Proletarianization in the gulag
>>598121>What should happen to porky after the revolution?
How can porky exist after the revolution? Riddle me this batman.
If the revolution has already happened they have ceased to be capitalists, since their private property has been taken (physically and/or by destroying the legal system that grants them private property rights). They should be treated the same as any other reactionaries:
>if they can be rehabilitated do that
>else if the threat can be contained through imprisonment or exile or something, do that
>else just kill the bastards, not worth making sure they're ok at the cost (even opportunity cost) of taking care of the revolutionary proletariat
work details, target practice, shot point blank in the nape in a cold dark clammy basement, etc>>598123>slave labour>proletarianization
Proletarians won't exist post-revolution for the same reason bourgeoisie won't exist post-revolution. They are classes defined by relations of production that have been abolished. There will not be "one class" of proles. There will be NO classes.
what does dictatorship of the proletariat mean
it's like a government type in an RTS, obviously
It refers to a transition period where proles take power and then crush bourgeois rule, after which class is abolished. There's a criticism to make of it (which is that in seizing power proles cease to become proles).
Engels even says as much in Anti-Duhring (quoting from Lenin's quote in State and Revolution):<The proletariat seizes from state power and turns the means of production into state property to begin with. But thereby it abolishes itself as the proletariat, abolishes all class distinctions and class antagonisms, and abolishes also the state as state.
Its the intermediate stage between capitlaism and communism in a post revolutionary society
You're just being dogmatic about the proletarianization because it "wasnt real socialism" or something
Mods should sage this thread before all the edgelords come in.
slave labour in the gulags wasn't proletarianization
Honestly these days you could just use the surveillance apparatuses we have to keep track of reactionary elements and if they get too uppity just dox them and watch the people take matters into their own hands.
Mods dont care, they are PPHfags.
>>598140>>598157>mods should stop a thread because I like this answer
>>598148>and watch the people take matters into their own hands
Name a CEO or reactionary politician who has been assassinated by the people in the past 30 years. There are very few. These people aren't secret, their docs are public already.
because the left is cucked compared to the right in this country the last time there was left wing radicalism was the 1960s/70s maybe. and i know rightoids will whine about muh antifa but the truth is antifa is gimped compared to the weathermen or black panthers or something.
ok then counteract the shitposts by giving the correct answer a bunch more (You)s saying /thread
or bully the tech team into adding emoji reactions to posts so people can vote their approval that way without shitting up a thread with a bunch of comments saying "this" but also actually giving approval so we can get an impression of where the board stands when someone posts a good/bad take.
Define "assassinated by the people"
If you dox somebody they are most likely to get got by some random nut stalker or whatever. You're not necessarily going to get rid of serial killers from society, so why not make use of them?
Also if you dox some rightoids trying to organize fascism they can just be ostracized to the point that they won't have the resources they need until they're humbled or they just flee.>>598176
IDK but a way to reply to a post other than a full on reply might be a good idea. I was against it at first too but I've come around. It can keep discussion from being too cluttered. Just give them some standard options, like "based," "bait," "you lose social credit" or any of the shitty no-effort meme replies people like to make. What is the use of having those kinds of sentiments expressed as a full reply and taking up space in the thread?
>>598175>or bully the tech team into adding emoji reactions to posts so people can vote their approval that way without shitting up a thread with a bunch of comments saying "this" but also actually giving approval so we can get an impression of where the board stands when someone posts a good/bad take.
>>598185>So basically an upvote button
No. Upvotes aren't (just) for points. They are the mechanism that sorts post order. People already hunt for (You)s so muh points isn't really a change in the situation.>>598186
ok but what if you could have just clicked a "cringe" reply instead of making a full post
>>598190>ok but what if you could have just clicked a "cringe" reply instead of making a full post
Because my post was intentionally phrased to parody yours. As low effort as it was, it expressed more than a mere number.
It also showed specifically what part of your multifaceted post I disagreed with.
See now you're making a good argument. But you would still be able to reply in more depth if we had emoji replies and those more in depth posts would be less crowed by simpler "no" or "yes" or "/thread" replies.
>>598190>People already hunt for (You)s so muh points isn't really a change in the situation.
Now that you mention it, there is an upcoming proposal to consider disabling (You)s by default and make them an optional feature. See end of this post: >>>/meta/14677
If I merely reacted, this conversation wouldn't have existed, unless you actively chose to press people for why they reacted. There would be literally 1 depth. Additionally, I don't think bloat shitposts in any way prohibits depth. It's bloat, that's true, but I do think basic yes/no//thread/cringe replies should come under the existing low-effort rules anyway, I don't think adding reactions would stop them unless they such simple replies were banned.
You will still see all the reply links on the post. Getting rid of the (You) in the reply is only addressing a symptom of the problem. People will still cream themselves over getting a dozen reply links on their post.
>>598215> I don't think adding reactions would stop them unless they such simple replies were banned.
I can see the rest of your arguments but I completely disagree with this. If there's an even lower effort way to reply, people would definitely prefer that to typing up a minimal post like that. You can also, of course, both use a react feature AND make an actual reply.
Made a new thread about what we're discussing now in /meta/:>>>/meta/14814
why? this is political, nothing to do with /meta/ shit
oh you mean the reply shit…
Ooooooh that's a bingo!
I'm literally posting this from Rojava.
It makes me wonder why hasn’t any leftist try to [redacted] a CEO or a corporate HQ? Look at Antifa, all they do is bonk Nazis on the head and knock over trash cans. Why don’t they do something useful and [redacted] an actual corporate HQ? (All in Minecraft)
lol, you want to ban Bezos from using toilets, truly a punishment fitting the crime >>598185>an upvote button
oh no don't make it reddit
I'm not one for glorifying bloodshed anymore, lord knows when I was younger I certainly had fantasies of lynching Epstein though some fucker beat me to it
and his accomplices.
But nowadays I'm not exactly a blood thirsty bloke, but I reckon the porkies ought to be put on trial on a case by case basis. I know that it's likely that a good chunk of their assets will be seized and either dissolved/ nationalised/ communalised etc. What happens to them is dependent on a case by case basis, and I know for a fact they wont be able to buy their way out. If they are rehabilitated and made to work with the rest of civil society, so be it. If they're found to be connected with overthrowing democratically elected governments, I pray god has mercy on their souls because the people will have none
they will be incorporated in the new system since this is what has happened always in history. sure they will lose power but they will be small kings again
I will kill them in their cells like Dirlewanger
Physical elimination as a class.
They stop being porky if you take their ownership away, you realize that?
I got radicalized pretty young so im in the beginning stage of losing the bloodlust
It takes time, but you eventually mellow out and get more invested in what you want to build, as opposed to what you want to destroy.
Revolution is a process not a single moment in history. Even if you mean that overthrowing of the bourgoisie state is the revolution, then there will be porkies and porky tendencies in the society and they need to be managed somehow. In the endgame both the proletariat and bourgeoisie will be no more, but in the short term the state is turned into a opressive tool against the power of capital and porkies themselves.
They retain their memories of capitalism. Capitalism and bourgeois ideology does not die overnight. They harbour bitterness against the proletarian dictatorship and will work to undermine it.
The communist future is not for everyone. At a guess around 5% of the world population will never accept communism. The bourgeoisie, the petit bourgeoisie, the bureaucracts, the richer labour aristocracy, nobility. They should simply be eliminated, as quickly as possible.
Re-education of pork chops and reintegrating them into worst jobs imaginable.
They do have names and addresses.
>What should happen to porky after the revolution?
depends on the individual porky>will porkoids get to vote or have input?
obviously not>Will they come back to work as regular workers?
this would be the ideal solution, but unlikely. the Chinese communists managed to change emperor Puyi>>598126
pretty much this>>598137>and abolishes also the state as state
this assumes worldwide revolution, no? because so long as there exists still at least one bourgeois state then you will need to fight them, and the tool to do that is a state>>598161
based and Stallman pilled
Unique IPs: 24