Thoughts on Marx's theory of historical materialism?

>>1626503
It has been debunked by reality. Saudi Arabia or Qatar are extremely modern, developed and rich yet they still have absolute monarchy and hereditary aristocracy. On the other hand, the only countries eager to adopt socialism tend to be poor semi-feudal shitholes (Russia, China, Bolivia, Vietnam etc) rather than modern, industrialized societies like Marx envisioned.

>>1626503
Russia and China only now going through their capitalist phase, the USSR and PRC were deviations from materialism, and the model they used was stupid and based on being anticap instead of practical. Socialist republics should adapt from capitalist societies, retaining markets, but having public ownership of capital. Full world communism should be a result of production surplus, not central planning.

>>1626503

Getting real spooky in here...

>>1626503
Erroneous.

People call it Eurocentric and even that shit did not happen in all European countries.

Not to mention there were premodern empires that literally did away with Feudalism (i.e. China) and he ignores merchantilism big time.

>>1626503
>that image
cringed

>>1626503
Anyone claiming a linear/positivist view of history should not be listened to. Whether an apocalyptic religious nutjob, a liberal ITS CURRENT YEAR type, or a marxist.

File: 1463066059598.png (141KB, 599x255px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 599x255px

>>1626513
>modern
>developed

>>1626503
>Meiji Restoration
>Revolution
That shit was Aristocrat VS. Aristocrat. The Japanese plebs had totally nothing to say about the matter save for avoiding battles and marching armies.

>>1626521
>Socialist republics should adapt from capitalist societies, retaining markets, but having public ownership of capital

This was the yugo model and it was a failure.

>>1626555
The yugo model failed because Tito was a retard who just took massive loans instead of actually doing something

Complete bunk, overly simplifying societal development. Also laughing pretty hard at how it mentions Russia, China, and Cuba as examples of moving to "Socialist republics" even though most Commies claim they aren't "real communism".

>>1626567
A socialist republic is a means to achieve communism

>>1626553
This. It was basically two disgruntled noble houses deciding to overthrow the Shogunate and replace him with the Emperor, using the recent intervention of America as the catalyst/excuse to make their power play.

That picture triggers me, the pyramids were not built by slaves, the workers most likely viewed it as a duty the same way we view paying taxes.

Class relations had an impact on history, but he vastly overinflates it and his followers inflated it even more as that image proves.

>>1626555
>>1626564
But it did better than Soviet satellite states, despite pissing off both the USSR and the USA.

>>1626577
Which has fuck all to with Russia or China or Cuba.

>>1626581
>That picture triggers me, the pyramids were not built by slaves, the workers most likely viewed it as a duty the same way we view paying taxes.
Clearly you've never talked to an ancap lolbert

>>1626564
True but markets still fucked with wages, inflation and unemployment.

>>1626538
Their base is indeed modern and developed while their superstructure is straight up 17th century.

>>1626586
Then whatever you consider Russia, China and Cuba were, that was a means to achieve communism, doesn't fucking matter because my point is still the same

>>1626536
This. It's "troublesome" in the sense that it's horseshit. Cherry-picked evidence, lots of baseless assertions and assumptions relied upon etc. And I'm a democratic socialist.

Deserves a place in the retired pantheon right alongside Whig history, its estranged parent.

>>1626585
Better how? It was funded by western capital.

>>1626585
Yugo was a shithole compared to East Germany and Czechoslovakia.

>>1626585
Yes because it used capitalist money to fund its programs. That's the problem with socialism, it only works as long as you have somebody else's money.

>>1626595
Brutal authoritarian regimes are not my idea of an equal society.

File: 1472313452596.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>1626611
>That's the problem with socialism, it only works as long as you have somebody else's money.

Ding dong the witch is dead - Fuck off Thatcher.

>>1626613
Ok? What I'm trying to say is that the leaders of those respective countries believed communism can be achieved using the means that they used(marxism-leninism). Just because it didn't work doesn't suddenly mean marxism-leninism == communism.

>>1626607
>east germany
Not a fair comparison. That has everything to do with them being German and nothing to do with them having a centrally planned economy. See West Germany.

>>1626503
It's literally a half-assed attempt of making historiography a science and thinking shit like French revolution could be empirically used to predict future events.

Marxism is to economics like alchemy is to chemistry or psychology is to neuroscience, still somehow stuck in ye olde days of pseudoscientific horseshit and unable to become a respectable field.

>>1626611
>somebody else's
Nice spook you got there

>>1626622
>it's a Germanaboo episode

File: 1300044776986.jpg (17KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x250px

>>1626622
>That has everything to do with them being German

>>1626625
>Marxism is to economics like alchemy is to chemistry or psychology is to neuroscience, still somehow stuck in ye olde days of pseudoscientific horseshit and unable to become a respectable field.
t. someone who has never read marx and doesnt even know what he talks about

>>1626639
I read Marx (Communist manifesto, good chunk of the first Kapital and some of the articles posted on marxists.org) and honestly wish I did not. It's horseshit and about as scientific as Freudian psychoanalysis.

>>1626654
>about as scientific as Freudian psychoanalysis
Marxists would take this as a compliment.

>>1626669
Says a lot about them.

>>1626654
>Communist manifesto
Shitty overrated pamphlet written by Engels. It's only widespread because it's short and a relatively easy read, as far as German texts go. It's prized by revolutionaries because it's a call to revolution and it's how they can relate their revolutionary struggles to Marx, even if they want to set up a backwards dictatorship.

>good chunk of the first Kapital
Apparently you gave up and projected that Marx was advocating Boshevik dictatorships, and not merely criticizing capitalism.

>some of the articles posted on marxists.org
The majority of those are by tankies. Tankies exist because Marx said
>Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes
So the USSR appeared to be a real step against capitalism, and not meaningless conjecture about how things could be better.

File: 1471392413017.png (72KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 900x900px

>>1626654
>I read less than 5% of Marx's work and didn't like it, so it's all shitt

If you think Kapital (especially vol.1) is anything like psychoanalysis then kysmm

>>1626688
>YOU NEVER READ MARX
>Yes I did
>BUT YOU NEVER READ ALL OF MARX

Honestly one doesn't need to read the entirety of the Twilight saga to know it's shit.

>>1626654
You should read critique of the Gotha Program. It's basically Marx bashing people that didn't understand gommunism.

>>1626691
>>Yes I did

Very much debatable kiddo

>>1626695
>kiddo

I'm probably old enough to be your dad, "kiddo". Keep reaching and memeing.

File: 1457928173435.jpg (392KB, 2502x3203px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 2502x3203px

>>1626691
>I read the first half of the first Harry Potter book
>Therefore I know everything there is to know about Harry Potter

File: 1471508210866.jpg (25KB, 530x530px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 530x530px

>>1626697
You didn't even finish the book, how can you say you read Kapital

>>1626688
Can Marxcucks and /leftypol/ fuck off? I'd rather here autistic ranting about the holocaust being faked than this shit

>>1626700
Well you definitely can call Harry Potter garbage after reading the first book.

>>1626702
I will not leave your safe space

>>1626702
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only -- for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.

File: 13582137_297669893902310_7458316850962729966_o.jpg (87KB, 1077x553px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1077x553px

>>1626709

>>1626716
oh shit an mspaint comic

don't I look the fool

>>1626730
yes

>>1626730
You believe in Marx's tripe, you're already looking the fool

>>1626734
You do

>>1626715
good analysis but poor presentation, in terms of being normy friendly it is dwarf fortress tier

>>1626709
/leftypol/ is a literal safe space.

>>1626730
You do, although the comic is really just the cherry on top.

>>1626742
>poor presentation, in terms of being normy friendly it is dwarf fortress tier
That's what happens when a German writes something.

>>1626627
Almost everything about Marxism is a spook.

>>1626764
>Almost everything about Marxism is a spook.
Yeah, but it's okay if they're self serving spooks.

File: 22583ac5f71c9070b0289d1db0cfbffb74cfa05d02cd2bea27262e6e3469e70d.jpg (46KB, 617x666px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 617x666px

>>1626762
Two (You)s, thanks.

>>1626764
see picture

>>1626740
What do you believe

My only fucking beef with /leftypol/ is the double standards the mods employ on this board, apparently /pol/ posting gets you axed even if you're genuinely arguing instead of shitposting, whereas /leftypol/ shitpost sprees go unchecked. Apply the same fucking standard hotpocket fucks.

>>1626771
/pol/ has been shitposting and baiting all over itself since before /leftypol/ existed. Also reported for complaining about moderation.

>>1626777
Except I'm talking about how the mods act on /his/.

>HITLER DINDU NUFFIN, KIKES INTO OVENS OY VEY SCHLOMO
>instant ban

>STALIN DINDU NUFFIN PORKY CLASSKEK KILL ALL KULAKS
>stays up the whole day

>>1626777
Savage

>>1626503
Roughly as empirically correct as his theory on the value of Labor.

Nomsayain

>>1626536
>Anyone claiming a linear/positivist view of history should not be listened to

Why?

>>1626781
One is obviously satire. I wish 4chan was still the same as old 4chan where it could be assumed that both were satire, but sadly, that's not the case anymore.

>>1626787
What's wrong with his LTV

>>1626795
It doesn't real

>>1626800
How so?

>>1626781
Tankies are the most powerful race in the world

>>1626795
He says that there's no invisible hand, and LTV doesn't explain prices.

>>1626777
>reporting reports
reported

>>1626806
Marx never denies supply and demand influencing prices

>leftists literally need mods to quell all opposition so they don't get BTFO in every thread

Notice that you don't get banned on /pol/ for being a leftist but you do get banned on /leftypol/ for being right wing.

>>1626812
>Notice that you don't get banned on /pol/ for being a leftist
But you don't have genuine leftists on /pol/, you just have rightist /pol/ baiting other /pol/ with leftybait to push the rightist agenda.

>>1626503
Back to /r/fullcommunism kid.

File: file.png (43KB, 226x424px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 226x424px

>>1626792
>i-it's t-t-totally satire g-g-guys

Could you have come up with a shittier excuse?

>>1626826
Go ahead and make a leftist thread this second on /pol/ and see whether you get banned.

>>1626830
So you're saying neither one is satire, and you think both are super cereal?

>>1626830
Funny thing is even if it's satire it's still shitposting so I fail to see how it's relevant.

>>1626777
B O O T L I C K
O
O
T
L
I
C
K

>>1626812
>Notice that you don't get banned on /pol/ for being a leftist
Heh. You don't seriously believe this do you?

>>1626832
Yes
>>1626833
This

>>1626709
>literally needing to create your own fucking ivory tower board because you can't handle the bantz on /pol/
>talks about safe spaces

My sides

>>1626835
Based redditor confirmed for never having been on /pol/

>>1626835
Go ahead and prove me wrong.

>>1626835
Where in the rules does it say "You must be right wing to post on this board"

The worst that could happen is that your thread/post gets deleted by a butthurt right wing janny.

>>1626831
The threads don't stay alive along enough get bans. They fall off the board before a mod can get to them. Also don't pretend like you want the global rules actually enforced on /pol/. Are you really implying that they will ban you within a second when they do it for free?

>>1626841
Unironically this. He seriously think /pol/ bans everyone who's not a nazi or something while it's literally free game for everyone. There was a shitload of leftists on /pol/ initially, they just eventually left because everyone laughed at them, nobody was banning them.

>>1626846
Based redditor moving the goalposts, whatever will he think of next?

File: 1471658424572.png (55KB, 905x624px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 905x624px

>>1626841
>>1626842
>>1626844
/pol/kiddies plz. They ban you for "shitposting" whenever you say anything they don't like. I made a serious thread not long ago asking why right wing people are generally less educated and they all got triggered and thought less educated = less intelligent and banned me for a week.

>>1626857
>I made a serious thread not long ago asking why right wing people are generally less educated
Were they at least intelligent enough to realise it's because each generation is more educated than the last?

>>1626857
Proof of this ban?

Also, prove us wrong a second time, and make post again.

/pol/ is like 50% trolling right now and no one's getting banned, hell, a racemixing thread where nude black girls were posted reached the bumb limit

>>1626850
This.

The reason leftypol fucked off in the first place was because they were tired of having to defend their ideology inside the original /leftypol/ general so they fucked off to cripplechan where they have their own hugbox.

Lolbertarians get shit on all the time on /pol/ but they never became butthurt enough to run away and create their own hugbox.

>>1626856
So you want the rules against racism enforced on /pol/, apparently you think it's unfair that /pol/ gets away without having rules enforced unlike other boards?

>>1626864
Hell I'll even make the thread for him if he's scared of a ban, assuming it's not CP or some other illegal shit.

>>1626864
>/pol/ is like 50% trolling right now and no one's getting banned, hell, a racemixing thread where nude black girls were posted reached the bumb limit
By your own admission /pol/ is basically unmoderatable, and it barely takes any time on /pol/ to reach a bump limit.

>>1626867
No, I'm talking about you saying
>The threads don't stay alive along enough get bans. They fall off the board before a mod can get to them
Which is bullshit. Mods don't need a live thread to ban someone, and 2, /v/ is a much faster board yet people still get banned

File: file.png (74KB, 784x392px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 784x392px

>>1626873
It's not unmoderatable, since they still ban global stuff, they just don't give a shit about your leftie ass

>/leftypol/ moving the goalposts from "you get banned on /pol/ for being a leftist" to "/pol/ is too fast to get banned"

You in all seriousness can't make this shit up

>>1626874
>Mods don't need a live thread to ban someone
But they generally don't ban dead threads unless there was an explicit rule violation. Banning threads for content happens when it gets spammed and the mod thinks it's disruptive.

>/v/ is a much faster board yet people still get banned
/v/ has more mods, meaning there's more likely to be a mod on duty. There's also a pretense of there supposed to be some vague semblance of a topic there.

>>1626513
Sitting on vast deposits of liquid money nullifies any argument regarding how successful or unsuccessful their systems are.

>>1626889
Liquid money = base. Marx BTFO.

Please get back on topic instead of discussing meta board drama.

>>1626879
They're not moderating content though. The threads are already dead. They're only moderating the users for breaking rules. If you want to ban for content, it needs to happen fast enough to make a difference when the thread is still alive. Otherwise, how would you even know?

>>1626887
>Banning threads for content happens when it gets spammed and the mod thinks it's disruptive
Kek, based redditors showing off his ignorance again.

You don't ban threads, you delete them, you ban USERS you retard.

>/v/ has more mods, meaning there's more likely to be a mod on duty
You know this because you're besties with Hiroyuki and Moot or something?

>There's also a pretense of there supposed to be some vague semblance of a topic there.

Wanna guess how I know you're a newfag

>>1626894
>The threads are already dead
Because a janitor deleted it you mongoloid.
>If you want to ban for content, it needs to happen fast enough to make a difference when the thread is still alive
Janitor deletes the thread where rulebreaking is taking place, and then the mod bans the one who broke the rule. This your first day here or something?

>>1626895
>You don't ban threads, you delete them, you ban USERS you retard.
You're talking about banning users for the type of content. When you ban a user for a post, the content gets deleted. You're talking about banning a certain kind of posting by banning the users that post it. So yes, banning threads applies.

>You know this because you're besties with Hiroyuki and Moot or something?
Yes.

>Wanna guess how I know you're a newfag
I said vague, and most threads are vaguely on the topic and at least loosely related to vidya.

>>>/pol/87203000
>>>/pol/87204824
>>>/pol/87199404

Wow look at all these banned threads

>>1626907
We've lost sight of the main point, which is
/pol/
won't
ban
you
for
being
lefty

>>1626901
>Because a janitor deleted it you mongoloid.
Or because it barely takes any time for a thread to fall off the board during active hours.

>Janitor deletes the thread where rulebreaking is taking place, and then the mod bans the one who broke the rule.
We're talking about content bans, rule 3, not other explicit rule breaking bans.

>>1626912
/pol/ won't ban you for most GR3 violations. Acting like /pol/ or /b/ is very likely to get you banned under GR3 on boards where GR3 is enforced.

>>1626915
You overestimate how long it takes for a thread to reach a bump limit on /pol/, (about half a hour), enough time for a janny to see it and delete it.

It's just that they usually don't give a shit (See /tv/)

>>1626909
>/pol/ baiting itself

>>1626894
>>1626895
>>1626901
>>1626907
>>1626909
>>1626912
>>1626915
>>1626923
>>1626924
Please go to /qa/ to discuss moderation on 4chan. This is a history board.

>>1626924
>You overestimate how long it takes for a thread to reach a bump limit on /pol/, (about half a hour), enough time for a janny to see it and delete it.
That also means a significantly higher rate of posting, and most shitposts to sift through.

>It's just that they usually don't give a shit (See /tv/)
The faster and bigger a board is, the less shits they tend to give.

>>1626928
Don't tell them about my secret board.

>>1626926
Most likely, yet completely destroys the retards' claim that /pol/ bans left discussion

>>1626909
There is nothing leftist about any of those threads you retarded /pol/shit.

>>1626937
Make a leftist thread on /pol/ right now and see if it gets you banned, go on.

>>1626934
But that's not left discussion. That's right discussion of the left. Those are just topics so /pol/ lampoon the left. There's no genuine leftism there or anyone actually defending leftism. Not to mention, those topics aren't even really leftist, JIDF is not leftism, although /pol/ seems to think everything it doesn't like is funded by Soros and leftist.

>>1626940
If you consider all those "leftist threads" then I honestly don't think I should bother.

>>1626944
So make a legitimate commie thread and see if you get banned
>>1626946
>this avoiding
So make a thread about what you consider leftist, and let's see

File: PewIsrael.png (37KB, 444x363px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 444x363px

>>1626937
supporting israel is leftist
t. altright

Robert Conquest is one of the worst historians going.

>>1626948
>So make a legitimate commie thread and see if you get banned
You don't get banned for making fascism threads here and discussing fascism unless you're really shitposting. They happen all the time.

>So make a thread about what you consider leftist, and let's see
Not him, but is racemixing and BBC leftist?

>>1626948
I'm not avoiding a thing you shit for brains /pol/ kiddie. I know for a fact that no matter what I make that's "leftist" you'll come up with some sort of dumb excuse as to why real left is limited exclusively to progressivism or whatever warped idea you have of what leftism actually is.

>>1626949
Look, even this dumb fuck actually thinks supporting apartheid states is leftist.

>>1626964
Nah wait >>1626949
Meant to quote >>1626909

>>1626962
I know that, I'm talking about the guys who claim that posting anything leftist on /pol/ will get you banned, which is absolutely wrong

>is racemixing and BBC leftist
Not at all, maybe progressivist if you really want to stretch definitions

>>1626964
>I'm not avoiding a thing you shit for brains /pol/ kiddie
Oh, but you are, since you keep refusing to make that thread about what you consider leftism.

Your ass is to the wall and you're desperately trying to claw yourself out.

Literally pick anything you want, as long as you consider it leftist and it doesn't break the global rules. I won't judge

>>1626970
>taking a "Heh." post seriously

>>1626964
Nigger literally post whatever you fucking want and see if it gets you banned. The only faggot who nitpicks about what constitutes real left ITT is you.

>>1626974
See
>>1626830

>>1626981
It's sad when newfag cancer can't spot obvious satire and thinks satire doesn't belong on 4chan.

>>1626993
It's sad when redditors think shitposting constitutes satire

>>1626503
It's absolutely correct and right-wing cuck memesters need to die

>>1626513
>using the word debunked unironically
>>>/YouTube/

>>1627002
>getting triggered this hard by a commonly used word

>mfw everyone thinks historical materialism is dialectical materialism

Historical materialism just means history is moved forward by material conditions being right rather than by the ideas of men, y'all are fucking retarded and the rabid anti-Marxism here needs to die.

>>1627009
>Historical materialism just means history is moved forward by material conditions being right rather than by the ideas of men

But that's what's being addressed, it's fucking nonsense.

>>1627009
To be rather frank with you famiglia Marxism is cancer and I'll allow even the most imbecilic /pol/lack to take a shot at it

>>1627014
Most of the replies are not dealing with it, and saying it's "nonsense" makes you sound like a retard. It's clearly sensible whether it's right or not, and no, often Marx is wrong in specifics but right in theory.

File: 13139115_1602027053445831_648229983236351086_n.jpg (19KB, 258x395px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 258x395px

Who is the "right-wing" equivalent of Marx? Maybe I should know my enemy

>>1627017
Refer to the very first repky ITT

>>1627021
There honestly isn't an equivalent of that magnitude, not even Hitlet.

>>1627021
There is none. Adam Smith and the like merely observed a system that formed naturally as a result of multitudes of individuals negotiating with each other.

>>1627021
Nietzsche, but most right-wingers hate Nietzsche when they find out his actual thoughts about pseudo-right wing man baby ideologies like nationalism and white supremqcy.

>>1627023
That's talking about dialectical materialism, not historical materialism.

>>1627026
Adam Smith was left-wing.

>>1627029
Elaborate. How is Nietzsche right wing?

>>1627029
>disagreeing with liberals means you're a white supremacist

As Marx articulates it, it doesn't work, however it's possible to modify into something correct. However anti-Marxists will do what they always do: by hyperbolic fedora-tipping man babies and insist Marx is 100% invalidated and if we kill all the black men then the world will be great.

Right wing ideology is cancer, people forget that universal suffrage and worker treatment improved because of the Soviet threat. The communists actually forced right-wingers to treat workers better. People don't realize that reactionary forces against communism led to left-wing policies in the west which built the middle class.

Also, that is disappearing fast as there is no pressure from left-wing governments

Right wing ideology is cancer

>>1627040
Maybe at the time, but nowadays he would be branded an extreme far right white supremacist who wants to curb stomp black babies.

>>1627053
Ironically nationalism is fundamentally a liberal ideology

>>1627029
The problem I have with most right wingers is that they often misunderstand their own philosophers, like many are actually convinced that Evola was a fascist, Nietzsche a nihilist etc. Then again Marxists are even more retarded so idk.

>>1627046
Absolutely antidemocratic, believed society should have classes and inferior people should accept their place.

>>1627053
You don't even understand the concept of liberalism, you just believe in spooky nonsense that you got from media sound bites.

>>1627062
Labor laws started improving in the gilded age before Sovcuck Union was even a thing

>>1627063
At the time they wrote is the only appropriate way to measure this IMO

>>1627078
Because of socialists.

>>1627087
Because social democrats actually, aka people who were willing to negotiate and not conmunist fedoralords chimping out and blowong shit up.

>>1627091
Oh right, so everybody who finds any value in Marx at all is a tankie fedora, thanks for the insight.

>>1627094
Nah tankies are actually the reasonable ones compared to orthodox marxists and anarcucks.

>>1627063
Adam Smith unironically believed in equality and regulation that helped the working class.

>>1627099
LOL *tips*

>>1627106
I'm being dead serious. I don't like Stalin at all, but he was a pragmatic man who got shit done, industrialized Russia, built a ton of cool stuff.

On the other hand you have things like the Paris commune or Anarchist Catslonia which were more or less just glorified chimpfests with braindead fanatics blowing up hospitals and organizing lynch mobs, just pure savagery.

>>1627120
>full tankie
>not even a communist

My head is spinning

>>1626567
A socialist republic is a state that wants to create communism

>>1626806
LTV isn't about what something costs, but what it ought to cost, innit?

>>1626812
What m8

Leftypol has some prominent far-right regulars

>>1627184
LTV is about profits, more or less. If someone is turning a profit on another's work, they are exploiting them.

>>1626909
Supporting Israel is a right wing position you dumb shit

>>1627021
Evola

>>1626812
>>1626812
>this is what right wingers actually believe

What is it with classcucked Donald Trump fans insisting they're "blowing things out" when they raise any objection at all, no matter how wrong it is or how little anyone agrees with them?

>>1627063
No he wouldn't be, don't be ridiculous

File: 0hQyd5L.gif (489KB, 420x315px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 420x315px

MRW sitting here watching people argue an unfinished work.

>>1627211
BTFOee detected

This is a fucking politics thread, go to /pol/

/his/ is for history and not fucking discussing government.

>>1627259
>/his/ is for history
& Humanities :^)

>>1627259
huuuuu man eeee ties

>>1626503
Step 4 is where this little meme diverges from history. As a matter of fact the world stayed at the capitalist stage, with productivity booms and agricultural advances (green revolution) serving only to entrench and reinforce the capitalist mode of production.

Socialism through its own botching and by successful first world propaganda campaigns and interference, has become discredited and ineffectual.

>>1626777
Awww little lefty baby needs big daddy gov to protect you :(((( how adorable aww

>>1627136
I'm not a tankie. I'm just saying that Stalin while a genocidal maniac also had some positives that made up for the fact he was a genocidal maniac. Other communists (Lenin, Pol Pot, Communards, Luminous Path etc) have no positives at all and are shit all around.

>>1627062
>as marx articulates it
t. someone that hasnt read marx

>>1627556
Leftypol is anti-statist dude

Full communism is anarchic

>>1628309
Haha what

I've never met anybody in my life who took a more positive view of fucking Joseph Stalin than they did of Lenin

settle down kids, I think we can all agree that both communists and fascists were assholes in their own unique special way

>>1626503
I don't understand how Marxists can still fuckin exist. Marx predicted this progression, yet it completely failed to occur. In fact, instead of "progressing" to communism, the socialist states "regressed" back into authoritarian capitalism. How do modern Marxists rationalize this?

>>1626949
>the american republican party is right-wing
zozzle

>>1628888
Lenin has zero positives, literally none. Adding to the fact that he was a genocidal lunatic, he was also an incompetent dumbass with double digit IQ, brain rotten from syphilis and ideologically he was pretty much a proto SJW with a gun.

>>1627136
I've seen a lot of fascists praise Stalin for being a strong leader and getting shit done.

>>1628949
Stalin:

>industrialized Russia
>won WW2
>beautiful architecture (Stalinist Gothic)

Lenin + Trotsky:

>reverse Midas touch turning everything into shit
>absolutely destroyed Russian economy
>couldn't even beat Poland
>legalized abortions, divorces, faggotry and feminism
>purged ethnic Russians from all positions of power and replaced them with Jews

>>1626503
The problem, I believe, is that people tend to follow leaders for their charisma instead of ideologies that represent the common good. That and also power corrupts everyone every single time, remember Stalin? Remember Cuba? What about Kim Jong Un? Wasn't it Marx the one who lived under the protection of his multi millionaire best friend and didn't have to work a day in his life? I believe that Marx's ideas are accurate and correct, but just like any other -ism, on paper looks great, but it can't be applied to reality because people don't work for the common good but for their own self interest.

>>1628914
Marx never said the bourgeoisie wouldn't resist. His assessment of capitalism was spot-on and his predictions are now coming true.

Instead of provides greater liberty to individuals, as liberals insisted, capitalism is creating a new aristocracy of very few and very wealthy people, due to the accumulation of capital. Capitalist economies are growing faster than can be sustained, leading to wasteful exploitation of natural resources and the expansion of capitalist markets all across the world.

>>1628942
Haha who the fuck did Lenin genocide? How was he incompetent? He successfully steered Soviet Russia through the Civil War and revolutionized Russia in ways that were undoubtedly for the better, providing healthcare and education to all citizens and liberating the Russian peasantry from their feudal oppression

Stalin fucked it up with his insistence on full state control, even over traditional farms, and his brutal suppression of dissent that makes Lenin look like an anarchist

>>1628936
Haha you think only monarchists are really rightist or something?

>>1626555
No? Yugoslavia saw massive developments until like the 70s while being completely independent of Soviet Gimmie money satellite cash.

>>1629043
>who the fuck did Lenin genocide?
>what is SLON
>what is war communism
>what are the three consecutive famines under Lenin
>what is killing the Russian economy to such an extent it needed Stalin to return to pre-WW1 levels in the 30s

Retard.

>liberating the Russian peasantry from their feudal oppression

Triple retard. Serfdom was banned in the 1860s, there was nothing feudal about Russia anymore in the 1910s. Ironically Lenin RECREATED serfdom by confiscating peasants' wealth and locking them up in kolkhozes where they were forced to work for subsistence. That's LITERALLY serfdom, like, that's the actual fucking definition of the word.

>>1626622
>That has everything to do with them being German

Bullshit. That had everything to do with them being the propaganda posterboy, so they were subsidized by the entire Eastern Block.