😮

My laptop doesn't support bluetooth and the onboard mic is trash. I will have to order a new analog mic.

That sounds like some poorfag problems.

what is hoxhaism

the greatest ideology ever created praise hoxha

dindu nuffin wrong

is it tankie lol

more stalin than stalin

it's extremely tankie

❤

Hoxhaism demarcates itself by a strict defense of the legacy of Joseph Stalin, the organisation of the Soviet Union under Stalin,[2] and fierce criticism of virtually all other communist groupings as "revisionist".

yup

nuttin wrong

http://ciml.250x.com/gallery/h_pictures.html

nice outfit

i want his hat

i need a good communist visor

lol

whoever filmed this is a giant nerd

Would like it to be a place for theory. <#308995540782284817> and <#308950154222895104> please.

Hoxhaism is the greatest type of communist thought fam @Blebleh

@Ica_Sillen#3653 Why is Hoxha a strain exactly?

I meant as in a type of communist thought

I don't know much about it. Can you elaborate why it is a strain on communist thought?

I thought strain meant like a branch on a tree

Ohhhh

Just poor wording

Last week, I was invited to a hoxhaist-aligned party, but tbh, I don't know much about it

Why Hoxhaism instead of just Marxism-leninism?

But, Stalinism doesn't even exist, so what does that mean?

It's basically socialism in one country

So, marxism-leninism?

Yeah, I can't find any mayor differences

Oh, ok

But it seems to mix maoism in some ways, but besides of that I can't see any mayor difference

It's funny how western media potrays the DDR as some poverty-ridden hell hole and west germany as some paradise in comparison when it was almost as rich as west germany

Hoxhaism, isn't a thing as it never caused a real ideological spilt from Marxism-Leninism

^

@Chairman Jack It has points against maoism while picking some definitions and Albania was openly state atheist, denounces Cuban and Chinese revisionism

The trend considers third-worldism revisionist

Okay and it didn't break from ML thinking

Pointing out Revisionism isn't a break from basic ML thinking

I agree.

Hoxhaism I don't think should be considered its own separate ideology, then again I am of the belief that Marxism-Leninism is the highest stage.

Well MLM can be considered an addition to ML thought as it does offer some real rifts from original thought but Hoxhaism doesn't really do the same

A real difference and rift needs occur between ideologies for them to be considered different

I disagree, I don't agree with Mao's law of contradictions nor do I believe many of Maoist tenants are universally-applicable.

I mean, sure Maoists think so, but I don't hold that opinion myself.

Well yes Maoism isn't universally-applicable especially with his idea of New Democracy which is used to bring states from Feudalism to a somewhat Capitalist state run by the Proletariat with the Peasants along side the petty and national bourgeois. That is completely unnecessary in a nation that has already Capitalistic and thusly you can end the Capitalist stage through State Capitalism with the Party apparatus taking over the economy and then afterwards having the transition to socialism. And the other difference is Mao didn't believe that the Proletariat needed to be the head of the Proletariat Revolution if there weren't many Proletariats, while Hoxha believed that the Proletariat should always be those at the head of a Proletariat Revolution and if a state doesn't have many Proletariats then a strong Vanguard based around them needed to be made.

Personally through my firm belief in Historical Materialism I find what Hoxha talked about more Dialectical as Capitalism is necessary to remove tribalism and feudal concepts but at the same time the combination of Cultural Revolution and New Democracy can do the exact same thing

Do you know how Hoxha achieved 0% taxes?

Most Socialist States have zero direct taxes but there are still some taxes. And they can mainly do that because they sell goods to foreign markets they can use that money and through tariffs

oh ok

so for example in world socialism when all the economy is planned with cybernetics and there isn't any surplus from the production, taxes would exist?

Indeed

Taxes would no longer be necessary to run a governor

I believe taxes under stain were fairly low as well

because there was really no need for it

Because surplus value went towards programs that, under capitalism, require a large amount of taxation

Although I haven't read much about Hoxha, for what I have seen so far, it seems more aligned with Marxism than Maoism.

Marx was actually pretty clear in the historical progression through Dialectical Materialism and how capitalism was not only unavoidable, but also had a sort of "historical mission" in overthrowing Feudalism, and Mao seems to ignore or flee from that

Maoism is a part of Marxism-Leninism. I thought the same way but Mao introduced the idea of New Democracy in which a Capitalist stage would occur guided by the Proletariat with help from the Peasantry, Petty and National Bourgeoisie. With Cultural Revolution it does everything to void Feudal Culture and Hierarchy move into Capitalism and after that make it easy for moment into Socialism.

Hoxha applies is the industrialized world while Maoism applies in the pre industrialized places of the world

Hmm, makes sense. Does that mean the China still could return to socialism? And this is the phase of capitalism? How do maoists see this?

No it can't but revisionist PSL thinks so.

kek

I mean, it can but there would have to be some kind of cultural revolution or second socialist revolution to get rid of the bourgeoisie.

This is something that I still need to read about, but I must admit it's really intriguing about Maoism.

Mao did have the country turn into Socialism, New Democracy was very brief. Deng brought the Capitalism through pushing for special economic zones which were massively increased by Zimmin. Deng would describe what he did as a Capitalist stage with Two Stage Theory making it while Maoists would call it Revisionism. Maoists hate modern china and seek revolution.

Yeah, I expected that, and seems to the correct position

There are a lot of people within China, especially the youth sect of the official communist party, that are maoists and seek to return China to socialism.

I also have heard that Xi Jinping has started a program of intensifying and re-applying classes of Marxism in universities, but his intentions probably aren't really good

I am really looking forward to discover what Xi meant by "a return to Marxist roots" as he repeatedly said in speeches. I can almost feel more revisionism.

Even if Xi wanted to do that, it would fruitless form the top-down because huge swaths of bourgeois class members entered the party for decades.

I personally believe Deng did what was necessary to advance Industrialization and make the West dependent on China. I also see Xi Jinping's removal of all possible rivals (which are all of Zimmin's faction), his massive consolidation of power, and his father being one of Mao's closest allies to all be signs of a possible return to Maoist policies seeing that he would need China to be unified and need massive amounts of power to insure that none of the Capitalist Billionaires and Party Members loyal to them could try to stop this return into Maoism.

Well, it would not be a return into Maoism. China was never Maoist in the theoretical sense. Maoism was not developed until the 1980s, and in Peru.

That's MLM

By Maoist China most people mean China under Mao.

But that's what most MLMs want anyway, a return to socialism and the implementation of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism while shaving off his right deviations.

I could just be me being optimistic but I don't see any real reason for Xi to seize so much power and influence just to keep the status quo

Well, who knows, maybe it turns out all the revisionism since Deng was all a plan? lol

Could be

For real, though, I am skeptical, but it would be amazing.

I really doubt, personally, that Maoism would return to China under Xi. For one, the party was filled to the brim with multimillionaires and bourgeois elements, to the point where most of the party is under the control of bourgeois forces. Secondly, even if Xi consolidates his powers and has these good intentions, he would have to purge huge numbers of party members. It just wouldn't be possible for him to do this on his own, without some kind of cultural revolution, and it would most likely devastate the party in the short-term.

He's already purging people

He would have to purge more than half the party.

And part of Maoism is cultural revolution which with his current powers he could do. And purging lots of the Party could be done if he gained enough influence and removed heads of any opposition as he is doing

The PSL is of the opinion that the Chinese Communist Party can still reverse course, so you're not alone in believing this about Xi. But personally I tend to be extremely skeptical, and it seems idealistic (not in the philosophical meaning) to me.

Well you should be skeptical as should everyone but I honestly don't see why he would take risks, remove rivals and possible opposition who are all part of the faction that made China extremely Capitalistic, and gather so much power into himself without planning on doing something huge such as the return of Maoism

Well, if those are his intentions, I certainly hope he is successful.

Question: what is the communist relationship with music and how should it be formed?

"Every artist, everyone who considers himself an artist, has the right to create freely according to his ideal, independently of everything. However, we are Communists and we must not stand with folded hands and let chaos develop as it pleases. We must systemically guide this process and form its result." - Lenin

https://youtu.be/6MFKN-1nw7o

@Deleted User why do you ask questions on which you know the answers?

@Corset Do I?

@Deleted User Maybe?

I was listening to classical and thinking: is this bourgeois?

Every matter is to be transformed but some will stay in history some will not.

Classics did stay

for a reason

What reason?

Quality

Of its time

@Deleted User you know the reaction of most people on Soviet art, right?

@Corset It's pretty?

https://youtu.be/2SLvtP6KMUM

@Deleted User We are just to enjoy it really. As a little extra.

Actually, it is really good.

Quality is important at all times.

Unless it is quantity.

or a measure.

I see.

@Deleted User what do you see?

I would like to know why it is quality. Because it expresses realism over impressionism?

Any quality can be taken outside of its time. The best might stay.

For a time

You mean that the best qualities are enduring? They survive the dialectal process? They survive like in evolution?

@Deleted User of course. The best qualities are not even qualities. They are the essence.

Essence? (I am newish to diamat)

https://youtu.be/KH-cQJqdrnk

@Deleted User essence is a dialectical matter.

It changes

all the time

But stays

at the same time

OK, so how come we have such shitty art and music nowadays (in general)? Is it because the subjective is a reflection of the objective, and those in the capitalist system are infected with a 'class virus', and thus reflected poorly on the art they produce?

@Deleted User the profit motive of the creation of the quality is a pure perversion of all things.

Wow, that makes a lot of sense.

Is a pure destruction of quality.

The degeneracy.

@Corset Do you think as class consciousness increases so does the quality of art?

Less perverted?

@Deleted User yes. The quality of art is able to meet the beauty of the reality.

https://youtu.be/yLAwPMjphUw

That's a pretty powerful thought. Materialism lets you see the world for what it is, without superstitious perceptions, and the standard increases everywhere.

You could say that religion hijacked beauty.

@Deleted User materialism doesn't even care.

It just is

@Corset No, materialism doesn't care. But if our subjective reflects the objective, the quality of our products increase?

@Deleted User If you do things according to how they are?

Completely possible.

I mean, you said that profit motive perverts quality, which makes art shitty. Which means, that socialism makes art better, by increasing quality.

@Deleted User yes.

Materialism makes everything its own

but also relative

When material conditions improve, because of Marxist thought, then so does the quality of art, which is reflected in the minds of artists as materialist thought.

@Deleted User not only

@Corset What do you mean, it makes everything relative?

subjectively too.

@Deleted User matter is constant and relative

At the same time

@Corset Do Marxists only think like materialists?

@Deleted User yes, otherwise they are not Marxist

It is fundamental

https://youtu.be/yU3Nt6KiLcg

I think I understand now. Making art is just apart of human life. It is perverts by profit motives and other falsehoods. But when the perversion is gone, humans are able to express themselves with better quality. They remove perversion with materialist thought. But art is not the aim. Materialist thought and Marxist thought just allows humans to express with better qualify, free from perverted motives.

@Corset So then, is art and music ultimately necessary?

@Deleted User no

nothing is ultimate, friend.

Matter is moving.

Change is flowing.

@Corset How much should revolutionaries indulge in music? Is it only to increase revolution?

And everything is ultimate at the same time.

Matter is a funny substance

Very prone to change

But always present

and changes

every fkin time

Ha. Thanks for your help.

How can be something that always is?

And always will be?

Sometimes objective comes too close subjective.

Or is it the opposite?

Or is it happaning all the time?

Now I will know, if something is good, it depends on its quality.

@Deleted User material, yes.

are you a material yourself?

Yes, I am now.

@Deleted User and before?

Not since right now, since maybe a month ago. Then I did not know; agnostic. Wanted to believe that saw no logical way. Now I see my cowardice.

@Deleted User what is the history of this material?

You mean historical materialism or other secular explanation like determinism? Is this an exam?

@Deleted User What qualitative, quantitative changes in your essence did you experience?

Tension and then freedom. I combined the best of both.

@Deleted User tell me about it.

I had experienced what I thought were 'mystical' experiences, that I could only experience being close to the supernatural, or at least entertaining thoughts of the supernatural. This created tension because I knew in my mind the supernatural did not exist. But then, when I read Marx and about Dialectical Materialism, it filled the supernatural need. And now I have piece of mind and piece of heart together, with no tension. I have been freed.

@Deleted User Materialism is a cure for dialectical mind. But there are not many to be cured.

Most material is idealist. One sided. Very limited.

At this moment

Even Hegel could not escape his idealism.

but there is a way

Yes, materialism was my cure. But what did you mean by 'a way'? What way?

@Deleted User a materialist way.

It changed the way I looked at the world.

People who used to impress me no longer impress me.

@Deleted User what was the previous way?

@Corset I used to tolerate the supernatural belief in others because I thought it did some good. Now I can cut through their lies and show they are slaves to bourgeois thinking.

@Deleted User which belief exactly?

@Corset Well, you see, I was a Fascist. And in those circles there is a big argument about which faith is best, according to the benefits it provides. Its a kind of willing brainwash. Yes, quite crazy looking back but that was their argument.

Ex-Fascist are best anti-Fascist.

That would be true. I know all the tricks. I have already hurt lots of feelings.

I know their mindset and I know why they do what they do, and their motivations.

That is a diamat way

Preservation and altering.

That is good.

Their ideology is short-sighted, and I can point it right out.

exceptional even.

@Deleted User how are they short-sighted?

What are the best methods of anti-Fascist propaganda?

@Corset Fascism has no 'long game' or 'end game'. The most successful fascist state would take over the world, but then what? As an ideology built on struggle against an enemy, but with no more enemies, it would turn upon itself, forever and ever. There is no resolution. It is fundamentally regressive. This is not a smart plan. I was dissatisfied with this. They focus on preservation instead of transformation. Once I went looking for alternatives, I found DiaMat, which was the definition of transformation.

On anti-Fascist propaganda, I haven't thought about. Let me think.

I could write a lot about this.

do

Ill go smoke

My friend, I will have to summarise, I have other tasks.

We can continue this conversation another time.

You can bring it up in theory at any time.

For now, I think the main weakness is the conservative bent, wanted to 'preserve' things instead of progressing. They have a static view of reality, 'human nature'. There is nothing sacred about the condition of humans. The best propaganda will expose the poverty of this gameplan.

I will. Thanks for the chat.

Science of materialism is the best anti-fascist method, I think.

It worked for me.

And this guy.

Questions:
1. What is the role of propaganda? What are its aims and how should it be used?
2. What would be the Party policy on donations and other contributions of funds? How should they be used?

1.) The role of propaganda should be to agitate and raise class consciousness against the bourgeoisie.

2.) The Party should reject donations from billionaires (obviously) and from large sources. Should only accept small contributions and dues. They should be used to strengthen the party organizationally, to create more outreach, and to develop programs that benefit the poor/working class and win them to our side.

in my humble opinion.

Full agree

@Deleted User Danke. I am happy with these answers.

no problem

What country would be one of the easiest to implement socialism in while being one that thrives the most under socialism

Q: Is it possible to have an international Party or can there be only national Parties?

i think it would be possible to have an international party

So do i

Maybe it would have people elected by national parties

That seems like a logical system

And then those at the top vote who the leader of the international party is

But the question is how much power should this party have I would say

@Hezbolshevik As a side note: democracy is a lie. Elections and voting are empty formalities that only sway people away from the correct course of action. In fact, it is a good way to prevent the truth by replacing it with consensus. If there is not question about the truth, if it is intellectually established, then there is no need to vote on it. Similarly, the most class-conscious and politically intelligent people, can be measured and shown without voting. Consensus is a distraction from correct practice and lets false consciousness take root. This must be protected through the authority of the most advance Party members.

So what will national parties pick random names from hats for international party admin?

And I mean voting within the upper echelon of the national party for international admin

@Deleted User

@Hezbolshevik No, instead of elections or random choice, the position of the international party admin will just be given to the most capable person, objectively measured.

Democracy clouds the process. If you want the best person for the job then just give the job to the best person, without voting.

Select who has the historical precedent for the most effective and scientific theory and practice. Not the best speaker. Not the best comedian. Not the cleverest talker. Selection should be based on strict and principled past successes in the intellectual field and in practical action.

So how are they selected (as in through what means not what qualities they must have)and who are the people deciding who is selected?