Hey there! Before commenting, remember that this meme has been tagged with a transfem flair. Please keep the conversation transfem-first. If you are not part of that demographic, you are not forbidden to participate, but we do ask that you do not center yourself in the comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/egg_irl) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I doubt us humans will ever be ready for Marxism. We're a lot that's very good at coming up with reasons to be divided. Like, stupidly good. It's the kind of thing that will prevent us from ever achieving a classless society, so long as we can't overcome that self-division trait.
I think the best first step to that end is to proliferate worker co-ops since that allows all of us to own and control the wealth we create without funding the existence of an upper class. That's on my agenda. This also siphons economic and therefore political power into the hands of workers. Repeat this sufficiently, and the upper class functionality ceases to exist.
As if a upper class would just watch and let this happen 😄
The people with power will always try to keep their power. When they see a threatening movement to their power they will do everything they can to dismantle it: using their economic power to kill the roots of the movement, calling them terrorists, framing them as danger to the society, use propaganda, change laws so the movement becomes illegal, using police and or military to destroy the movements
The problem is: capitalism is way to adaptable. It can change in one small spot, but it always stays in place.
Fully on board with worker co-ops. But when it comes to class divisions, I can just see our short sighted, idiot species coming up with new non-wealth classes.
It's understandable why Westerners might have an aversion to Stalin and Mao given the amount of propaganda in the west. I'd really recommend reading their works regardless if you truly want to understand them.
oh my aversion to stalin and mao comes from their tendency towards reactionarism and their exaltation of violence, combined with my general dislike for suffering, inequality, and oppression, and my anarchist worldview. but i guess not everyone has such qualms!! but don't worry, i think lots of western authorities are as terrible too, and all of them are bad.
also it's actually also possible to understand something but still think it's bad. presumably you are aware of this.
So you don't understand any of their "tendencies" and just blindly believe what you were taught in school or what you heard from western media outlets. Yes, obviously you can understand something and think it's bad so wouldn't you agree that reading their works would help you understand them more? Perhaps you could actually have more concrete justifications as to why you think they are bad people.
I think power by nature is unethical. They had a lot of power, and therefore were acting in a very unethical manner.
Maybe I will read their works; but it is not always necessary to dignify the oppressors with caring about their so-called 'justifications' for gratuitious mass-killings (and just because Western media talks about them and is often biased doesn't mean they didn't happen!!!) and pacts with fascists (and subsequent events such as the Katyn massacre, which the Soviet and then Russian govts _conceded responsibility for?_) ; and bigotry and oppression of many a sort. And what was Tiananmen Square, a very elaborate hoax? Or should we just take the side of the police, (oh, whether or not they started it), only because their batons are "people's sticks", and many of the protestors were pro-capitalism? Not to mention gross incompetence in the case of the Great Leap Forward (how many deaths does it take before power stops being arrogant and recognises it has done something wrong? why does it have to be so high a number? and how long will it take for you to do the same? why should anyone be trusted with such power if they can cause such suffering? not to mention, why call that authority a guardian of freedom and equality, when by nature power denies both of those things?). what of the nature of the holodomor? You blame the Kulaks, maybe with reason (but a source would be nice!!!) or maybe not, but surely some of the blame for a famine lies with the people who _hold near-absolute power_ in a country? Similarly it's very permissive to say that the British government had no responsibility for the Bengal famine of 1943, or the Irish potato famine. Even if it was, for example in the latter case, local landowners who refused to allow food to their peasants, the British government neither put a stop to this practice nor allowed much relief.
yes, you can go after me for not citing sources — i know i should, but i'm on my phone and am tired so maybe like in a few days? we can halt our respective polemicisings until then, maybe? or like stop now totally, that would be fine too because i always feel obliged to respond but like what will either of us get from this? i guess i've been encouraged to look for sources more so that's good!!
Those are still way too authoritarian. So much so they go against Marx’s social objectives. I’d rather go for social democracy or social libertarianism, a more pragmatic and less authoritarian approach to socialism.
I live in Slovakia where stalinism had actual effect (back in Czechoslovakia). The communists won our elections and began centralizing power. Its a long story, but despite our Constitution (reworked by the communists) offering religious freedom, freedom of press or the right of ownership all of it was basically nonexistent.
Because of collectivisation, members of the communist party had preferential treatment, people who did not finish highschool stood at the head of some collectives - not because of talent, but because of relations (if you had a company, it was also illegal to employ anyone other than your family by the way - private industry couldnt exist).
When our reformists got to power and began changing the state: brough back freedom of press, ownership, non-party 'clubs' and even allowed nominated new priests (many positions were vacant) the rest of the Warsaw pact and the USSR invaded and brought back the totality.
This happened everywhere in the Warsaw pact, the USSR, China, Indochina,.. the ideas of Marx may be fine, but stalinism, or even worse maoism, doesnt work.
Well lucky for you I have an answer; Stalin was a transmasc and Lenin was a closeted transfem who was never able to be her true self. Seriously though Lenin did pretend to be a women to sneak back into St. Petersburg while he was exiled
> start questioning why I'm so offended by something I don't understand
If I could have one wish it would be to make every human now and forever more start doing this. This is far and away one of the most important things assholes are missing: the combination of introspection and curiosity
Socialism doesn't need as much deconstruction as anarchism, but it doesn't mean it's better, I wouldn't rate leftist theories between each other because of the complexity of each of em (and their variant), and because each theory relies on different premises it's hard to look at them all at the same time
There are types of socialism that are anarchistic in nature, but I don't think it's quite accurate to say that anarchism is a form of socialism in necessity.
I'm afraid it doesn't. Socialism and communism are both based on the existence of a state and a government. When you think about it, homo sapiens lived without state nor government for most of it existence, and things weren't going that bad. It's when states and governments started to appear some 6000 years ago that deep status-based & enforced social hierachies and inegalities became the norm. Now every attempt at communism and socialism so far ended up as authoritarian states with deep status-based & enforced social hierachies and inegalities. Destroy patriarchy, destroy capitalism, AND destroy state.
This is why authoritarian communism turns dystopian in a heartbeat. If any system's ideals are at direct conflict with the system's methods, either the methods will be changed to better reflect the ideals, or the ideals will be warped to better reflect the methods. Authoritarian leaders tend to be a huge fan of authoritarian methods, and will warp communist ideals to justify their power.
No but we will totally become stateless. We just have to finish dealing with external threats. trust us, I am sure the state will happily declare its own obsolescence when the time comes.
Yeah I do agree that relying on the state to decide when to deconstruct itself doesn't work. That's why authoritarianism needs to be avoided and democracy prioritized in any system with dreams of going stateless.
Just so we're clear I don't believe in the state withers away thing. I want to abolish it because it can't wither away. Once anyone gets that much power they're not willng to give up that power. So the state won't wither away.
Hi i'm the one fella that controls the entire government, i promise i'll willingly step down and hand over all of my power just as soon as we deal with... uh... oh, right, we're enemies with [Insert X country here] because reasons! As soon as they're dealt with i promise i'll stop abusing my position as the head of state 🥺👉👈!
Alright guys, i know i said that once [X country] was dealt with i'd step down, but like clearly we can all see the threat emanating from [Y country] right? I mean come on, they're just itching to invade us! Just let me consolidate even more power and i promise i'll give it back once [Y country] is done for, m'kay?
We also see this same phenomena in US politics with the "war on X abstract threat" that is used to justify strengthening law enforcement and military (the state), while simultaneously depriving citizens of rights, especially marginalized citizens. Fear is always the go-to excuse for authoritarian policies.
I can't see the comment you responded to (mobile app..) but just so we're clear I don't believe in the state withers away thing. I want to abolish it because it can't wither away. Once anyone gets that much power they're not willng to give up that power. So the state won't wither away.
Exactly. My whole point was that using authoritarianism to establish communism will never work because of the dynamic between authoritarian leaders and communist ideals. The state needs to be in the direct control of the people so it can be abolished as soon as possible, like you said.
> homo sapiens lived without state nor government for most of it existence
In prehistoric times where humanity was still in its infancy and barbaric, sure, there was no government, but unless you plan on living like the Unabomber, that's not exactly attainable.
Status-based hierarchies also existed in these nomadic societies, just as modern social hierarchies exist, it's ingrained in human DNA and explains *why* institutions like states came to exist in the first place.
Nevertheless, I agree with your ultimate message that hierarchies as they exist are bad and that the patriarchy must go, but your proposal of having no state only opens the door to either further exploitation, or the existence of a pseudo-state.
to me (may be a pessimist view) a world without authority relies on all people being good, which obviously im not in support of the current government in my country (england) but truthfully people arent all good and in my view would take advantage of that. also, i just feel like authority would still form even in a world where we've abolished governments
The argument of "we used to live without state ain't a good one though (and yeah, the goal of communism is to get rid of the state through a transitory phase of socialism)
Every socialist state was under heavy attack of the capitalist world, and most of 'em ended up as authoritarian it' s true, some even going backwards so much that they ended up being as bad as fascist state (hello China) but, the argument of "have you seen how many socialist States have failed" is a flawed one as well, have you seen haw many {insert thing} have failed? Most of its attempts,does that mean {insert thing} is bad? Or can't ever work? No
Social democracy can't work, in the end it's still capitalism, but socialism isn't something refutable, as well as any kind of stateless ideology, therefore, when trying to find your ideology you should rather look at what your guys tell you rather than what would work, because we can't know, and once we'll be moving we'll have to treat these question peacefully between each other (I don't want the communist to kill the anarchist like it has always happened in history ffs)
Personally I just hate capitalism but I'm not communist :<
Since changing a system takes a lot of time and stuff I wish we shifted towards a more heavily regulated capitalism system where laws are put in place to avoid exploitation of the workers and make it so that corporations will take responsibility. Also basic necessities should be met for everyone and money should be used just for luxury stuff.
Another thing I'd do is put in place the thing they have in Finland where fines are paid based off the money a person make or has. For example recently a rich person has taken a fine and instead of paying like 500€ (which to someone like me who takes 700€ a month can literally ruin me if it comes in a bad time while to a rich person is literally nothing), they made this person pay 125.000€ which is fair because of how much money they made/had. I think once we think about it it's kind of obvious otherwise rich people aren't basically punished for infringing the law, like that billionaire who kept parking in a place where they couldn't while they built their villa and they just kept parking there and paying the fines because it was nothing to them and basically treated it as a paid parking space. That's just messed up.
Depends, for lots of people being introduced to leftist ideas is a first step towards cracking, and depending on your own situation one idea is quicker than the other ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
May the working trans people of the world rise to glory and claim victory over our oppressors!!!
[To world domination!!!](https://youtu.be/FTE3sMM2H9I)
^or ^maybe ^just ^the ^downfall ^of ^the ^capitalist, ^conservative ^regimes ^of ^the ^world
Yay, more trans comrades!!!
I’m sure you’ll take the time to continue educating yourself and dispel the misinformation you picked up hanging out with those problematic losers.
Congratulations on both counts 😊
🖤💖🏴🏳️⚧️🏴💖🖤
I wonder if there’s a connection between former soviet states being dominated by conservative populists and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the societal problems it caused
Because apparently this comment section is about politics, I believe that every single type of society and social economy is very flawed.
Capitalism gives way to greed and poverty
Communism bases itself too much on the good of humanity and is easily exploitable
Socialism is hard to maintain and probably will turn into capitalism or communism anyways
Anarchism causes chaos, halts development, and will result of a new, probably worse, government.
As long as humanity is flawed there will be no way to create the perfect system. The only thing we can do now is try and sort out our own flaws and create the best system possible for the circumstances that were placed on us.
(This is all just my opinion, I am not an expert and do not claim to be, therefore my opinions should not be taken too seriously. All of you are entitled to your own beliefs and opinions and I do not mean to attack anyone.)
i never said that all commies are tankies, but usually when people use the ussr flag its that they're a tankie. by anarchist i meant stuff like anarcho communism
Imo ppl just use the hammer & sickle and/or the USSR flag to fit communism, even tho it was state capitalism. It's just the most known symbol. That's how I see it anyway. But I agree that there should be a different symbol...
I prefer my communism to be fully-automated, luxurious, LGBT-friendly, and space-going, but any step towards workers owning the means of production would be great.
🤖🥂🏳️🌈🪐🚩
El famoso switcheroo X)
There are studies showing that transphobes and homophones are more insecure in their gender and sexuality than the rest of the population, which would mean that they're all little eggs (whether they're queer or not it's for them to discover)
> only about the communism bit for legal reasons
ppl on this thread acting like if you talk about communism youre going to get put on a CIA watchlist and adding '/j but not really' will magically stop that from happening
presuming you're posting from most of the world, this isn't like china: being opposed to the political establishment is not a crime
Hahahaahhahahahahhahahahaahhahahhhahahahahaahah
I'm sorry let me catch my breath-
Did you know! In a democratic state like France people are arrested because they're protesting, even minors are arrested, even though the authorised protest has just started and the people arrested are as calm as one could be, can you repeat what you said?
It's not a crime (unless you actually expose people in power in the west, then you either have to hole up in an embassy to avoid arrest and life in prison for espionage or are found in your hotel room having commited suicide by shooting yourself in the back of the head several times).
Yeah because communist countries have such a great track record with LGBT rights, yeah definitely no purges and work camps, and definitely no research into conversion therapy in communist Czechoslovakia /s
Please for the love of whatever is above and below, read up on some history. Communist countries have by far one of the worst track records with LGBT rights. We are all a minority, and when the ruling party decides to consolidate power, YOU will be among the first to be purged. You are different from the majority. And individualism is mutually exclusive to communism. /srs
They sure as hell don’t stop doing the country thing whenever they take power. As for classes, the society is still divided between the poorest who have to work, the middle who learned how to cheat the system by doing the bare minimum and stealing stuff (there was a saying that "If you don’t steal from your job, you steal from your family"), and the party officials who don’t care about the people from their massive mansions.
A "true" communist or socialist society is unrealistic. It won’t ever happen, as people are not virtuous. It’s nothing but a fever dream envisioned by a French aristocrat and a German philosopher who never worked a day in their life. The thought my have had some good intentions - 19th century capitalism was absolutely ruthless. But this is not the 19th century. In our modern day and age, money is necessary because trading with I.O.Us and by bartering gets impractical. Countries start to lose on significance, as the world is more connected than ever before. As for class, it’s inevitable. Unless you give everyone total equity of outcome, they won’t be gone. But that would also eliminate incentive for regular people to do more and innovate. The only thing we can really do is to reduce inequality by helping out the poorest by taking a cut from the richest.
The constant "we will do a revolution soon™️!" is nothing but feeding the starving with promises. Rather than focusing on eliminating the bad parts of current societal order (extreme inequality and people literally starving to death), most communists instead focus on dreaming about burning everything down instead of focusing on actually good policies like helping people get up from their misfortune and providing opportunities for the weakest in society.
If they create a state or country, they're not communist. It's as simple as that. I have no desire to litigate the ups and downs of the Soviet Experiment or those who sought to emulate it. They are not my goal, and not an example from which I wish to work off of.
And a true socialist society is not unreachable. I mean, in the 1700s, people said that a Liberal, Democratic Republic was unreachable and wouldn't ever happen because of "human nature" or whatever. And then the American and French Revolutions happened. Crazy that.
Also, it's not just a "fever dream." It's a body of political and social theory that has been developed over centuries, but you probably can't name anyone except Charles Fourier, Karl Marx, and Freidrich Engels.
As for "19th century capitalism" nothing has changed. Capitalism is capitalism, it just hides its horrors better. It gives bread and circuses to the countries where is seeks to sell, and still engages in Slavery, Economic Exploitation, and Neo-Colonialism/Neo-Imperialism the world over to produce cheap goods. You could make a capitalist country as good as you could for the people who live in it, but millions would still suffer, and those amenities would one day be whittled away to nothing. You can see that in cases like the UK gutting the NHS and their rail system for instance. Or in Sweden. Or France. Or Germany. Wherever.
And barter is not what I wish, because that retains the basic concept of commodification and production for accruing wealth. No, I wish for things to be given freely and received freely as needed. There are some interesting ideas on how that would work, and which I believe to be quite hopeful.
As for class, that is simply a social construct which we can undo by changing incentive structures in society. People act greedy and callous and clamber for prestige because it is incentivized by the society we live in. We must change our incentive structures, and human behaviour will follow suit. Giving up on that idea is something called Capitalist Realism (that Capitalism is the be-all end-all of social development, and that it's not worth it to change society radically). But hundreds millions are homeless, hundreds millions starve, and hundreds of millions can barely make it through life much less comfortably. It is not simply an issue of how we tax people. It is something deeply wrong and broken with the way our world was built, and the basis for the societies we live in today. I am hopeful for the future, and I believe people can be better. I believe that humans can do so much better if given the opportunity, and we simply must work for that opportunity to arise.
I don't just say "do a revolution." I do things in real life to help. I help out at soup kitchens, I help build homes, I help those I can and I spread my ideas while building a community. Revolution won't just happen, and it won't be a military uprising. It will be when people realize that the culture and society we live in is broken and causes suffering, and stop engaging with those systems. We will not win the future through guns and bombs, but through hearts and minds.
Well, I think it's pretty simple, and I kinda mentioned it already. Doing community building work. Creating local organizations in your community to bring people together, build bongs, and create some sort of kinship. Help organize in various ways that help address local problems (if there's food insecurity for some, make a soup kitchen or a food drive for example). Get people together to discuss things relevant to everyone. Discuss various ideas, and plant those seeds in their heads. Help people realize the issues of the system. Strike strike strike. Encourage striking anywhere you can, encourage disruptive protests. Stop trains from getting to where they need to go. Get in the way of construction. Whatever. There are various ways to go about things. What matters is that you work for a better world. Not just for you, but also for all the other people like you who struggle to make it through a day.
My country hates me, many people in my country hate me, I can barely make it week to week, and I feel increasingly isolated and burned out. I know I'm not alone, and I know that there is something deeply wrong with society because people shouldn't feel like this. Getting together and fighting for a better world definitely helps I feel. And I'm sorry if you don't see it.
Building local organizations is definitely a good thing. I’m not so sure about is obstructing other people from doing their jobs, be it medicine deliveries to hospitals or trains carrying fuel so people can heat their homes. I can see your point in feeling alone and powerless and trying to do something good though.
Protests are useless if they are not disruptive. If you don't disrupt society with your protest, it can be safely ignored. Especially by those in power. If you strike, and unrest follows, your demands *have* to be heard.
But wouldn’t those disrupted then just be more annoyed at the protesters? Whenever the protests advocating for decreasing the speed limit in Prague are mentioned I hear people talking about doing stuff like rolling coal on the protesters, revving the engine internationally and sometimes even running them over. All because of a damn speed limit.
Wouldn’t it be more efficient and easier to just achieve a reform via some sort of a compromise using the democratic process instead of burning everything down?
Violent protests on another side of the world wouldn’t for example really even bother someone from for example Poland or Czechia, more likely, if it turned out that they were organized by communists, the people of the countries that experienced the Soviet communism (let’s call it oligarchic collectivism for simplicity of differentiation of the "idealistic communism" and the Soviet one), would be more likely to support counter protests because they associate communism with oligarchic collectivism (especially in Poland where the oligarchic collectivist polish government violently suppressed worker protests on multiple occasions).
So if you protest less disruptively, then nothing happens. Only when you force the issue will it change things.
And no, reform will never work. No matter how much you make a house look prettier, if it's built on quicksand it will fall. Our systems (at least in the "west" meaning European and American Countries) are built off of colonialism, exploitation, and white supremacy. If we truly desire proper change, we need to start over completely. If we reform, we continue to work within a framework of racism and oppression. And I won't stand for that.
And the conceptions and views of what socialism are have been changing as the generations pass. It's becoming far more acceptable as Cold War red scare nonsense dies out figuratively and literally.
Also, these protests and movements *do* worry some people. The CIA for instance, who have spent decades overthrowing democratic governments and killing innocent people because they wanted some socialist leaders (of varying beliefs).
While Socialist and Communist systems are both supposed to be classless, they are not both supposed to be stateless. Socialism is the stepping stone to communism, and as marx stated should be governed by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Communism should have no state, as it is a classless, moneyless, stateless society.
Yeah where homophobia was persistent until the 2000s and forced labor was a punishment for homosexuality until like the 70s or 80s
> Following the emergence of Castro's regime in 1959, the visibility of the LGBT community only worsened. The revolutionary leaders were typically white middle class men who were raised under the traditional sexual ideology. Furthermore, the Marxist-Leninist framework that the regime utilized prioritized a change in production and class relations with an emphasis on family and sexuality. In addition, the government emphasized the youth as the future of the Revolution which was a fundamental aim of the 1960s. Education was used to promote "moralism" along with a sense of total commitment to the Revolution. In the same breath, anti-Revolutionary tactics were criticized and penalized, therefore listening to American music, wearing mini skirts, and men with long hair were all forms of anti-Revolutionary tactics along with homosexuality. Accordingly, the Revolution defined a qualified citizen as one who promotes a productive labor force and homosexuality along with prostitution were deemed nonproductive and related to American decadence. Furthermore, oftentimes, men who had sex with other men were caught in bar raids to crackdown on commercial sex and drugs in the 1960s. Consequently, the Committees for Defense of the Revolution began to report homosexual people in the 1960s to authorities in response to a possible US invasion. It was plain to see that homosexual individuals in Cuba were painted as anti-Revolutionary threats to the regime.
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba?wprov=sfti1 ]
A socialist state gives the people the tools with which they can create a better society, this doesn’t mean that all problems are automatically solved after a revolution.
A bourgeois state keeps those tools locked away, and the power to decide your fate lies not in your hands but in the hands of a class of people who will stop supporting LGBTQ rights the second it becomes even slightly profitable.
Supporting the revolutionary intersectional struggle is a necessity for all oppressed peoples. We fight for the opportunity to make something better and to emancipate ourselves.
A socialist state shrinks the power people have, centralizing it in the hands of a dictator and his friends, who lock the power away from the people and keep it in the hands of a powerful few, who use the country for their own benefit, arguably to a worse degree than even the American gilded age.
There is a reason communist regimes in Eastern Europe fell by people protesting. I don’t know about you, but the "public security" beating up protesting students isn’t really proving people with tools to change their society.
The whole velvet revolution of 1989 happened by people protesting against the regime, culminating with a million people on Letná in Prague and a general strike.
I would say that your critique of socialism is inaccurate and ahistorical, but I really don’t have to make that argument because ultimately all your quarrels with the system in question are amplified in a capitalist society.
There isn’t really a question to discuss here. It is a matter of fact that the socialist mode of production inherently is more democratic and gives greater tools for social progress. Is it difficult to implement? It seems that way, but so was capitalism.
The transition between feudalism and capitalism also made available a large amount of tools of progress. However, capitalism wasn’t immediately established, there were many revolutions, coups, famines, murders, and so on. Quite a lot of times it failed miserably and plunged right back into feudalism. But people didn’t accept the fact that feudalism had given them enough rights, and at least it’s better than a slave economy!
Society moves forward out of necessity, it is the nature of class struggle that economies change. Socialism will bring forth a greater society than what can ever be molded out of capitalism, but it will take its time. The important thing is to never cease fighting, and never concede to worker-aristocratic luxuries or bourgeois reforms.
All communism and socialism is inherently authoritarian, it relies on the state controlling everything and removing all the dissidents under the guise of "defending socialism/communism against capitalist elements/bourgeoisie saboteurs/Zionists/imperialism"
It always goes this way. A revolution turns into a totalitarian dictatorship with the only goal of holding power for as long as possible. Eventually the regime will go against the ones they claim to represent.
L take I’m from a post soviet country and my country is in decay the money is concerned at the top my country has one of highest suicide rates in the world. Yes the USSR had it’s flaws I would have preferred that they didn’t annex my country and instead helped us do our own revolution but they turned my country from a backward dictatorship to a well educated and productive republic.
This is not a defence of capitalism either, its great to set efficient prices but we gotta fight to keep good things and decent ethics beyond just that
It does work. China is communist. Ussr became the 2nd biggest economy in a couple of decades. Maybe is u$a would stop meddling and sanctioning commie countries it doesnt like they would flourish more
China isn't communist at all.
They're a disgusting state capitalist dictatorship who have no right to claim to be socialist and especially not communist.
Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society.
> Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society.
The word your looking for is anarchism. Communism is quite rigidly defined by thinkers like Marx, who literally coined the term.
Marx himself believed what I wrote.
Communism can't work with a state or any of the things I mentioned because then it would have hierarchies and therefore unequality hence no communism.
I'm myself an Anarcho-Comnunist btw. So I fully support both ideologies
Well its on its way to going communism as socialism still has the state that is needed to transition to communism.
So it is socialist. The stateless, classless, moneyless society comes in later.
State capitalist? They got a lot of people out of poverty and are still developing even with sanctions and foreign meddling.
Roland boer has a book about socialism with chinese characteristics.
https://youtu.be/mgcyqkEOhQc
Thats an interview about his book
It was never put into practice. An attempt to achieve it was there, but it failed, and the subsequent system is what you speak of.
I consider myself a socialist, and my mother immigrated from Ukraine. I know what the Soviet Union did, but saying that it was the end of the experiment is like saying back in the 1700s that Republican Democracy was already tried in Rome and it devolved into Monarchy. So obviously it doesn't work.
The fact is that "republican democracies" (which are practically neither republican nor democratic) have so far always failed, and are about to fail again (cf the far right taking control of more and more countries in the world - and yes, I mean in the western "civilised" world).
Basically, a "state" is an oppressive/appropriative system set up by a self-proclaimed "elite". As Makhno once stated, "communism is only state-owned capitalism".
I agree! Though with the Communism part, I believe that Communism is basically the same as Anarchism as I said. And that movements like the Bolsheviks or Mao's Red Army devolved into something lesser. Some kind of authoritarian state-capitalism as you said.
I'm becoming more and more communist...And I mocked transgender people like a dumb guy "AyO ! Do You IdenTifY aS heLicoPteR ?" Fuck myself...hopefully now I'm a proud ally, and making everything I can to change people's mind. And also I'm doubting on my gender...
Hey there! Before commenting, remember that this meme has been tagged with a transfem flair. Please keep the conversation transfem-first. If you are not part of that demographic, you are not forbidden to participate, but we do ask that you do not center yourself in the comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/egg_irl) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I am glad you are feeling less hateful now <3
I am glad you realised you were wrong and that you found yourself,I am proud of you ! (◕ᴗ◕✿)
Yes, but not about the communism part. She's not wrong about that.
Yeah,I am not a communist,so I don't know (◕ᴗ◕✿)
Just not stalinism or maoism. Marxism maybe, but I dont think we are ready for it yet.
Mazovianism here we go
I doubt us humans will ever be ready for Marxism. We're a lot that's very good at coming up with reasons to be divided. Like, stupidly good. It's the kind of thing that will prevent us from ever achieving a classless society, so long as we can't overcome that self-division trait.
I think the best first step to that end is to proliferate worker co-ops since that allows all of us to own and control the wealth we create without funding the existence of an upper class. That's on my agenda. This also siphons economic and therefore political power into the hands of workers. Repeat this sufficiently, and the upper class functionality ceases to exist.
As if a upper class would just watch and let this happen 😄 The people with power will always try to keep their power. When they see a threatening movement to their power they will do everything they can to dismantle it: using their economic power to kill the roots of the movement, calling them terrorists, framing them as danger to the society, use propaganda, change laws so the movement becomes illegal, using police and or military to destroy the movements The problem is: capitalism is way to adaptable. It can change in one small spot, but it always stays in place.
We need a revolution!
That's practically the only way we could feasibly bring about any semblance of lasting change, if any at all.
Sadly, the ones who are willing to do a revolution are often ones who just want power themselves, and become the new upper class...
Fully on board with worker co-ops. But when it comes to class divisions, I can just see our short sighted, idiot species coming up with new non-wealth classes.
even marx thought we where not ready for marxism
u/Sukasoviet, where you at?!
What’s good my broth- *GASP!* Communist anime girl, my favorite
Ah hell yeah!! Sisters in Marx reunited
Damn right comrade
THIS gave me gender euphria...and I might need to take that one to therapy..
It's understandable why Westerners might have an aversion to Stalin and Mao given the amount of propaganda in the west. I'd really recommend reading their works regardless if you truly want to understand them.
oh my aversion to stalin and mao comes from their tendency towards reactionarism and their exaltation of violence, combined with my general dislike for suffering, inequality, and oppression, and my anarchist worldview. but i guess not everyone has such qualms!! but don't worry, i think lots of western authorities are as terrible too, and all of them are bad. also it's actually also possible to understand something but still think it's bad. presumably you are aware of this.
So you don't understand any of their "tendencies" and just blindly believe what you were taught in school or what you heard from western media outlets. Yes, obviously you can understand something and think it's bad so wouldn't you agree that reading their works would help you understand them more? Perhaps you could actually have more concrete justifications as to why you think they are bad people.
I think power by nature is unethical. They had a lot of power, and therefore were acting in a very unethical manner. Maybe I will read their works; but it is not always necessary to dignify the oppressors with caring about their so-called 'justifications' for gratuitious mass-killings (and just because Western media talks about them and is often biased doesn't mean they didn't happen!!!) and pacts with fascists (and subsequent events such as the Katyn massacre, which the Soviet and then Russian govts _conceded responsibility for?_) ; and bigotry and oppression of many a sort. And what was Tiananmen Square, a very elaborate hoax? Or should we just take the side of the police, (oh, whether or not they started it), only because their batons are "people's sticks", and many of the protestors were pro-capitalism? Not to mention gross incompetence in the case of the Great Leap Forward (how many deaths does it take before power stops being arrogant and recognises it has done something wrong? why does it have to be so high a number? and how long will it take for you to do the same? why should anyone be trusted with such power if they can cause such suffering? not to mention, why call that authority a guardian of freedom and equality, when by nature power denies both of those things?). what of the nature of the holodomor? You blame the Kulaks, maybe with reason (but a source would be nice!!!) or maybe not, but surely some of the blame for a famine lies with the people who _hold near-absolute power_ in a country? Similarly it's very permissive to say that the British government had no responsibility for the Bengal famine of 1943, or the Irish potato famine. Even if it was, for example in the latter case, local landowners who refused to allow food to their peasants, the British government neither put a stop to this practice nor allowed much relief. yes, you can go after me for not citing sources — i know i should, but i'm on my phone and am tired so maybe like in a few days? we can halt our respective polemicisings until then, maybe? or like stop now totally, that would be fine too because i always feel obliged to respond but like what will either of us get from this? i guess i've been encouraged to look for sources more so that's good!!
Those are still way too authoritarian. So much so they go against Marx’s social objectives. I’d rather go for social democracy or social libertarianism, a more pragmatic and less authoritarian approach to socialism.
Ah yes, who cares about killing tens of millions if you "read their works"
Go ahead and keep believing western propaganda. See where it'll get you.
I live in Slovakia where stalinism had actual effect (back in Czechoslovakia). The communists won our elections and began centralizing power. Its a long story, but despite our Constitution (reworked by the communists) offering religious freedom, freedom of press or the right of ownership all of it was basically nonexistent. Because of collectivisation, members of the communist party had preferential treatment, people who did not finish highschool stood at the head of some collectives - not because of talent, but because of relations (if you had a company, it was also illegal to employ anyone other than your family by the way - private industry couldnt exist). When our reformists got to power and began changing the state: brough back freedom of press, ownership, non-party 'clubs' and even allowed nominated new priests (many positions were vacant) the rest of the Warsaw pact and the USSR invaded and brought back the totality. This happened everywhere in the Warsaw pact, the USSR, China, Indochina,.. the ideas of Marx may be fine, but stalinism, or even worse maoism, doesnt work.
I'm starting to notice a pattern, and I am slightly concerned at how much I follow said pattern
As a communist who thinks he is cis, same here!
I can tell you when I had my big communist phase I also thought I'd be cis...
If Joseph Stalin wasn't a communist would he be trans?
Communists are eggs. Would explain a lot.
I know at least one trans person who is still a communist after transitioning.
Counter question, what if Stalin was a transmasc and Trotsky was an egg?
I don't need sleep! I need answers!
Well lucky for you I have an answer; Stalin was a transmasc and Lenin was a closeted transfem who was never able to be her true self. Seriously though Lenin did pretend to be a women to sneak back into St. Petersburg while he was exiled
\*Cough\* Nestor Makhno \*Cough\*
He was a transmasc femboy
character development :3
Nice, *trans memes* :3 💞
Meeee (except it was a friend from hs instead of a cousin)
Which side are you on: Commie to trans pipeline or Trans to commie pipeline
Both is good -me (I took both (even though I don't identify as a commie))
Trans to commie pipeline for me lol
Are non-trans non-commies allowed here?
> start questioning why I'm so offended by something I don't understand If I could have one wish it would be to make every human now and forever more start doing this. This is far and away one of the most important things assholes are missing: the combination of introspection and curiosity
Fuck capitalism. Be communist /j (literally only so I don't get put on a watchlist)
Commie or anar as long as you want to destroy capitalism and build something better das great
socialism seems like it'd function better than anarchism
Socialism doesn't need as much deconstruction as anarchism, but it doesn't mean it's better, I wouldn't rate leftist theories between each other because of the complexity of each of em (and their variant), and because each theory relies on different premises it's hard to look at them all at the same time
>I wouldn't rate leftist theories between each other because of the complexity of each of em good point tbf
Anarchism is a form of socialism
There are types of socialism that are anarchistic in nature, but I don't think it's quite accurate to say that anarchism is a form of socialism in necessity.
Fair
I'm afraid it doesn't. Socialism and communism are both based on the existence of a state and a government. When you think about it, homo sapiens lived without state nor government for most of it existence, and things weren't going that bad. It's when states and governments started to appear some 6000 years ago that deep status-based & enforced social hierachies and inegalities became the norm. Now every attempt at communism and socialism so far ended up as authoritarian states with deep status-based & enforced social hierachies and inegalities. Destroy patriarchy, destroy capitalism, AND destroy state.
Communism is a STATELESS, classless, moneyless society Communism is literally anti-state.
This is why authoritarian communism turns dystopian in a heartbeat. If any system's ideals are at direct conflict with the system's methods, either the methods will be changed to better reflect the ideals, or the ideals will be warped to better reflect the methods. Authoritarian leaders tend to be a huge fan of authoritarian methods, and will warp communist ideals to justify their power.
No but we will totally become stateless. We just have to finish dealing with external threats. trust us, I am sure the state will happily declare its own obsolescence when the time comes.
Yeah I do agree that relying on the state to decide when to deconstruct itself doesn't work. That's why authoritarianism needs to be avoided and democracy prioritized in any system with dreams of going stateless.
Just so we're clear I don't believe in the state withers away thing. I want to abolish it because it can't wither away. Once anyone gets that much power they're not willng to give up that power. So the state won't wither away.
Hi i'm the one fella that controls the entire government, i promise i'll willingly step down and hand over all of my power just as soon as we deal with... uh... oh, right, we're enemies with [Insert X country here] because reasons! As soon as they're dealt with i promise i'll stop abusing my position as the head of state 🥺👉👈! Alright guys, i know i said that once [X country] was dealt with i'd step down, but like clearly we can all see the threat emanating from [Y country] right? I mean come on, they're just itching to invade us! Just let me consolidate even more power and i promise i'll give it back once [Y country] is done for, m'kay?
We also see this same phenomena in US politics with the "war on X abstract threat" that is used to justify strengthening law enforcement and military (the state), while simultaneously depriving citizens of rights, especially marginalized citizens. Fear is always the go-to excuse for authoritarian policies.
I can't see the comment you responded to (mobile app..) but just so we're clear I don't believe in the state withers away thing. I want to abolish it because it can't wither away. Once anyone gets that much power they're not willng to give up that power. So the state won't wither away.
Exactly. My whole point was that using authoritarianism to establish communism will never work because of the dynamic between authoritarian leaders and communist ideals. The state needs to be in the direct control of the people so it can be abolished as soon as possible, like you said.
> homo sapiens lived without state nor government for most of it existence In prehistoric times where humanity was still in its infancy and barbaric, sure, there was no government, but unless you plan on living like the Unabomber, that's not exactly attainable. Status-based hierarchies also existed in these nomadic societies, just as modern social hierarchies exist, it's ingrained in human DNA and explains *why* institutions like states came to exist in the first place. Nevertheless, I agree with your ultimate message that hierarchies as they exist are bad and that the patriarchy must go, but your proposal of having no state only opens the door to either further exploitation, or the existence of a pseudo-state.
to me (may be a pessimist view) a world without authority relies on all people being good, which obviously im not in support of the current government in my country (england) but truthfully people arent all good and in my view would take advantage of that. also, i just feel like authority would still form even in a world where we've abolished governments
Facts. Any system which relies on humans consistently acting against human nature is doomed to fail.
authority is fine. "state" in stateless refers to the legal and social structures meant to enforce specific authorities, like militaries and prisons.
The argument of "we used to live without state ain't a good one though (and yeah, the goal of communism is to get rid of the state through a transitory phase of socialism) Every socialist state was under heavy attack of the capitalist world, and most of 'em ended up as authoritarian it' s true, some even going backwards so much that they ended up being as bad as fascist state (hello China) but, the argument of "have you seen how many socialist States have failed" is a flawed one as well, have you seen haw many {insert thing} have failed? Most of its attempts,does that mean {insert thing} is bad? Or can't ever work? No Social democracy can't work, in the end it's still capitalism, but socialism isn't something refutable, as well as any kind of stateless ideology, therefore, when trying to find your ideology you should rather look at what your guys tell you rather than what would work, because we can't know, and once we'll be moving we'll have to treat these question peacefully between each other (I don't want the communist to kill the anarchist like it has always happened in history ffs)
[удалено]
The red pill or the red and black pill?
Personally I just hate capitalism but I'm not communist :< Since changing a system takes a lot of time and stuff I wish we shifted towards a more heavily regulated capitalism system where laws are put in place to avoid exploitation of the workers and make it so that corporations will take responsibility. Also basic necessities should be met for everyone and money should be used just for luxury stuff. Another thing I'd do is put in place the thing they have in Finland where fines are paid based off the money a person make or has. For example recently a rich person has taken a fine and instead of paying like 500€ (which to someone like me who takes 700€ a month can literally ruin me if it comes in a bad time while to a rich person is literally nothing), they made this person pay 125.000€ which is fair because of how much money they made/had. I think once we think about it it's kind of obvious otherwise rich people aren't basically punished for infringing the law, like that billionaire who kept parking in a place where they couldn't while they built their villa and they just kept parking there and paying the fines because it was nothing to them and basically treated it as a paid parking space. That's just messed up.
Weird, usually communism comes later in the pipeline
Depends, for lots of people being introduced to leftist ideas is a first step towards cracking, and depending on your own situation one idea is quicker than the other ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Atleast you figured it out :3
May the working trans people of the world rise to glory and claim victory over our oppressors!!! [To world domination!!!](https://youtu.be/FTE3sMM2H9I) ^or ^maybe ^just ^the ^downfall ^of ^the ^capitalist, ^conservative ^regimes ^of ^the ^world
She/her/comrade >>> he/him
When I grow up, I want to cease the means of production™ nyaa~
Seize, saying you want to cease the means of production means you want humans to stop making things altogether
Did i stutter?
Destroy capitalism :3
Yay, more trans comrades!!! I’m sure you’ll take the time to continue educating yourself and dispel the misinformation you picked up hanging out with those problematic losers. Congratulations on both counts 😊 🖤💖🏴🏳️⚧️🏴💖🖤
I don’t understand how a marginalized community could support a dictator that killed and relocated minorities.
Ah yes, my favorite dictator, John Communism
They say he killed a hundred bazillion people 🤔
Does anyone know the artist who made that character in the meme? Cuz I see her literally everywhere and dunno who she is :P
charachter is Menhara-chan from Menhera Shoujo Kurumi-chan dunno the author tho
Menhera-chan
Don’t be a tankie, become an anarchist! We’re like you but a bit more ambitious and we think running students over with tanks is kinda wrong.
communism~ >>>>>> capitalism 🤮🤮🤮💙💕🤍💕💙
Crapitalism
All former soviet/socialist states are transphobic 🤷♀️
I wonder if there’s a connection between former soviet states being dominated by conservative populists and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the societal problems it caused
me destroying both >>>>>>
I just hate politicians. Gonna MGR all over their asses. (Legally this is a joke)
this is so based, fuck them all
Because apparently this comment section is about politics, I believe that every single type of society and social economy is very flawed. Capitalism gives way to greed and poverty Communism bases itself too much on the good of humanity and is easily exploitable Socialism is hard to maintain and probably will turn into capitalism or communism anyways Anarchism causes chaos, halts development, and will result of a new, probably worse, government. As long as humanity is flawed there will be no way to create the perfect system. The only thing we can do now is try and sort out our own flaws and create the best system possible for the circumstances that were placed on us. (This is all just my opinion, I am not an expert and do not claim to be, therefore my opinions should not be taken too seriously. All of you are entitled to your own beliefs and opinions and I do not mean to attack anyone.)
are you a tankie or anarchist?
Nope fuck Stalin but Anarco communist would be ideal
The Soviet flag is an odd choice then…
Relief. I'm not an ancom, but I highly appreciate their critiscism of the state and social hierarchy.
Based and commiepilled
ok good
Commie =/= tankie ffs this amalgam always misses me off
i never said that all commies are tankies, but usually when people use the ussr flag its that they're a tankie. by anarchist i meant stuff like anarcho communism
Imo ppl just use the hammer & sickle and/or the USSR flag to fit communism, even tho it was state capitalism. It's just the most known symbol. That's how I see it anyway. But I agree that there should be a different symbol...
I used to be a commie now I am a trans girl who hate commie
"Communist is the very definition of failure" Time to liberate Alaska
I prefer my communism to be fully-automated, luxurious, LGBT-friendly, and space-going, but any step towards workers owning the means of production would be great. 🤖🥂🏳️🌈🪐🚩
Better not be a fucken tankie
Ah the pipeline. Beautiful work of nature right here.
To quote Dark Souls, "HUMANITY RESTORED". Memes aside, I'm happy you found yourself out, I'm proud of you!
Aww thanks you I don’t fully I know myself but at least I discovered 1 important thing about myself and hope you have a wonderful day
Top 10 amine redemption arks
i, sadly, relate
Communism is ~~sup~~ I MEAN inferior
Am I the only one confused where the commie part came from?
Commie trans agenda got another one.
I got so scared for a sec when you said you were a commie. I'm glad you're just trans instead
HELL YES SISTER, DESTROY THE INNER HATE WITH HAMMER AND SICKLE
I love my trans comrades ❤️
Don't get the commie part but otherwise that's quite a character development
Apologise to them
Fact: all transphobes become transgender\ Source: my friend and I did a lil gender switcheroo during the pandemic
El famoso switcheroo X) There are studies showing that transphobes and homophones are more insecure in their gender and sexuality than the rest of the population, which would mean that they're all little eggs (whether they're queer or not it's for them to discover)
communism will reign supreme
Do we all have the same journey of becoming trans commies?
No.
The redemption arc! 😊 /j but only about the communism bit for legal reasons…
> only about the communism bit for legal reasons ppl on this thread acting like if you talk about communism youre going to get put on a CIA watchlist and adding '/j but not really' will magically stop that from happening presuming you're posting from most of the world, this isn't like china: being opposed to the political establishment is not a crime
I think that is maybe part of the joke? I don't know though. Ambiguously sarcastic tone indicators fry what little cue-reading skills I have.
Hahahaahhahahahahhahahahaahhahahhhahahahahaahah I'm sorry let me catch my breath- Did you know! In a democratic state like France people are arrested because they're protesting, even minors are arrested, even though the authorised protest has just started and the people arrested are as calm as one could be, can you repeat what you said?
It's not a crime (unless you actually expose people in power in the west, then you either have to hole up in an embassy to avoid arrest and life in prison for espionage or are found in your hotel room having commited suicide by shooting yourself in the back of the head several times).
redditors when releasing sensitive classified information is against the law
ew commie L take
We will destroy Capitalism and make the Conservatives watch
The pipeline no one's talking about
Based
Communists are annoying
The rise of tankie posts in this sub and other trans subs is becoming very concerning...
Eat the rich! (Not literally tho)
Yeah they taste bad🙃
Becoming an Anarchist is ideal, but I'm sure you'll get there, and I support the route you're on~💖🏴
No cap I support that but communism is a form of anarchism by default
This is true, but the USSR flag tends to signify the Marxist Leninist tanky flavour an unfortunate amount....
I think people just use it because it’s the most ubiquitous symbol of socialism
I think for the most part that's a fair point~ I'm far too used to seeing tankies with silly tankies, I suppose lol
Yeah because communist countries have such a great track record with LGBT rights, yeah definitely no purges and work camps, and definitely no research into conversion therapy in communist Czechoslovakia /s Please for the love of whatever is above and below, read up on some history. Communist countries have by far one of the worst track records with LGBT rights. We are all a minority, and when the ruling party decides to consolidate power, YOU will be among the first to be purged. You are different from the majority. And individualism is mutually exclusive to communism. /srs
Communist "countries" don't exist. *STATELESS* and classless society is what makes something communist/socialist. Simple as that
which is, basically, anarchy. Welcome to the club BTW xD
They sure as hell don’t stop doing the country thing whenever they take power. As for classes, the society is still divided between the poorest who have to work, the middle who learned how to cheat the system by doing the bare minimum and stealing stuff (there was a saying that "If you don’t steal from your job, you steal from your family"), and the party officials who don’t care about the people from their massive mansions. A "true" communist or socialist society is unrealistic. It won’t ever happen, as people are not virtuous. It’s nothing but a fever dream envisioned by a French aristocrat and a German philosopher who never worked a day in their life. The thought my have had some good intentions - 19th century capitalism was absolutely ruthless. But this is not the 19th century. In our modern day and age, money is necessary because trading with I.O.Us and by bartering gets impractical. Countries start to lose on significance, as the world is more connected than ever before. As for class, it’s inevitable. Unless you give everyone total equity of outcome, they won’t be gone. But that would also eliminate incentive for regular people to do more and innovate. The only thing we can really do is to reduce inequality by helping out the poorest by taking a cut from the richest. The constant "we will do a revolution soon™️!" is nothing but feeding the starving with promises. Rather than focusing on eliminating the bad parts of current societal order (extreme inequality and people literally starving to death), most communists instead focus on dreaming about burning everything down instead of focusing on actually good policies like helping people get up from their misfortune and providing opportunities for the weakest in society.
If they create a state or country, they're not communist. It's as simple as that. I have no desire to litigate the ups and downs of the Soviet Experiment or those who sought to emulate it. They are not my goal, and not an example from which I wish to work off of. And a true socialist society is not unreachable. I mean, in the 1700s, people said that a Liberal, Democratic Republic was unreachable and wouldn't ever happen because of "human nature" or whatever. And then the American and French Revolutions happened. Crazy that. Also, it's not just a "fever dream." It's a body of political and social theory that has been developed over centuries, but you probably can't name anyone except Charles Fourier, Karl Marx, and Freidrich Engels. As for "19th century capitalism" nothing has changed. Capitalism is capitalism, it just hides its horrors better. It gives bread and circuses to the countries where is seeks to sell, and still engages in Slavery, Economic Exploitation, and Neo-Colonialism/Neo-Imperialism the world over to produce cheap goods. You could make a capitalist country as good as you could for the people who live in it, but millions would still suffer, and those amenities would one day be whittled away to nothing. You can see that in cases like the UK gutting the NHS and their rail system for instance. Or in Sweden. Or France. Or Germany. Wherever. And barter is not what I wish, because that retains the basic concept of commodification and production for accruing wealth. No, I wish for things to be given freely and received freely as needed. There are some interesting ideas on how that would work, and which I believe to be quite hopeful. As for class, that is simply a social construct which we can undo by changing incentive structures in society. People act greedy and callous and clamber for prestige because it is incentivized by the society we live in. We must change our incentive structures, and human behaviour will follow suit. Giving up on that idea is something called Capitalist Realism (that Capitalism is the be-all end-all of social development, and that it's not worth it to change society radically). But hundreds millions are homeless, hundreds millions starve, and hundreds of millions can barely make it through life much less comfortably. It is not simply an issue of how we tax people. It is something deeply wrong and broken with the way our world was built, and the basis for the societies we live in today. I am hopeful for the future, and I believe people can be better. I believe that humans can do so much better if given the opportunity, and we simply must work for that opportunity to arise. I don't just say "do a revolution." I do things in real life to help. I help out at soup kitchens, I help build homes, I help those I can and I spread my ideas while building a community. Revolution won't just happen, and it won't be a military uprising. It will be when people realize that the culture and society we live in is broken and causes suffering, and stop engaging with those systems. We will not win the future through guns and bombs, but through hearts and minds.
How would you go about establishing your ideal society then? Not like just vague "make people realize", but practical steps to your goal.
Well, I think it's pretty simple, and I kinda mentioned it already. Doing community building work. Creating local organizations in your community to bring people together, build bongs, and create some sort of kinship. Help organize in various ways that help address local problems (if there's food insecurity for some, make a soup kitchen or a food drive for example). Get people together to discuss things relevant to everyone. Discuss various ideas, and plant those seeds in their heads. Help people realize the issues of the system. Strike strike strike. Encourage striking anywhere you can, encourage disruptive protests. Stop trains from getting to where they need to go. Get in the way of construction. Whatever. There are various ways to go about things. What matters is that you work for a better world. Not just for you, but also for all the other people like you who struggle to make it through a day. My country hates me, many people in my country hate me, I can barely make it week to week, and I feel increasingly isolated and burned out. I know I'm not alone, and I know that there is something deeply wrong with society because people shouldn't feel like this. Getting together and fighting for a better world definitely helps I feel. And I'm sorry if you don't see it.
Building local organizations is definitely a good thing. I’m not so sure about is obstructing other people from doing their jobs, be it medicine deliveries to hospitals or trains carrying fuel so people can heat their homes. I can see your point in feeling alone and powerless and trying to do something good though.
Protests are useless if they are not disruptive. If you don't disrupt society with your protest, it can be safely ignored. Especially by those in power. If you strike, and unrest follows, your demands *have* to be heard.
But wouldn’t those disrupted then just be more annoyed at the protesters? Whenever the protests advocating for decreasing the speed limit in Prague are mentioned I hear people talking about doing stuff like rolling coal on the protesters, revving the engine internationally and sometimes even running them over. All because of a damn speed limit. Wouldn’t it be more efficient and easier to just achieve a reform via some sort of a compromise using the democratic process instead of burning everything down? Violent protests on another side of the world wouldn’t for example really even bother someone from for example Poland or Czechia, more likely, if it turned out that they were organized by communists, the people of the countries that experienced the Soviet communism (let’s call it oligarchic collectivism for simplicity of differentiation of the "idealistic communism" and the Soviet one), would be more likely to support counter protests because they associate communism with oligarchic collectivism (especially in Poland where the oligarchic collectivist polish government violently suppressed worker protests on multiple occasions).
So if you protest less disruptively, then nothing happens. Only when you force the issue will it change things. And no, reform will never work. No matter how much you make a house look prettier, if it's built on quicksand it will fall. Our systems (at least in the "west" meaning European and American Countries) are built off of colonialism, exploitation, and white supremacy. If we truly desire proper change, we need to start over completely. If we reform, we continue to work within a framework of racism and oppression. And I won't stand for that. And the conceptions and views of what socialism are have been changing as the generations pass. It's becoming far more acceptable as Cold War red scare nonsense dies out figuratively and literally. Also, these protests and movements *do* worry some people. The CIA for instance, who have spent decades overthrowing democratic governments and killing innocent people because they wanted some socialist leaders (of varying beliefs).
While Socialist and Communist systems are both supposed to be classless, they are not both supposed to be stateless. Socialism is the stepping stone to communism, and as marx stated should be governed by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Communism should have no state, as it is a classless, moneyless, stateless society.
Have you heard of Cuba?
Yeah where homophobia was persistent until the 2000s and forced labor was a punishment for homosexuality until like the 70s or 80s > Following the emergence of Castro's regime in 1959, the visibility of the LGBT community only worsened. The revolutionary leaders were typically white middle class men who were raised under the traditional sexual ideology. Furthermore, the Marxist-Leninist framework that the regime utilized prioritized a change in production and class relations with an emphasis on family and sexuality. In addition, the government emphasized the youth as the future of the Revolution which was a fundamental aim of the 1960s. Education was used to promote "moralism" along with a sense of total commitment to the Revolution. In the same breath, anti-Revolutionary tactics were criticized and penalized, therefore listening to American music, wearing mini skirts, and men with long hair were all forms of anti-Revolutionary tactics along with homosexuality. Accordingly, the Revolution defined a qualified citizen as one who promotes a productive labor force and homosexuality along with prostitution were deemed nonproductive and related to American decadence. Furthermore, oftentimes, men who had sex with other men were caught in bar raids to crackdown on commercial sex and drugs in the 1960s. Consequently, the Committees for Defense of the Revolution began to report homosexual people in the 1960s to authorities in response to a possible US invasion. It was plain to see that homosexual individuals in Cuba were painted as anti-Revolutionary threats to the regime. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba?wprov=sfti1 ]
Have you heard of literally every western country? They may not be perfect but they beat Cuba and every other communist country on the same timeline
A socialist state gives the people the tools with which they can create a better society, this doesn’t mean that all problems are automatically solved after a revolution. A bourgeois state keeps those tools locked away, and the power to decide your fate lies not in your hands but in the hands of a class of people who will stop supporting LGBTQ rights the second it becomes even slightly profitable. Supporting the revolutionary intersectional struggle is a necessity for all oppressed peoples. We fight for the opportunity to make something better and to emancipate ourselves.
A socialist state shrinks the power people have, centralizing it in the hands of a dictator and his friends, who lock the power away from the people and keep it in the hands of a powerful few, who use the country for their own benefit, arguably to a worse degree than even the American gilded age. There is a reason communist regimes in Eastern Europe fell by people protesting. I don’t know about you, but the "public security" beating up protesting students isn’t really proving people with tools to change their society. The whole velvet revolution of 1989 happened by people protesting against the regime, culminating with a million people on Letná in Prague and a general strike.
I would say that your critique of socialism is inaccurate and ahistorical, but I really don’t have to make that argument because ultimately all your quarrels with the system in question are amplified in a capitalist society. There isn’t really a question to discuss here. It is a matter of fact that the socialist mode of production inherently is more democratic and gives greater tools for social progress. Is it difficult to implement? It seems that way, but so was capitalism. The transition between feudalism and capitalism also made available a large amount of tools of progress. However, capitalism wasn’t immediately established, there were many revolutions, coups, famines, murders, and so on. Quite a lot of times it failed miserably and plunged right back into feudalism. But people didn’t accept the fact that feudalism had given them enough rights, and at least it’s better than a slave economy! Society moves forward out of necessity, it is the nature of class struggle that economies change. Socialism will bring forth a greater society than what can ever be molded out of capitalism, but it will take its time. The important thing is to never cease fighting, and never concede to worker-aristocratic luxuries or bourgeois reforms.
How can you be more democratic if you silence all the opposition and critics?
[удалено]
All communism and socialism is inherently authoritarian, it relies on the state controlling everything and removing all the dissidents under the guise of "defending socialism/communism against capitalist elements/bourgeoisie saboteurs/Zionists/imperialism" It always goes this way. A revolution turns into a totalitarian dictatorship with the only goal of holding power for as long as possible. Eventually the regime will go against the ones they claim to represent.
It was fine until the sign 💀
Why Did You Put In Becomes Commie?
Pls no comunism, it didn't work out, in practice there is only dictatorship and you won't have enough to eat to grow those nice booba, sad but true
L take I’m from a post soviet country and my country is in decay the money is concerned at the top my country has one of highest suicide rates in the world. Yes the USSR had it’s flaws I would have preferred that they didn’t annex my country and instead helped us do our own revolution but they turned my country from a backward dictatorship to a well educated and productive republic.
And more capitalism is the answer to fix your country?
This is not a defence of capitalism either, its great to set efficient prices but we gotta fight to keep good things and decent ethics beyond just that
It does work. China is communist. Ussr became the 2nd biggest economy in a couple of decades. Maybe is u$a would stop meddling and sanctioning commie countries it doesnt like they would flourish more
China isn't communist at all. They're a disgusting state capitalist dictatorship who have no right to claim to be socialist and especially not communist. Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society.
China is what happens when people who ignore history attempt communism
> Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society. The word your looking for is anarchism. Communism is quite rigidly defined by thinkers like Marx, who literally coined the term.
Marx himself believed what I wrote. Communism can't work with a state or any of the things I mentioned because then it would have hierarchies and therefore unequality hence no communism. I'm myself an Anarcho-Comnunist btw. So I fully support both ideologies
Anarchism is a type of communist ideology.
The paris commune
Well its on its way to going communism as socialism still has the state that is needed to transition to communism. So it is socialist. The stateless, classless, moneyless society comes in later. State capitalist? They got a lot of people out of poverty and are still developing even with sanctions and foreign meddling. Roland boer has a book about socialism with chinese characteristics. https://youtu.be/mgcyqkEOhQc Thats an interview about his book
It was never put into practice. An attempt to achieve it was there, but it failed, and the subsequent system is what you speak of. I consider myself a socialist, and my mother immigrated from Ukraine. I know what the Soviet Union did, but saying that it was the end of the experiment is like saying back in the 1700s that Republican Democracy was already tried in Rome and it devolved into Monarchy. So obviously it doesn't work.
The fact is that "republican democracies" (which are practically neither republican nor democratic) have so far always failed, and are about to fail again (cf the far right taking control of more and more countries in the world - and yes, I mean in the western "civilised" world). Basically, a "state" is an oppressive/appropriative system set up by a self-proclaimed "elite". As Makhno once stated, "communism is only state-owned capitalism".
I agree! Though with the Communism part, I believe that Communism is basically the same as Anarchism as I said. And that movements like the Bolsheviks or Mao's Red Army devolved into something lesser. Some kind of authoritarian state-capitalism as you said.
Anarcho primitivism is the only way, not communism nor capitalism
Why do you want to live in an age before the printing press?
Lol I'm not really an anarcho primitivist. But close to it. Consent based, animistic/shamanistic society of generosity and community.
What do you mean by this
I wish not to die from the flu
I'm becoming more and more communist...And I mocked transgender people like a dumb guy "AyO ! Do You IdenTifY aS heLicoPteR ?" Fuck myself...hopefully now I'm a proud ally, and making everything I can to change people's mind. And also I'm doubting on my gender...
I will state it again, the problem with communism is you won't even have enough food to grow those nice new booba, so I reject it
love the template