international
Discord ID: 308950154222895104
752,937 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 29/3012
| Next
Why is there is only Lenin
Where is comrade Mao or Hozha
Stalin?
Why not united marxist-leninist front?
what
@Deleted User You've missed the right-wing raid. Why most right-wing are the lower, white trash, poor and delusional folks?
@aleks Why is it united Leninist front and not united Stalinist front?
cause most MLs reject the term stalinism, just as stalin himself did. and the word leninism implies Marxism-Leninism the two are interchangeable
No, it doesn't imply anything. Trotskiest are usually accepted in "leninist" communities.
Are they accepted in ULF?
It's no wonder there's a strong divide between most modern Marxists and the proletariat.
@Deleted User Trotskiest are the one's making divides.
We embrace unity and authority.
Stuff like
>Why most right-wing are the lower, white trash, poor and delusional folks?
Doesn't give good impressions honestly
@Deleted User We have to destroy this filth with proper education.
And better nutrition.
The fallacious delusions of the ivory tower's residents
Read Mein Kampf Firefly I'll give you a PDF link. If you're going to be a socialist/revolutionary-theory-shitter be the kind I am.
@Deleted User I've read it 16 years ago
Well you need to read it again, let me link it
@Deleted User I kinda remember it.
Same here honestly, re-reading books like Hitler's, Marx, etc you pick up on stuff you didn't before
@Deleted User I've read it with a group of people. For a month. Writing essays.
New <#314928198809026561> channel is up and running. Invite your Spanish-speaking friends.
Join voice chat.
Yo yo yo
These are some of the spiciest memes I've seen yet.
@Firefly Let me talk from experience. The right-wing on the internet is young, alienated and believes in fairy tales. They at least understand something is wrong with the system, but their alternative is based on forming a new mythology, instead of a purely material analysis of their alienation. It is a post-enlightenment regression back towards idealism. And due to this they will never find a resolution to their struggle, nor do they necessarily want to according to myths put as central to their ideology. The hamster on the wheel who accepts his situation and whose sole enjoyment is striving to be the best hamster in the wheel. The right-wing in an ideology based on existential trappings. A philosophy based on 'the now' and the identity of 'the self' or 'the tribe' can never transform itself to be free of these duties. Its view is based on preservation first, not transformation. This is why they are hamsters.
You can sense the desperation in their words.
@Deleted User why didn't you do anything about it yet?
About what?
@Deleted User about this situation on the right-wing.
There are problems and you've been Fascist.
I realised it was bullshit.
Why?
@Deleted User
What's your current position?
@The Study of Change#1345 get out, libertarian filth.
@The Study of Change#1345 Now I am studying Marxism because the right doesn't have enough answers. I will learn if it is better, which is why I am here.
He left hymself
Didn't touch him.
@Firefly The right does not plan ahead or have a clear vision of the future. The most successful Fascist state possible would take over the world and then have to manufacture its own enemies. More likely it is turn on itself, forever. This was not a satisfactory scenario for me. It is fundamentally regressive.
CHUCK SCHUMER IS GONNA IMPEACH DRUMPF
DRUMPFTARDS BTFO
@Deleted User
What's your supposed solution to that endless cycle of creative destruction now?
@Deleted User Now as we have <#314649062928547840> channel you can ask questions there as you read through the books. Unti-During is always productive to discuss.
@Firefly Thanks, I have lots of books on order. I will start studying in earnest soon. I will surely have questions.
@The Study of Change#1345 The solution to the endless cycle is to transform the game. Man fights because it is in his nature. But I do not hold this as sacred. Man can be transformed and the cycle broken.
<:che:312047280523837450>
@Deleted User
A transformation. Interesting.
@The Study of Change#1345 The next question is: transformed into what? It seems like Marx has a good answer in materialism. Becoming a being of reason not superstition.
@Deleted User
Right now I see rationalism as the closest ideology to that solution.
@Deleted User
Ah, that is _much_ clearer now. Initially I found your view very ambiguous and hazy, but this explains a lot more of it now. I can finally take a step in the right research direction.
The first communist egoist
Or it could just be ensuring the individual's orientation towards the common good.
@The Study of Change#1345 Thanks for the genuine interest. Not long ago I thought myself to be very right wing. Now I am in limbo. If my view changes away from the right soon I will have to probably change my avatar to something not associated to the Wehrmacht, as to not keep causing such confusion.
@Deleted User
Well as of yet, I find Star Trek to be a good candidate for what you could represent.
@Deleted User You should also read Dzerzhinski. He would like you
We must create theoretical abstractions to counteract abstractions to solve field problems.
@Kaiser Does that avatar denote a technocratic leaning or am I mad?
Forced labor camps are good when my heros use them
Only for bourgeois thieves of surplus value; they have to work to repair what they've stolen, they're in debt
You have a strong sense of justice regarding the bourgeois. Have they stolen from you recently?
yes
Have they stolen from *you* recently?
always
How so?
From what's worked, a part of what I produce goes for them
surplus value
And you produce?
but more like alienation in my case
educational one
the other one I see in my family
yes
Forgive me but I don't understand
What do you produce
It doesn't matter. Workers go to the workplace and they receive wages; these wages are just a part of what the owner has won in total
the profit
and just a little part goes to the workers in the form of salary
the other part is surplus value extracted from the workers who have worked for the enterprise
@Deleted User his parents produce.
So you would say you are of the opinion you are for a sense of justice rather than personal strife?
@Deleted User Something stolen from his family is something stolen from him.
What does his family produce and for whom?
@Deleted User I don't know him. I'm here first time.
What is the difference?
Every man's reasons for his opinions is personal, whether it's a personal zeal to solve the problems of others as well
I seek to understand the cause, solution, and reasons for involvement
@Deleted User I don't have a personal problem with capitalism. But I'm Marxist
I'm also petite-bourgeois
Do you have a personal problem with the bourgeois?
By objective class
How are you petit-bourgeois?
@Deleted User From my family.
And the wealth of your family are a fount for you to drink from?
@Deleted User Now it is my wealth
Inheritence?
@Deleted User yes
The worker doesn't own the means of production, the enterprise. So the worker has to sell the skills (labour force)... but since the worker is in disadvantage to negotiate a contract the worker needs to push for better conditions or it depends completely on the conditions of the bourgeois
that's why there are unions
Lenin was an aristocrat, Engels managed his own fabrics.
It is unfortunate the the aloof bourgeois still do not understand the necessity of working with their employees rather than distancing themselves and allowing for others to take their place in that area
That detail always tickles me Apex
@Deleted User Only revolution can bring communism.
When I talk to Marxist-Leninists
An aristocrat is their hero, in the movement for the workers'
And what do you define communism as?
If aristocrat is on the side of proletariat its all good.
"It is unfortunate the the aloof bourgeois still do not understand the necessity of working with their employees rather than distancing themselves and allowing for others to take their place in that area" The national bourgeoisie
Other aristocrat: Gyorgy Lukacs
Very few who shed blood became influential in that system.
Those who labored, and later fed up and sacrificed never ascended, instead allowing those who did neither to instead.
Lenin was sent to prison
Marx to the exile
Stalin to prison
The bolsheviks robbed banks
Stalin was a worker, Mao too
Stalin was only a worker for a short time in factory as a cobbler apprentice as a child
Otherwise he quickly found his way into politics and/or insurgent activities
He infiltrated factories working in them.
He who acts as one though he is not one
He didn't have an income from capital.
He is of class proletariat.
He WAS until he became an official in the revolutionary government
But he was not a mere laborer
@Deleted User Officials work for the class.
"I must say in all conscience, comrades, that I do
not deserve a good half of the flattering things that
have been said here about me. I am, it appears, a hero
of the October Revolution, the leader of the Communist
Party of the Soviet Union, the leader of the Communist
International, a legendary warrior-knight and all the
rest of it. That is absurd, comrades, and quite unneces-
sary exaggeration. It is the sort of thing that is usually
said at the graveside of a departed revolutionary. But
I have no intention of dying yet.
I must therefore give a true picture of what I was
formerly, and to whom I owe my present position in
our Party.
Comrade Arakel* said here that in the old days he
regarded himself as one of my teachers, and myself as
his pupil. That is perfectly true, comrades. I really
was, and still am, one of the pupils of the advanced
workers of the Tiflis railway workshops"
goodbye
>gripes about the social-democrats in the first few pages
Even Stalin hated them
Also I C E P I C K
@Deleted User Social-Democracy is a national-socialism in the first stage.
Has nothing to do with Marxism anymore.
That is a complete and utter untruth my friend
Social Democracy was one of the things National Socialists formed to oppose
In fact it was the very first movement Hitler was introduced to
That is what Marxist theory came to. At first it was an opposition but after Social-Democrats joined NatSoc
He even remarked it had strayed far from anything it ever could have been to begin with
And had taken the unions with it
Social Democrats may have *converted* but National Socialism and Social Democracy are two wildly different systems
If they were able to convert something is wrong there. Marxists do not convert.
They are logical, rational.
Humans are infallible.
As I have said before, you really ought to read Mein Kampf. Second and third chapters heavily involve criticisms of SocDem and why it was bunkum in his opinion
If I recall correctly it was mostly because the movement was driven by non-workers, much like many such movements
Hmmm
@Deleted User Social-Democrats turned NatSoc. Marxist fought them in the war.
Now we are against SocDems
Individuals, not Social-Democracy and its rotten structure
The structure makes the prone. The lack of theory and structure too.
And you must understand, many National Socialists WERE Marxist leaning, what was disavowed were Marxists themselves rather than Marx's philosophies
So they turn
SocDems are Fascist babies.
You do not even know what fascism is
Actually, no, I skipped ahead
Define fascism
@Deleted User Show me your amazing script of propaganda
Yours first my friend
I have none.
Never used it. I made few for other people
So you claim that Socdems are fascist yet you do not know what a fascist is?
I would really like to talk about Stalinism.
instead
I do not mean to condescend, I am no more wiser on certain subjects
And despite my aversion to fascism's might-makes-right tendencies I have a personal obligation to help you to understand things I already do
It's the best possible I can provide at the moment
It's a bit edgy but it should help paint what exactly actual fascists are about
National-Socialism can work only under Marxist authority.
And it did
It was beaten up by Marxists
It was beaten by those who were misguided
The treachery of nations leaked into the affairs of the people.
T h i c c
National socialism works..it was the only credible existential threat to international capital..ever...not communism...national socialism...that's why you are so programmed to despise it
wew
I guess that's why Hitler made juicy deals with the UK and some porkys from US and they didn't intervene until it was too obvious
Or why he privatized strategic sectors of the german economy
Yep, that sure is against capital, yes sir
yes...valuing a nation's labour over intenational credit loans and central banking lol...whereas you act like a rebel and forward central banking. derp
they're for capitalists
nah..the quote is nonsense...national socialists circumvented the embargo and boycott by trading with other nations by commodity instead of caputal lololol
the economy is capitalist
>valuing a nation's labour over intenational credit loans
>making deals with other country's porkys and basically privatizing everything to put your friends in strategic positions
by your words I think you don't know what capitalism is
Pick one. What you're defending is only a more authoritarian and shittier form of capitalism
fascists conserve the bourgeoisie
Do you know what the president of one of the most important banks in Spain after the failed coup in 83?
"I honestly didn't care if the coup was successful or not, I was still going to be the bank's president the day after"
Sure, it's me who's clueless and not the guy who hasn't studied german economy a single bit, or the relationships between capitalists and nazi germany, privatization...
they claim to be antiliberal
just to put the most reactionary form of capitalism
antidemocracy
connecting jews with communism
which is undialectic
srsly...you're a shabbos goy.. clueless
Bakunin on Marx and Rothschild
โHimself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press โ they have taken possession of all the newspapers โ and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of blooksuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion โ this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.
This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ....โ
Source: Michael Bakunin, 1871, Personliche Beziehungen zu Marx. In: Gesammelte Werke. Band 3. Berlin 1924. P. 204-216.
Slack, seriously, just read a fucking book
bakunin was an antisemite
Marx wasn't even a Jew
after he was expulsed he was calling everyone a jew as an insult
^^^^
"anit semite" !!! hahaha
ridiculous
yes
*cough*
marx's "on the jewish question" was a limited hang out]
have you even read it? lmfao
See, when you have to resort to mental gymnastics instead of trying to be objective in your analysis then you know you're brainwashed
that is irrelevant for class
we need big pits for ideologues
jew, christian, whatever, if they're bourgeois they exploit
hi robot
Read about privatization in nazi germany and nazi ties to capitalists all around the world and tell me if that's being anticapitalist, retard
about the central banking and bakunin
bakunin as anarchist didn't want to rely on a central state, he wanted a federation of libertarian socialist communes
in self-management, they didn't even reach a central planned economy yet
Do you think it's a coincidence that, when the people are tired of liberalism and porky wants to protect its capital, these right-wing populists/pseudofascists start to pop up and get massive media coverage like crazy?
about communism and jews....bolshevist high command over 98% jewish....nkvd summary executions on the spot after lenin decreed your "anti semitism" a capital offence...uh...marx the 3rd cousin to rothschild, infamous for hating russians...scores of millions dead....hang a moment...i will give you a list of all the jewish capitalist banking houses that bankrolled the russian revolution you robot
When capitalism is in danger it always resorts to fascism or its variants
those are falsifications of nazis
capitalism and communism are the dialectic omg...people are so dumb
like the one I read, that he had a rabbi XD
and in that case it wouldn't have mattered anyways
now you got "democracy". go congratulate a rabbi for gspreading infant herpes hahahah
they were still socialists and the nazis not
"People are so dumb", says the guy who is falling for the capitalist tactics of becoming more authoritarian when the situation is dangerous for them
socialism is the common wheel.... it was co opted
752,937 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 29/3012
| Next