit rates, which in turn is the basis for the alliance of the proletariat and oppressed nations which have a common interest.
>>2864141modern native americans have been basically assimilated, thats true. the scary thing about this is that you can imagine the same thing would have probably happened to the tiny minority of slavs that would have survived the nazi generalplan ost. similar thing with those "token" jews. no connection to their peoples past, simply germanized or in this instance, americanized
>>2864207It varies a lot tbh, there have been a lot of efforts at cultural revival, mainly in terms of language and religious practices. These have had varying success.
>>2838845>Leninist concept of self determination Yes. Native Americans have that right
>liberation for oppressed nations.That's not communists end goal, that would be the amalgamation of nations under a single workers polity. Until that time native Americans have the right to secede, but 'liberation of oppressed nations' isn't in a single party program and for good reason
>>2864205>No it isn'thttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch07.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm>Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance of that class. An oppressed class under the sway of the feudal nobility, an armed and self-governing association in the medieval commune(4): here independent urban republic (as in Italy and Germany); there taxable “third estate” of the monarchy (as in France); afterwards, in the period of manufacturing proper, serving either the semi-feudal or the absolute monarchy as a counterpoise against the nobility, and, in fact, cornerstone of the great monarchies in general, the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative State, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie<LeninRead more unionist. It will do you much good.
Native Americans have the highest military service rate among any ethnic group in the US. They’re part of the oppressive capitalist apparatus, the world’s rapist cops.
>>2864209>but 'liberation of oppressed nations' isn't in a single party program and for good reasonYes it is.
<The socialist government will recognize the inviolable right of all oppressed nations to self-determination with regard to their means of gaining and maintaining their liberation. In the United States, this includes the right of self-determination for African American, Native, Puerto Rican and other Latino national minorities, the Hawai’ian nation, Asian, Pacific Islander, Arab and other oppressed peoples that have experienced oppression as a whole people under capitalism.https://pslweb.org/program/<Among the smaller nations in Canada are Indigenous peoples who are exercising their right to sovereignty with the demand for autonomy and self-government. Among these are the Northern Cree in Quebec, and the newly created territory of Nunavut, the Nisga’a on the west coast, and others. The Acadians in the Maritimes also constitute a smaller nation in Canada. The two largest nations are English-speaking Canada and Quebec.<The crisis of confederation lies first and foremost in the refusal of the ruling class, the Canadian monopoly bourgeoisie, to recognize the right of each nation to self-determination; that is, the right to choose the form of sovereignty that the majority of the people of each nation desires, including the right to separate and form an independent state.https://communist-party.ca/chapter-4-the-canadian-state-the-nations-and-peoples-of-canada-and-the-crisis-of-democracy/>>2864211>Read moreNo you.
<The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word. The right of self determination of nations is completely incompatible with the goal of communism which is a unified, one world, centrally planned, centrally controlled government that will inevitably have one standardized language. It’s like giving a finger or a toenail the self determination to leave your body.
>>2864218<No you>The working men have no country>We cannot take from them what they have not got>Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy>Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy>Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy>must rise to be the leading class of the nation>must constitute itself the nation>it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.>though not in the bourgeois sense of the word>though not in the bourgeois sense of the word>though not in the bourgeois sense of the wordStop proving my point
>>2838819Why do American colonists (by which specifically I mean anyone living in the so-called "New World" who isn't Native American) refuse to take responsibility for their historic and ongoing crimes of genocide, colonisation, and slavery against the indigenous peoples, and then attempt to frame taking responsibility for such actions and support for resistance against said genocide as "liberalism"?
American so-called leftists and Communists live by a double standard.
They comprehend and support solidarity with Palestinians in their struggles against Zionist colonisation - but go insane and perform all kinds of mental gymnastics if you suggest native Americans should resist their own colonisation.
And no, OP that doesn't equate to demanding greater private property rights for Native Americans. Demanding that as a means to rectify things would be economically liberal in it's methodology.
But I also don't see anyone on the left calling for that, I'm curious where you're finding these examples of supposed leftists demanding more private property rights for Natives?
Also as funny as I find it, shouting for all crackkkers to leave Turtle Island clearly isn't serious.
Of course racially based expulsions would be wrong, ethnically based crap flinging like that has no place in communist or anarchist thought.
But for so long as the US has it's current white nationalist Christian fundementalist regime I say the chants to kick you out of Turtle Island should continue, and while national liberation (ie ethnostates) isn't beneficial (Luxembourg and others explain this), I can't blame natives for falling into calling for it under current conditions when there's bigger issues at hand.
What should be done then?
There's plenty that can be done to help remedy the situation - redistribution of wealth, investment in native communities, reparations, stop building 100000 mile long pipelines and car parks the size of a European town on their lands, stop honouring the colonists responsible for genocide as national heroes, stop turning mountains into statues of people's faces, etc.
I'm not an expert on this topic but I'm sure if you listen to what the communities are requesting a lot of it very moderate and reasonable given the damage you've done.
>>2864225Native Americans have been direct participants in zionist colonialist violence against the rest of the world though, they’re per capita the most willing to join the US IOF and go into other countries to help US capitalism rape
>>2864222The end goal is unification, but until then oppressed nations living inside oppressive nations, like the native tribes in america, have the full accepted right to secede whenever they want until our end goal can be achieved, it's necessary to recognize this to build trust between the two kinds of nations. Lenin says the unity between the two has to be democratic for it to work. If they want to leave they can.
>The right of nations to self-determination, i. e., the right to secede and form independent national states, will be dealt with elsewhere.[1] But while, and insofar as, different nations constitute a single state, Marxists will never, under any circumstances, advocate either the federal principle or decentralisation. The great centralised state is a tremendous historical step forward from medieval disunity to the future socialist unity of the whole world, and only via such a state (inseparably connected with capitalism), can there be any road to socialism.
<It would, however, be inexcusable to forget that in advocating centralism we advocate exclusively democratic centralism. On this point all the philistines in general, and the nationalist philistines in particular (including the late Dragomanov[7]), have so confused the issue that we are obliged again and again to spend time clarifying it.https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/crnq/6.htm >>2864226Source for your claim that native Americans are disproportionately Zionists?
Why would they support doing to others what happened to them?
>>2864228This framework is what caused Soviet collapse and China is currently in the process of rejecting it with the ethnic unity law. Preserving these cultures and languages retards national development and causes further stagnation and ghettoization and uncompetitiveness among smaller nations
>>2838842>spirit>rightspoopy
>>2864229Natives join the voluntary US military rate at the highest per capita rate of any ethnic group in the US
>>2864231Constitutionally the Soviet union was federalized, so it doesnt reflect what Lenins talking about here
>ethnic unity lawterrible comparisons all around. do the Uyghurs have their own state? No? Then they're being assimilated like the native americans have been
>>2864231>This framework is what caused Soviet collapseIt is not. The exact opposite occurred.
>China isInvalid entirely.
>>2864236And communists should be honest enough to directly say smaller nations and cultures are to be destroyed and this is progress in action
>>2864224Anon what do you think is the meaning of the phrase "rise to the leading class of the nation, constitute itself as the nation" means? It means they must seize control of the nation state as a political unit.
>though not in the bourgeois sense of the wordWho said anything about it being in the bourgeois sense of the word? Anyway Marx goes in to say
<In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another will also be put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end.National liberation has always been part of a Marxist program. Marx himself supported the national liberation struggles of Poland and Ireland. Lenin simply extrapolated this line of thinking for the imperialist epoch when national oppression became a cornerstone of the global capitalist system.
>>2864238If the nations of the Soviet Union didn’t have the legal right to secede the collapse would not have taken place, its that simple
>>2864240Marx also called for the genocide of slavs because they opposed Hungarian and Austrian revolutions
>>2864242Which is why Lenin's innovations are superior. He corrected many of Marx's deficiencies.
>>2864241pretty sure russia unilaterally dissolved the soviet union against the other members consent but ok
>>2864244Did you think I thought that was okay because Russia was the biggest and therefore most progressive culture there? Of course not
>>2864243Considering the collapse of Leninism I’m going to say no, those deficiencies are in fact worse than those of Marx
>>2864248Marx never got as far as Lenin did though.
>>2864249The opposite of your statement is true
>>2864249August Willich is clearly superior to both tbqh
>>2864251Too bad Marx was a pussy ass uygha and refused to fight him in a duel.
>>2864239>Whoever does not recognise and champion the equality of nations and languages, and does not fight against all national oppression or inequality, is not a Marxist; he is not even a democrat. That is beyond doubt. But it is also beyond doubt that the pseudo-Marxist who heaps abuse upon a Marxist of another nation for being an “assimilator” is simply a nationalist philistine. In this unhandsome category of people are all the Bundists and (as we shall shortly see) Ukrainian nationalist-socialists such as L. Yurkevich, Dontsov and Co.Lenin was exposing you emotional retards over a hundred years ago. yes you WILL be assimilated, that's kinda how communism is supposed to go
Even if we assume that, in time, there will be a state frontier between Great Russia and the Ukraine, the historically progressive nature of the “assimilation” of the Great-Russian and Ukrainian workers will be as undoubted as the progressive nature of the grinding down of nations in America.https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/crnq/3.htm >>2864253What does Marx have to say on this matter?
>>2864253Why are you quoting Lenin at me when I reject Lenin wholesale? This isn’t convincing
>>2864256you think the point of debate is to convince the person being debated?
>>2864253There's a pretty big difference between natural assimilation through cultural exchange and economic integration on the one hand, and forced, artificial assimilation on the other (e.g. kidnapping minority children and beating them if they speak their own language). The latter just doesn't work, as the continued existence of Indigenous identity despite 150 years of brutal systematic attempts to eradicate their culture will show.
>>2864257There’s no audience
>>2864259false. it used to be me
>>2864260So there was an audience and now it no longer exists
>>2864258The latter does work for capitalists, but never with 100% effectiveness.
>>2864258The end result for either of those is the same thing though, it’s the difference between going to the dentist who uses pliers and novocaine for a bad tooth vs tying the tooth to a truck and driving away
>>2864264>The end result for either of those is the same thing thoughOne cannot say this with absolute certainty
>>2864258>forced, artificial assimilation on the other (e.g. kidnapping minority children and beating them if they speak their own language). this is part and parcel the capitalist system of assimilation Lenin is describing as progressive here
>as the continued existence of Indigenous identity despite 150 years of brutal systematic attempts to eradicate their culture will show.the whole point is more subordination and economic exploitation and less complete annihilation
Does a bear shit in the woods?
>>2864268>this is part and parcel the capitalist system of assimilation Lenin is describing as progressive hereAnd yet when the Bolsheviks took power they granted unprecedented rights for minorities and protections for their language and culture.
>>2864264>The end result for either of those is the same thing thoughNo it isn't. In one scenario you end up with harmonious coexistence between nations as they slowly amalgamate. In the other you end up with constant unrest and the occasional low level insurgency.
>>2864275Yes, as enumerated in the Soviet constitution.
Because the right of oppressed nations to self-determination is a fundamental part of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism. It is progressive since it allows them to modernise. In America, for example, indigenous people have backwards material conditions and live poorly compared to the rest of the country. Self-determination and autarky are the only ways to modernise.
>>2864281Right’s loving unionist.
>>2864283>It is progressive since it allows them to moderniseThis is also something people always leave out when talking about Marx and his statements about the progressive features of colonialism. Even if it broke through the pre-capitalist structures of these societies and forcibly integrated them into capitalist relations of production, in then inhibits their further development into fully industrialized societies. Much like how capitalism is at first a massive boon for the development of productive forces and then becomes an obstacle to it. Even if you make the argument that this was a progressive development in the 19th century, it is decidedly no longer the case today.
>>2864284Why should socialist societies not have a rights framework as the basis for its legal system and relations of production?
>inb4 rights emerged under bourgeois society So did toilet paper. Do you go around all day with your ass caked in shit?
>>2864273>And yet when the Bolsheviks took power they granted unprecedented rights for minorities and protections for their language and culture.what does this non sequitur have to do what I said? communists realize all cultures and minorities need to have free and equal status. this doesn't disprove anything
>No one unobsessed by nationalist prejudices can fail to perceive that this process of assimilation of nations by capitalism means the greatest historical progress, the break down of hidebound national conservatism in the various backwoods, especially in backward countries like Russia.
>Take Russia and the attitude of Great Russians towards the Ukrainians. Naturally, every democrat, not to mention Marxists, will strongly oppose the incredible humiliation of Ukrainians, and demand complete equality for them. But it would be a downright betrayal of socialism and a silly policy even from the standpoint of the bourgeois “national aims” of the Ukrainians to weaken the ties and the alliance between the Ukrainian and Great-Russian proletariat that now exist within the confines of a single state. >>2864286>Why should socialist societies not have a rights framework as the basis for its legal system and relations of production?Because we ultimately desire the administration of things, not people.
>So did toilet paperAt least toilet paper is material.
>>2864289Communism has no rights, but communism also doesn’t need rights either
>>2864290You can take what you want and no one will stop you, it’s the rule of the strong over the weak who are at the former’s mercy, just like primitive communism
>>2864290So you will own nothing and be happy, then?
>>2864292>You can take what you want and no one will stop youJust like rape.
>>2864294If communism doesn’t have rights, why would it have consent?
>>2864295Exactly - You think rape and murder should go unpunished by law, and so society should descend into a war of all against all.
>>2864296Rape and murder are class society concepts, moving beyond class society means any and all taboos or rules are nil
>>2864292>You can take what you want and no one will stop youNot what that means
>it’s the rule of the strong over the weak who are at the former’s mercyNot what that means
>just like primitive communismAbsolutely not like primitive
>>2864293No. It means people manage themselves rather than rely on a upper class to stomp on them.
>>2864287>what does this non sequitur have to do what I said? The point is that Lenin clearly didn't recognize Western style forced assimilation of oppressed nations to be a good thing. Otherwise he wouldn't have implemented policies which were completely antithetical to these.
>>2864288>Because we ultimately desire the administration of things, not peopleWhat kind of nonsense answer is that? All states and social orders by definition administer people.
>>2864297So rape isn't bad in itself, it is only a cultural taboo?
>>2864298>It means people manage themselvesAnd what happens when people don't manage themselves?
>>2864299>What kind of nonsense answer is that? Deadass, are you fucking with me right now?
>All states and social orders by definition administer people.Primitive communism does not do that. Communism does not do that.
>>2864242Marx supported poles right to self determination though
>>2864302>And what happens when people don't manage themselves?It means back to the warehouse wagie.
>>2864303You're talking about higher stage communism after the state and classes have disappeared. But that is preceded by lower stage communism and the dictatorship of the proletariat, which absolutely requires administration of people, and thus legal frameworks like rights.
>>2864296“Society” is already a war of all against all
>>2864304He opposed it for everyone that became Yugoslavs
>>2864306>But that is preceded by lower stage communismThat’s Lenin, not Marx.
>>2864299>The point is that Lenin clearly didn't recognize Western style forced assimilation of oppressed nations to be a good thingyes he did, from the quote posted earlier:
<Even if we assume that, in time, there will be a state frontier between Great Russia and the Ukraine, the historically progressive nature of the “assimilation” of the Great-Russian and Ukrainian workers will be as undoubted as the progressive nature of the grinding down of nations in America.>Otherwise he wouldn't have implemented policies which were completely antithetical to these.why are you unable to grasp the notion that its progressive in both cases? one aspect of capitalism being progressive does not automatically make it regressive in communism. lol. in this case communism enhances and rapidly speeds up assimilation which is what we want, overnight the people of ukraine and russia were no longer ukrainians and russians but soviet citizens. why on earth would we want to keep the native americans in the primitive bourgeois concept of nationhood
>>2864305What? You are just permitting murder, rape and slavery in the absence of a concept of rights - that is what has been concluded.
>>2864307Hobbes tells us that the state of war is tempered by the state of society, mediated by rights. It is rights which define society. If not, then no person would have a claim over anything, and you'd sound like a lunatic, claiming that rape and murder is fine, actually.
>>2864309No it isn't. Marx described a process of social evolution by which the state, money, and class distinctions would gradually disappear. This starts with the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat and progresses through socialist construction. His rejection of the immediate abolition of the state and classes was the main disagreement between him and the anarchists.
>>2864309Marx distinguishes between the lower and higher stage of communism
>>2864310>yes he didThen why did the Bolsheviks implement the opposite policy?
>>2864311>What? You are just permitting murder, rape and slavery in the absence of a concept of rightsNo, I am not actually. As a matter of fact, I am doing the exact opposite when I reject the concept of rights.
>>2864314implementing the equality of cultures and nations within a single state speeds up the process of assimilation, a process that capitalism began dummy
>>2864312>No it isn'tYeah, it is.
>Marx described a process of social evolution by which the state, money, and class distinctions would gradually disappear. This starts with the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat and progresses through socialist constructionNone of this exists under communism. This all applies to the time under dictatorship of the proletariat.
>>2864313Source it
>>2864315>Person A: We have a right to bodily autonomy, and thus a right to not be raped or murdered.<Person B (you): Actually, no, rape and murder are allowed.Anything to add? Or have I represented your genius adequately?
>>2864311Hobbes has been thoroughly disproven by archeological data, primitive communism was far more peaceful than slave and feudal societies precisely because we had to rely on each other against a hostile and predatory nature
>>2864317They didn't just implement official equality of nations, they took deliberate steps to promote minority languages, grant special privileges to minorities to elevate them to positions of management and leadership, granted them political autonomy within the USSR, and promoted a revival of minority cultures that the Tsarists had repressed. This is pretty much what most socialists suggest for Indigenous people in the Americas.
>>2864309But what about small scale prodution? What about the force of habit of billions of people? Lenin says communists will have to learn to live with those small scale producers under dotp
>>2864318And a dictatorship of the proletariat requires a rights framework to function.
Ten thousand years of dotp before communism btw
>>2864320>primitive communism was far more peaceful than slave and feudal societies precisely because we had to rely on each other against a hostile and predatory natureOkay, so what happens to rapists and murderers in a communist society?
>>2864319Bud, I think you glossed over the armed proletariat part of the manifesto.
>>2864326They won’t exist
Take an average person and see if he can do anything and everything. He cant. There will be division of labour for ten thousand years before communism happens
>>2864329That’s why you mechanize labor
>>2864327Arms that will be locked in a room. Burgers have more gun rights than future proles will
>>2864322>But what about small scale prodution? What about small scale production? We aren’t anarchists here.
>Lenin says communists will have to learn to live with those small scale producers under dotp<Lenin >>2864330Like pressing a button on a machine and it gives me stuff
>>2864327What are you implying? That rape and murder will be punished according to the consciousness of inherent rights that justify a mode of self-defense against aggression?
>>2864328Just like the Heaven that religious people discuss. All good things and nothing bad. But I'll ask you, should rapists and murderers in our current society be punished? If so, why?
>>2864334Ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure
>>2864335So you can't say whether or not rapists should go to jail?
>>2864323Progam? Sure. Rights? Not really.
>>2864324Refers to communist society, not communism itself
>>2864331>Arms that will be locked in a room. Burgers have more gun rights than future proles willWhat are you basing all this on?
>>2864334>That rape and murder will be punished according to the consciousness of inherent rights that justify a mode of self-defense against aggression?What is wrong with you?
All commies disagree with each other and nobody has it right. It seems one has to spend a lifetime of reading everything to get the proper understanding
>>2864340>Refers to communist society, not communism itselflol
>>2864337Jail doesn’t work, in fact it makes criminals more hardened
>>2864341Exactly like every religion with their thousands of schisms and petty pedantic nonsense
>>2864340>what are you basing all this onNothing man. Dont take my pessimism seriously. Even commies would get emotional and make theory mistakes that BASED lenin had to expose and stuff
>>2864344I didnt say that fuck you
>>2864340What gives someone the RIGHT to shoot another person?
That is the question, which has already been answered.
I'll wait for you to catch up.
>>2864343So rapists SHOULDN'T go to jail?
What SHOULD happen to rapists? Enlighten us all.
>>2864347It's literally the same
godless weirdos worship their idols using politics instead of religion
>>2864342Yeah, you’re actually supposed to build up communist society along the dotp.
>>2864348>What gives someone the RIGHT to shoot another person?I genuinely don’t care
>>2864350>I genuinely don’t careObviously not. Your brain is empty, my friend.
>>2864348Probably exile and social ostracism like in primitive communism
>>2864330Mechanizing labour makes it so that you dont have to teach people to be able to do everything? Is that correct? If so, nifty. But man i feel like its going to be a thousand years of dotp with brvvtal labour discipline and shit. My life wont get any better
>>2864352>Probably exile and social ostracismBut why? What makes rape worthy of punishment?
>>2864355Why are you asking metaphysical questions?
>>2864321>At all events, it is by no means impossible to meet, on the basis of equality, all the reasonable and just wishes of the national minorities, and nobody will say that advocacy of equality is harmful. On the other hand, it would certainly be harmful to advocate division of schools according to nationality, to advocate, for example, special schools for Jewish children in St. Petersburg, and it would be utterly impossible to set up national schools for every national minority, for one, two or three children. Furthermore, it is impossible, in any country-wide law, to define how large a national minority must be to be entitled to special schools, or to special teachers for supplementary subjects, etc.in any case, the policy of equality of cultures in the ussr only sped up the process of assimilation between the workers, a process that capitalism began
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/crnq/5.htm Bauman got away with causing a womans suicide because he was useful. Since communist party is an anticipation of communist society its probably depends on who you are. Its not like communists believe in equality like liberals.
>>2864355It’s impractical for the collective
>>2864358Lenin is talking in the context of his material powers. Also, why did some non russians got their own republics while others didnt? Also, wasnt lenin black pilled when he wrote who the nature of the bolshevik state is like that of tsarist one?
>>2864362>Lenin is talking in the context of his material powers. what does this even mean. this was written in 1913
>>2864356>You: Rapists should be punished<Me: Why?>You: What are all these metaphysics!?The claim was that rapists should be punished. Why?
>>2864361Why is it impracticable?
>>2864357You have literally never thought about anything before.
>>2864363Russia sucked that why every minority couldnt get their schools in their language.
Why did bolsheviks kill minority specialists and intelligentcia? Were they great russian chauvisnists all along?
Will there be rape under communism? Under dotp there will be law to punish rapists because there will still men will still look at women as something that you are not allowed to take without consent. Then, in communism, women will be strong or some shit. Male on male rapes will keep happening though and female on female one too. Because, uhh, they dont produce children or some shit. I am not commie and i didnt read commie books btw. Fully i mean
>>2838824Retarded lib nonsense.
Would lenin and bordiga shit on each other?
>>2838819>liberal conceptsread losurdo lib. libs are the ones who colonized the world.
>modern communists>modernopen up lenin's collected works as a PDF and ctrl+f "oppressed nations" and be amazed
>>2838834>imperialism is irrelevant to communismI love when people who haven't read anything just say random fucking bullshit. you should be beaten with sticks.
>>2864374
Nta man i am not a commie
>>2864364Spreads disease, unplanned pregnancy, victims don’t function very well afterwards, that affects everyone
>>2864364>You have literally never thought about anything before.I have thought of your need to prepare for upcoming No Kings protests. Here, i’ll even start you off with a couple:
First:
>Neighbor neighbor can't you see>Democracy is what we need (2)>Oh oh oh oh oh, this power grab has got to go (2)>Healthcare is a human right>That's why today we stand and fight (2x)>Oh oh oh oh oh, healthcare cuts have got to go (2x)>Neighbor neighbor can't you see>Social security's what we need>Oh oh oh oh oh, these billionaires have got to go (2x)>Education is a right>That's why today we stand and fight (2x)>Oh oh oh oh oh, privatization's got to go (2x)>Neighbor neighbor can't you see>Medicaid is what we need>Oh oh oh oh oh, these cuts have got to go (2x)>Ain't no way we're backing down>We're rising up the time is now (2x)Second:
>Everybody's got a right to live Everybody's got a right to live>We say poverty no more>We cry justice for the poor (or justice for sure)>Everybody's got a right to live<(Break) (Version w/the break)>Everybody's got a right to live (to live)>Everybody's got a right to dream (to dream)>Everybody's got a right to love (to love)>Everybody's got a right to learn (to learn)>Everybody's got a right to breath (to breath)>Everybody's got a right to bealth (to bealth)>Everybody's got a right to care (to care)>Everybody's got a right to… >>2864369People will be genetically engineered to be incapable of rape, murder, and every other antisocial behavior
>>2864377>Spreads disease, unplanned pregnancy, victims don’t function very well afterwards, that affects everyoneWhat if a rape only affected one person and it never extended to the group (since the victim was also murdered) - would the rapist still be liable for punishment by the act itself, or simply for its external effects? If effects have a cause, is the cause itself not primary?
>>2864379>genetically engineeredby whom?
Acknowledging the past is key to solving problems in the present. Otherwise you fall into the individualist rabbithole that leads to fascism where you believe certain groups are just predisposed towards being impoverished/etc and deserve to be oppressed or culled.
Indigenous rights also typically result in a collective good. Biggest example being environmental protection - they're the most directly impacted by a river being polluted because it's their livelihood but it affects everyone else.
However landback is obviously not feasible in the US. And no it's not equivalent to Palestinians suffering under Israeli occupation. Just because bad shit happened in the past doesn't mean we should allow other bad shit while we're alive. The genocide against Palestine is happening as we speak.
>>2864380Murder is bad because you’re depriving the victim their presence in the community, that’s an emotional and practical hole, a big psychic and physical wound on the collective
>>2864382>the individualist rabbithole that leads to fascism where you believe certain groups…An "individualist" doesn't think of "groups".
>>2864384Don't "erm akstually" me when you don't understand what a rabbithole is.
>>2864381The DOTP which isn’t actively trying to delay communism until after the heat death of the universe
I do not like the collectivist/individualist dichotomy
>>2864248>Marx also called for the genocide of slavs because they opposed Hungarian and Austrian revolutions>>2864243<Which is why Lenin's innovations are superior. He corrected many of Marx's deficiencies.>>2864242>Considering the collapse of Leninism I’m going to say no, those deficiencies are in fact worse than those of MarxLook at this fucking worm dude. Pretending to care about Marx of slavs to win an internet argument, only to lose that internet argument, only to end up supporting the thing he previously brought up as bad. It's clear this man has no principles and is just morphing from one post to the next.
Like feel this shit beat for beat:
>Marx wanted to genocide slavs<that's why Lenin was better than him>no actually genociding slavs is better than Leninismlike wtf???
>>2864383>Murder is bad because you’re depriving the victim>wound on the collectiveYou're confusing two things here. In the first case, the victim is the individual, and in the second, it is the collective. The point of the hypothetical is to show that rape and murder must concern individuals - which you seem to agree to. But let's take a dark example. A group will achieve collective pleasure by abusing a scapegoated minority, even if its a minority of one. If the pleasure of the majority exceeds the suffering of the minority, is this justified?
>>2864385You were just using lazy buzzwords.
No harm, no foul.
>>2864391Hey ive heard about da book like this scenario
>>2864389It’s really absurd because individualism makes no sense, it takes people to make people, and humans are squishy, weak creatures as individuals, we’re completely reliant on each other and each other’s labor to not be completely at the whims of nature like primitive communism days. The problem is we don’t directly see the labor we all do for each other, we see the finished product and it’s just there.
>>2864393I could go off on how annoying and lazy you're being but I will just match your energy and not bother.
Sometimes it seems like one cant become a communist at will. Its a kind of a club that you cant join.
>>2864389>>2864396Parts and wholes cannot exist without each other.
>>2864390What wins is what’s correct, it’s that simple
>>2864397If your politics are about "groups", you are not an "individualist".
There's no need to be upset.
>>2864400Capitalism is winning though
>>2864400So, "might makes right", yeah?
>>2864398One cannot say become a communist with the correct material conditions.
>>2864401You're just repeating yourself now dude.
I find these kinds of interactions really tiresome so you can have the last word and I'll stop replying.
>>2864406Okay, hopefully you expand your vocabulary in future.
>>2864402Chinese Marxism is winning currently
>>2864404Yes but in a much broader and more economic sense than when fascists say it
>>2864233The people who do that are largely trying to escape destitution on a shitty reservation (the poverty draft is real for people who actually live in poverty). They are not representative of native Americans as a whole, this is an incredibly stupid cherry to pick.
>>2864402Capitalism won over Feudalism
>>2864409<Marxism >>2864409>Might makes right, but not in a PROBLEMATIC wayWhy not? You simply believe in the law of the jungle.
>>2864410So are drug dealers and other gangsters, we still lock them up despite jail making criminals harder, but veterans get free parking and free drinks at UVF bars
>>2864409>Chinese MarxismSo, capitalism but managed by a bureaucratic state
>>2864412Law of the jungle is far more complex and nuanced than hobbes or warhammer 40k makes it out to be
>>2864414Whatever label you put on it, the Chinese are winning, and thus are correct
Marx isn't God idk why people think we need to hang on everything he says. He provided a framework, not a Bible. Sometimes he said some dumb shit, we don't have to follow it. We can absolutely cherrypick.
>>2864417Quality of life, trust in institutions, general societal direction, vibes
>>2864419Uh oh someone might call you a revisionist and will make you melt like the wicked witch of the west
>>2864420>muh quality of life>muh institutions>general societal directionSpecify
>>2864422Right, so life just becomes an aimless cycle of violence.
This is fascist ideology.
>>2864425Law of the jungle is also leaving scraps for wolves and eventually making dogs, symbiotic relationships as well as predators and prey
>>2864424I said vibes, and I do mean it
>>2864419>Marx isn't GodNo one said otherwise.
>idk why people think we need to hang on everything he saysBecause he’s valid as fuck and they’re working on his framework.
>provided a frameworkYeah, he did.
>Sometimes he said some dumb shitProvide an example.
>We can absolutely cherrypickNot with an invalid reason.
>>2864427I don’t want to acknowledge that in any way, shape, or form.
>>2864432Because you’re afraid
>>2864426If life is just violence, then so what? Why persist?
>>2864434It’s simply disgust
>>2864436How is leaving scraps for wolves violence?
>>2864437Because you’re a westerner who bought into the yellow peril propaganda
>>2864438Because you're making them your slaves.
Big human make dog his slave.
>>2864440No, because I am a communist who completely abhors entirely subjective conversations
>>2864442China is objectively closer to communism than anywhere else by virtue of having a DOTP
>>2864441And slavery is objectively more progressive than primitive communism
>>2864443Letters don’t really count
>>2864445Define "progress"
>>2864444>DOTPHow is it a DOTP
>>2864447The real movement which abolishes the status quo, whatever it happens to be
>>2864446Letters count the most. Literally private conversations.
>>2864448Because it’s controlled by the CPC
>>2864450>The real movement which abolishes the status quo, whatever it happens to beEvery second, all of human society changes - is this progress?
>>2864451>Literally private conversations.Private conversations made separately from the public officially released framework. They don’t really count with some exceptions. This is not one of those exceptions, this is about Marx’s side hobby.
It's modern COINTERPRO designed to make leftism about literally anything other than worker unity and class struggle
>>2864452And what is the CPC exactly?
>>2864454Okay, so progress is just synonymous with time, making it a tautological concept ("things changing is when things change"). If progress is unconditional, then no state of human society is more "progressive" than the rest, and so we return to the cycle of eternal violence; the mysticism of eternal struggle for life.
>>2864456Why are you incapable of admitting that Marx said dumb things?
>>2864462I’m not saying that. I’m saying his framework doesn’t really include dumb things.
>>2864451>letters count the mostanon do you think our shitposts on here count more than what we do with our lives? Think about it this way.
If someone gets really drunk, and says something stupid, are they showing their "True selves" or are they just acting different on mind altering substances? I think someone looking to ruin their reputation would say they showed their "true self" while someone who understands better the separation between formal and informal matters wouldn't care. We judge Marx by his pivotal works, because those are what forms the foundation of his theory. Even if he said stupid shit in private, it doesn't really matter beyond performative moralism. I don't accept the conjecture that I have to take everything he ever said as a package deal. Even within his publicly presented framework I don't agree with everything he said, merely most. A person truly capable of critical thought will adopt from another thinker what they think is correct and discard what is not, rather than insisting it's all one package.
>>2864456Well besides his phrenology hobby and racism, it shows he seems to believe the Jewish fairytales. The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt.
>>2864462Humans are naturally wired for religion, or at least animism and as such tested in children. And humans need their prophets, icons, idols, sacred objects, etc. Marx is one for the communist left, despite Marx' own words about materialism and religion
>>2864464>If someone gets really drunk, and says something stupid, are they showing their "True selves" or are they just acting different on mind altering substances?Yes. Literally. Does the "alcohol" cause domestic abuse?
>>2864465archeology has revealed a lot since
checks notes 1883
>>2864467I say dumb shit I don't mean on alcohol, if you want me honest give me cocaine instead
>>2864469Intoxication is revealing.
You do not become possessed.
>>2864467mind altering substances can cause someone to consent to something they otherwise wouldn't so I don't agree that a person is their "true self" when poisoned and dis-inhibited.
>>2864470Nice dogma, but not true
>>2864470>brain damage reveals your true selfif you hit your head so hard that you become comatose does that reveal your true self
>>2864465>it shows he seems to believe the Jewish fairytales. The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt.Hmm, what should I do? Address this incorrect detail about Marx’s life, or move back to the original discussion of the his framework? Let’s do the latter.
Provide an example from his framework.
>>2864472Silly me, when you drink, spirits possess your mind and its really cruel for people to think that it had something to do with you.
>>2864466Opioid fueled idealism
>>2864466I would say that "idolatry" is naturally composed in human beings, since even babies have preference for one toy over the other, and like animism, imbues it with personality. To ascribe sentimental value to an object makes it "sacred" in an elementary sense.
>>2864475Oriental mode of production.
>>2864476the problem with this conversation is the juggling of 3 different examples:
>is a person responsible for saying dumb shit while intoxicated>is a person's consent valid if it is given while intoxicated>is a person responsible for getting violent while intoxicatedand this isn't even considering other variables like
<how intoxicated are they<were they poisoned or did they knowingly imbibe<were they the victim or perpetrator of what happened while they were intoxicatedbut I think at the heart of it is the question
>is a person responsilenot just in the legal sense, but in the ontological sense. And I say no, free will is a spook. Time to talk about that for 200 posts.
Phineas gage lived 12 years or so after pic related happened to him. Everyone who knew him said his behavior and personality were altered by it, and that he made decisions he otherwise would not have. I think the brain is a biological computer that produces a variety of outputs based on its stimuli. It cannot overcome the laws of physics and "choose" "freely" because it cannot chose its own internal structure or the stimuli that influence it. Unless you are a religious idealist who believes in souls, this is pretty obvious.
>>2864480And your problem is?
>>2864466>Humans are naturally wired for religion,bailey
> or at least animism and as such tested in children. motte
>>2864482Are you the commie anon?
>>2864482>people arent responsibleSo what is the cause of you typing this post?
Do we need more appeal to superstition?
>>2864482Free will aint real, sure. Are things like racism, transphobia and antisemitism real?
>>2864466>Humans are naturally wired for religion, or at least animism and as such tested in children. And humans need their prophets, icons, idols, sacred objects, etc. Marx is one for the communist left, despite Marx' own words about materialism and religionNot exactly. This video references the latest research on this topic.
TL;DR
>babies arent born with religious beliefs but by age 3.5 they develop a theory of mind, including a theory of mind for dead things>they have to be socialized into believing specific religious ideas>non-religiosity is surprisingly "sticky" and persists across generations in the same family through socialization even if the person themselves wasn't raised to be explicitly nonreligious. This is because modern 1st world societies subconsciously indoctrinates new generations into secular humanism. >>2864487You are talking to a body duuuude
>>2864489You're misunderstanding anon's point.
>>2864487>So what is the cause of you typing this post?why do things need 1 cause? most things have several simultaneous things causing them, and none of them are a soul choosing outside the bounds of physics.
my brain received several stimuli and responded based on "model training" from past stimuli it has received. same as yours. It did this within the bounds of my hierarchy of needs as well. Perhaps you haven't eaten yet today. Perhaps you needed to shit in the middle of the post. Perhaps you didn't get enough sleep last night. Perhaps your feelings aren't actually consistent and you will word things differently based on who you're talking to, how confident they are, how you're feeling today, etc.
>>2864493>none of them are a soul choosing outside the bounds of physics. You are the only superstitious person here who keeps up bringing ghosts, ghouls, goblins, spirits and souls.
You claimed that people are not "responsible" for the things they choose to do, because… physics? You are incredibly incoherent.
>I can't fly therefore I can't do anythingBrilliant stuff.
>>2864494Anon is describing an attachment to objects which give them a sense of specialness. This attachment is the domain of the sacred. "Religion" is a loaded term, but that's what he means.
>>2864496I wasn't denying fetishism of objects, I was pointing out as you agree that "religion" is taking that claim a bit too far. Religion, especially organized religion, involves a lot more than just ceremonial burial and fetishism of objects. It requires, in my opinion, orthodoxy, orthopraxy, a clearly designated ingroup, and layers of indoctrination at various stages of life.
>>2864439Blocking the pipelines is good though.
>>2864215you don't see landback first worldists ever acknowledge this lol
>>2864500Because they don't have a fetish for losing like online leftists do.
>>2864499Didn't say it isn't.
>>2864498Right, and so secular religions can also exist, as anon writes.
>>2864495- i already distinguished legal responsibility from ontological responsibility. people can be legally responsible, but that is only a social construct.
- peolpe don't "choose" to do anything. their brain produces output given input. it is very complex input and very complex output, but physical nonetheless. even if there is quantum randomness in it that is not sufficient for ontological responsibility. one of the things the brain outputs is the illusion of feeling like you chose to do something. Why? because the brain feels better that way. people feel better believing in ontological responsibility because it justifies legal responsibility. knowing you're on rails feels bad so people believe in spooks like free will, ghosts, souls, ontological responsibility, etc.
- I didn't say anything about flying any more than you said anything about souls. When I said the brain can't overcome physics I wasn't talking about superpowers. I was talking about how your brain cannot sit outside of reality and overcome the physical stimuli causing it to make "choices".
- If you receive a significant amount of brain damage, from something beyond your control, your entire life is changed. you behave differently and have a different personality and make different decisions. This is because your brain is a physical object producing output from input. It is not something outside of the universe, and is not "free" in any sense of the word. It has "will" but not "free" will. Engels tries to square this circle by redefining free will as "recognition of necessity" but this renders free will into an impotent and uncontroversial concept not worthy of the name, the same way Spinoza redefined god to just mean the physical universe.
>>2864504You got me. I forgot to add supernatural stuff to my criteria. Damn.
>>2864215>>2864500>>2864501poverty draft tbh.
reservations actually experience the poverty draft. when a suburban petty bourgeois white boy like platner joins the US military despite his parents offering to pay for his college, because he wants to go kill some arabs and have an adventure. that's not poverty draft. poverty draft is when you live on a reservation or in american samoa or some shit and the only job is the military.
fwiw this varies from group to group.
>>2864506>peolpe don't "choose" to do anythingRight, so you never actually typed this post, then?
>>2864509Being opposed to anyone who's ever been in the military is absolutely a losing strategy.
>>2864511>bringing up platner unpromptedcheck not run out yet?
>>2864495if you suffer a traumatic brain injury, are you the same person as before? I say no. Do you say yes? Does your brain produce the same behavioral outputs it would have produced had you not received any brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes? Does a person with brain damage process stimuli as quickly and reliably as a person without brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes? Does a person with brain damage process stimuli and produce outputs as quickly or reliably or accurately as a person without brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes? If you say "no" then we agree. If you say "yes" then we do not. If you say "yes" explain why. Ontological responsibility is just a fiction to justify socially constructed rituals like execution, imprisonment, torture, etc.
If a bee accidentally touches alcohol while out collecting pollen, it gets drunk. Its behavior is altered, its nervous system produces different outputs than it normally would. When it returns to the hive drunk, the other bees tear it to pieces. This is, to me, the essence of what people do when they hold each other responsible. It is a ritual meant to make the collective feel like they have control over the individual, but all that is proved is that the stimuli has rippled out from the individual to the collective. the bee accidentally became drunk, and it triggered the other bees into being violent. Nobody was "controlling" anything, it was all just stimuli and response from beginning to end. One big incident, like a tree falling in the woods, only with the illusion of "responsibility" for those whose brains have been trained by evolution to create symbolic explanations. Like yours and mine.
>>2864511So iraqis should forgive their rapists if they were native?
>>2864518yes i'm being paid by zionists to point out he's a zionist. great stuff
>>2864521no actually. not even close to a reasonable interpretation of what i said.
This debate is so retarded it moved on to Marx's infallibility, inebriation, the naturalness of superstitous thought, some other random bullshit I probably missed.
>>2864520Who typed this post? If no one chose to type it, how did it appear?
>>2864523If poverty draft is real than every gang member goes free because they were just trying to escape poverty
>>2864525>dodging questions>asking questions already answeredgo back and read.
>>2864526not what i'm suggesting
>>2864517I'd agree with that anon, I just find it funny that anti-military purists and noble savage theory with extra steps purists are not only a circle shaped venn diagram but also conveniently overlook natives being disproportionately represented in the US military. ofc
>>2864511 has a simple explanation for that phenomena but the anti-military purists won't like it since it gets in the way of their individualistic moralism.
>>2864528The only reason to bring up poverty draft is as an excuse for joining a reactionary VOLUNTEER ARMY
>>2864527>go back and read.But I would have to choose to do that.
And I am not responsible to your words, am I?
In fact, I never even typed this, so you are getting mad at nobody.
>>2864520>are you the same person as before?Who’s “you”?
What is “you”?
>>2864531i don't believe in free will so i don't believe people are "excused" or "responsible."
I think we can overcome the systems which stimulate our behavior, but only if we evolve to recognize them and change them. unfortunately evolution is slow.
The US army is reactionary and volunteer yes. I think there is a difference between a person who joins for "adventure" and a person who joins because it's the only job. I don't think either of them are "excused" I just think both of them exist in a system that produced them as predictable and statistically likely output.
>>2864535My brain is acting transactional today. Answer "My" question with something other than a question and maybe I'll answer "yours"
>>2864536>n't believe in free will so i don't believe people are "excused" or "responsible." so antisocial behavior cannot and shouldn’t be punished because it was inevitable anyway, got it
>>2864538you confuse prescriptive and descriptive. like i already said, punishments can and do happen:
>If a bee accidentally touches alcohol while out collecting pollen, it gets drunk. Its behavior is altered, its nervous system produces different outputs than it normally would. When it returns to the hive drunk, the other bees tear it to pieces. This is, to me, the essence of what people do when they hold each other responsible. It is a ritual meant to make the collective feel like they have control over the individual, but all that is proved is that the stimuli has rippled out from the individual to the collective. the bee accidentally became drunk, and it triggered the other bees into being violent. Nobody was "controlling" anything, it was all just stimuli and response from beginning to end. One big incident, like a tree falling in the woods, only with the illusion of "responsibility" for those whose brains have been trained by evolution to create symbolic explanations. Like yours and mine. >>2864538Imprisonment is not supposed to be about punishment, it is supposed be about "rehabilitating" the perpetrator.
>>2864539Who are you talking to? But wait, you are not even typing, are you?
You are a disembodied mind experiencing spontaneous phenomena.
If there is no free will then there is no redemption
>>2864537>Answer "My" question with something other than a question and maybe I'll answer "yoursSpecify or don’t bother saying anything else.
>>2864546see
>if you suffer a traumatic brain injury, are you the same person as before? I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does your brain produce the same behavioral outputs it would have produced had you not received any brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does a person with brain damage process stimuli as quickly and reliably as a person without brain damage?
>I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does a person with brain damage process stimuli and produce outputs as quickly or reliably or accurately as a person without brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes? If you say "no" then we agree. If you say "yes" then we do not. If you say "yes" explain why. Ontological responsibility is just a fiction to justify socially constructed rituals like execution, imprisonment, torture, etc.
>>2864549Sp-ec-ify what is “You”
>>2864544ok? and? redemption for what? existing? shit happens and then you die. big deal.
>>2864545>sinjust a spooky word when an individual brain produces behavior that the collective brain rejects. like the bee who returns to the hive drunk and is torn to pieces.
>>2864538>so antisocial behavior cannot and shouldn’t be punished because it was inevitable anyway, got itpunishment doesn't solve the behavior nor even discourage it. it is just a cathartic ritual for an enraged collective. frankly it doesn't even matter if the individual is truly guilty, all that matters is the collective is convinced they are. this is why lynch mobs happen. technically when a mob lynches somebody they are the ones defining the "social" and the person who got lynched was "determined" to be "guilty" of "antisocial behavior." Whether this is actually true is besides the point. The ritual can be as brutal as a lynch mob or as elaborate as a trial by jury, but it is all a ritual nonetheless. punishment does nothing. Evolutionary processes will eventually either succeed or fail in producing a society where undesirable behaviors are as close to impossible as possible. That is the real essence of justice, not "crime" and "punishment" dialectics. You want an eye for an eye. If that makes you feel better that's fine, but it doesn't really mean anything.
>>2864550any arbitrary nervous system producing output based on stimuli
>>2864553"my" questions are still sitting there even after I have answered "yours." Is "your" brain unwilling to respond to them? that is ok.
>if you suffer a traumatic brain injury, are you the same person as before? I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does your brain produce the same behavioral outputs it would have produced had you not received any brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does a person with brain damage process stimuli as quickly and reliably as a person without brain damage?
>I say no. Do you say yes?
>Does a person with brain damage process stimuli and produce outputs as quickly or reliably or accurately as a person without brain damage? I say no. Do you say yes? >>2864555>"my" questions are still sitting there even after I have answered "yours." Is "your" brain unwilling to respond to them? that is ok.I require a valid source to fully answer your question
>>2864556very funny. chew on this for a while. systems are capable of self correction, but not really choice. self correction is when an entity tries and sometimes fails to adapt to its environment. nature will kill you if you do not adapt to your environment so it's not really a choice so much as it is a compulsion. in human society you will be killed, imprisoned, humilitated, or ostracized if you don't openly profess to believe in things like free will, guilt, crime, punishment, and responsibility, so those who profess to believe these things are not merely choosing to believe in spooks, they are forced to believe in spooks. I do not blame them. The rewards for believing in these spooks are also pretty compelling. At the end of the day violence is more compelling than truth. What gets defined as "antisocial" is sometimes actually quite unfortunate. For a long time materialism was determined to be antisocial behavior.
>>2864559Do you have a source for any of this?
>>2864561Giordano Bruno was tortured for 8 years and burned at the stake for denying the trinity, mary's virginity, and, among other things, thinking that the sun was just one star of many billions. He was punished for his antisocial behavior. His brain produced the wrong outputs. He was the bee who came back to the hive drunk. It doesn't matter that he was drunk on the truth.
>>2864561I know you're going to continue trolling to prove your little point about how you are using your free will to be annoying but give it some thought, won't you? maybe when you're trying to sleep.
>>2864564Source?
>>2864566>about how you are using your free willThat is not my point. My is point is that you are being imprecise with your words, and that you keep utilizing baseless statements in this discussion. It is annoying.
>>2864569you could have said that earlier instead of just dodging questions, but your neurochemistry won't allow you any more than mine will allow me to believe in a spook like free will.
punishment systems can be viewed as a set of evolved mechanisms that regulate behavior without requiring anyone to have acted from an uncaused choice.
>>2864569btw words can only be imprecise. if a word truly perfectly described the thing itself, there would be no need for the thing itself. words are compression. they are lossy. like a jpg.
so for one, tribes are collective national entities, so there is a big difference between land being private property and land being owned / controlled by a tribal nation, the later is much closer to socialism ala cuba ( tho there is a wide difference between how politics operate between different tribes or factions of leaders, obviously we support indigenous proletarians, not capitalists, and often tribal authorities are puppets of the gov/ white capitalism) and even in the case of lots of land being owned by individuals / families there's usually overarching responsibilities to the land that don't exist under capitalism.
Now personally I don't think that true justice for indigenous people's is possible under the current system, and requires a mass international revolution, but disregarding indigenous struggles outright, or as something irrelevant to the international socialist revolution, rather than these peopel interconnected simultenous struggles, that's a grave error and a vector of reactionary thinking as much as opportunist idpol arguments that disregard the existence of compredor capitalists
indigenous nations are having their shit stolen, their leaders murderered, their people terrorized all over the Americas for the benefit of trans-national extractivist megacorps, their struggle is just one front in the class war, reacting to this like it's a distraction from the "real" struggle is just ignorant and reactionary, maybe do some research before forming your opinion based on some stereotypical internet randos who might not even be humans
that being said certainly capitalism exists on reservations and even collective ownership can foster capitalism, but to act like land being owned by the US gov or some mining company is no different from being granted to one or more
>>2838858
> If a socialist society would be established all this land would be owned collectively and social relations like settler and would be irrelevant anyway.centuries of oppression don't just magically go away, especially when you pretend they don't matter, if you form a new society in a former colony without addressing the foundational relations that colony is built on ( namely the genocide of natives, or enslavement of africans etc. ) you're just going to reproduce those same relations. So you now have a nominally socialist society that just reproduces white supremacy and shouts loudly about how racism doesn't exist, maybe try making any discussion of racism illegal and have indigenous leaders arrested if they say otherwise.
>>2864584>you could have said that earlier instead of just dodging questionsI wanted to see if the discussion actually lead anywhere
>but your neurochemistry won't allow you any more than mine will allow me to believe in a spook like free will. No source
>>2864588No source
>>2864622Does the sky being blue require a source you fucking asshole?
>>2864622>I wanted to see if the discussion actually lead anywhere well it could if you put as much effort into answering my questions as i put into answering your questions, but your brain won't let you.
>>2864626don't let this anon get under your skin
>>2864643>well it could if you put as much effort into answering my questionsYour questions were shit and required more context you failed to provide.
>>2864626The sky is not relevant to this discussion, so no.
>>2864594I agree that you can't just sweep things under the rug, but by definition if you have universal equal rights to employment, housing, education, etc combined with socialist relations of production then by definition you can't "reproduce those same relations" of settler colonialism and slavery. That's just a huge exaggeration. At most you might have lingering discrimination in some areas, but even just removing the capitalist basis of the economy would dramatically improve the conditions of oppressed nations in America.
Unique IPs: 47