What actually is Marxism? A lot of things seem to be thrown

>>1779690
The redistribution of wealth and resources by the government to create a "classless" society. Very rarely, however, has this been successfully implemented. Class systems typically survive in one form or another and in a communist system - where the government owns everything - members of the government and friends of government officials usually end up with most of the wealth.

>>1779690
The ideas written about by Karl Marx

workers controlling the factories and making things based on communal need instead of profit

it has less to do with "redistributing wealth" and simply more to do with cutting the capitalist middleman out of the picture

File: IMG_2955.png (10KB, 317x159px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 317x159px

>>1779690
Marx's main economic observation was that society was divided into two main classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He said that the proletarian class was being exploited by the bourgeoisie and the under capitalism society would gradually degenerate into feudalism. His solution was socialism, he believed that if the proletariat communaly owned the means of production (as opposed to capitalism were the means of production are owned privately) society would naturally progress into an anarchist utopia (communism).

I'm definitely not an expert on the subject and I don't consider myself a socialist so sorry if this is inaccurate.

>>1779748
But tankies told me communism doesn't have a state

>>1779773
What's the closest we got to that? Commune of Paris? Revolutionary Catalonia?

Well geez, it worked great for them, uh?

Multiple things. A Marxist philosopher is not the same as a Marxist historian is not the same as a Marxist sociologist is not the same as a Marxist political scientist. At the core of it, they're all just adherents of Marx's ideas (which cover too wide of a scope to actually give you a full look in a 4chan post) in some capacity or another.

File: 1475507117222.png (243KB, 550x578px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 550x578px

>>1779780
>Two states born in war and died in it
>hurr failed ideology

>>1779748

>Very rarely, however, has this been successfully implemented.

It has NEVER been successfully implemented and attempts to do so have historically resulted in economic stagnation and political repression.

>>1780628
Wasnt fabianism a thing before marx

"Marxism" is a thing decided mostly after Marx's death. There's wide variance of actual politics right up to apoliticism or even str8 up going into business and fuck proles, what's common is simply the theoretical framework established within the volumes of Capital, with some allowed variance after Vol 1. There's marxists that say the TRPF isn't a thing or isn't really indicative of any sort of crisis eschatology, but it's all within the same framework.
So that's what it is: a marxist is a person who has read Capital and is mostly down with the terms.

>>1780617
Economic equality to a certain degree is completely impossible. Also, it is very negative on technological growth to have everyone be equal. You can make enough to sustain yourself but the issue is that quality of life is low.

>>1779773
>anarchist utopia
How is chaos utopia?

>>1779780
The Commune wasn't *really* communist. The actual program of reform was fairly moderate, at least in modern terms. A sizeable chunk of their electorate were radical jacobin sorts, instead of socialists.
What really killed the commune was mostly its military structure and how extremely poorly it fared on the april offensive towards Versaille. They were thoroughly outmaneuvered.

>>1779773
>would gradually degenerate into feudalism.
incorrect. This one is actually strange an error, where did you get this idea?

>>1779690
Why don't you try and read the basic level works by yourself, since most of those who pretend to know marxism are incompetent :
Principles of Communism by Engels
Manifesto
Anti-Duhring by Engels
The Origin of Family, Private property and the state by Engels
Imperialism as the last stage of capitalism by Lenin
The State and Revolution by Lenin

>>1779690
Marxism is the idea that capitalism will naturally lead to socialism which will naturally lead to communism (a stateless, classless, moneyless society).
This prediction turned out false.

Just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_history#Stages_of_history for the first time and realized what a fraud Marx is. All he does is recite history, describe the present, make a few vague and likely predictions, describe his master plan and how easy it will be, then bait you with some sugar candy mountain bullshit.
People fell for this?

>>1780827
>>1780858
why do anti-communists repeat by rote late stalin-era histmat when the matter of stageism comes up
why don't they consult marx on the matter of marxism

>>1780882

Because reality trumps theory.

>>1779748
>redistribution
Not beyond the initial revolution to seize the means of production, not, not at all.

>>1779755
As vague as this is, that's pretty much what it means, ideas derived from Marx. Now Marxist socialism and Marxist communism mean some pretty specific things, and so for Marxism-Leninism. But people lump all these things together as Marxism.

>>1779765
This is somewhat accurate.

>>1779773
No he did not say that capitalism would become feudalism.

>>1779775
What are you talking about, tankies love the state.

>>1779780
Marx was originally a "for the greater good" type communist. He revised his thought later to say that people would only be able to act "for the greater good" in a post-scarcity situation, and scarcity caused "for the greater good" societies to crumble.

>>1779785
Marx the economist.

>>1780617
Because no one met the economic requirements for industrialized communism, post-scarcity. Socialism is the step between communism, and like all new forms of government that require violent revolution, not every revolution is successful in transitioning and it takes several times to get it right. See democracy.

>>1780628
It's sort of but not really based on Marx.

>>1780670
There are "Marxists" who think Capital is not his most important work. An important point is that there's Marxists that believe 100% of what Marx said, and there's Marxists that believe some of the stuff he said, but not all of it.

>>1780677
Marx thought the idea of "equality" was bourgeois and was not a huge believer in "equality". "Equality" is meme communism. He believed that people should be able to live in a society and have their needs met (in before someone says human needs are limitless because they think wants are needs) and not be exploited by other people. It's not about redistribution beyond the initial deconstruction of private ownership of capital.

>>1780766
>read a whole bunch of shit written by engels and lenin to learn about marxism
How about no.

>>1780827
There's still time. He said eventually automation and the increasing reliance on capital and not labor for industrial output would cause class tensions. There's only so much welfare capitalism can use to bandaid these problems. Robots are definitely going to become a reality within the next few hundred years or so.

>>1780858
When did he say it would be easy?

>>1779690
The various methods and theories of Karl Marx Tbh

>>1779748
You described communism.

Marxism is a framework of analysis that looks at exploitation in labor relations.

>>1779690
Essentially
>society is built upon/around the organization of labor
>the organization of labor creates distinct, antagonistic classes
>all societies will eventually succumb to their internal antagonisms and collapse
>when one society collapses another assumes control of the previous one's remains, and creates a new method of organization with new classes and antagonisms
>eventually a collapse will occur with no society replacing it, leaving anarchy/communism

But, most importantly,
>philosophy should not extricate itself from society, but rather be at the forefront of revolutionary activity
This is mostly what gives it legs among "intellectuals" desu

>>1779775
Objectively, if there's a state then it is not communism.

Tankies believe a strong (and often expansionist) is needed to transition from capitalism to socialism, and then establish communism and destroy itself.

Marx believed the state would "wither away" after the transition to socialism, but so far this has nice happened.

>>1779780
This is why tankies believe an imperious state must defend the revolution

>>1780913

I think there are about 7 different kinds of shit as well, I think.

>>1780901
And what is the reality of a discussion on a highly theoretical concept? What is the reality of what Marx thought on the matter?

>>1780904
>There are "Marxists" who think Capital is not his most important work.
There are folks who call themselves Marxists without so much as having read beyond the Manifesto, but that lot isn't really important. We want a definition of a Marxist that is functional in identifying at least the main currents of marxist thought, and I believe I provided at least one such a definition.

>>1780904
>lol I don't want to read marxists to learn what marxism is

>>1780827
>Marxism is the idea that capitalism will naturally lead to socialism
This is bullshit, Marx said that a bloody revolution would have to take place in order for Socialism to be implemented. Unless you're saying bloody revolutions are a "natural progression" of Capitalism.

If only he could predict we would be able to have robots a century later, many conflicts of the 20th century could have been avoided.

>>1779690
>What is Marxism
[COLLAPSE]

>>1780987
Maybe you should read Marx to learn what Marxism is and avoid the abomination that is Marxism-Leninism.

>>1781034

You mean [COLAPSE]

>>1781028
>If only he could predict we would be able to have robots a century later, many conflicts of the 20th century could have been avoided.
Robots aren't socialized. The product of robots goes to those that own the robots, the capitalists.

I am not an expert and I have yet to read Capital but I've hung around left wing circles and am a sympathizer.

Marxism is a bit like the word Darwinism. What's a Darwinist? A person that basically accepts the world view Darwin and what that means for the biological sciences, i.e. the Galspagos finches beaks were shaped by evolution. A Marxist accepts the set of observations about the political-economic world that Marx wrote about in his lifetime.

Whereas Darwin covers biology "Marxism" is a set of theories on how the world works covering economics, politics, history, anthropology, sociology, and a pinch of philosophy and psychology.

What Marxism is definitely NOT (but everyone thinks it is): a set of doctrines on how to ideally rule and create a utopia. That might be Communism, Socialism, or Anarchism. Marxism is descriptive, not prescriptive. Much like Darwin doesn't tell you if there is a master race, if such a thing should be created, or how to do it. Only that evolution is a fundamental pattern of nature. Marxism only covers what Marx says are the patterns of human society.

>>1781044
Summing all it up is hard because Marx himself tried to do this with Capital and that's a multi-thousand page set of tomes he died before completing. Here is an incomplete list of Marxist world views:

- history is primarily "materialist"
- there are natural economic patterns to history that settle in era. The previous era was Feudalism, the new era (especially in Marx's time) is "Capitalism"
- economic eras are defined by classes that have mutually exclusive interest. They fight or "struggle" against each other.
- the Feudal era had classes such as aristocrats, merchants, priests, serfs all struggling for social dominance. The Capitalist era has polarized into just two classes: proletariat (wage workers) and bourgeoisie (property/capital owners)
- in the Capitalist era the wage workers and property owners have mutually exclusive economic interests that will force them into antagonistic struggle with each other, just as aristocrats and merchants fought in the feudal era
- the common link of all value is labor
- "profit" is only consistently achieved by business owners by stealing value from wage workers by compensating them less than the total valuable labor they have given the completed and sold products. I.e. a factory worker makes $100 worth of iphone parts in a day but is only payed $80. The $20 difference is pocketed personally by the business owner as profit. This is "exploitation" (don't let the name fool you it's just a word for a process, not a moral condemnation. Like the word slavery.)
- the rate of Profit globally tends to decline over time
- the Capitalist system has self-contradictory elements that lead to crisis. Like a fire burning itself out.
- labor is naturally a social relationship. Like a hunter bringing home a kill to the tribe. Not seeing who enjoys your work or even producing a coherent finished product is slowly soul destroying/alienating.

etc. but it's all like this. Analysis on how society REALLY works, supposedly.

>>1779755
>The ideas written about by Karl Marx
This, but adding:
>as interpreted through Engels and the tradition he originated

>>1781058
Fuck Engels, fucking bourgeois, fucker never worked a day in his life, his daddy literally owned a factory.

>>1781041
My point is that socialism might have actually worked with a lot less violence if the concept was introduced when we already had robots (or were close to having them).

>>1781046

>- history is primarily "materialist"

Wew.

>Fuck Engels, fucking bourgeois, fucker never worked a day in his life

A bit like his butt-buddy Marx then.

>>1781099
Marx wrote Capital because he saw that Engels, a bourgeois, never had to work a day in his life, and convinced Engels to be a class cuck and fund Marx to write anti-bourgeois propaganda.

File: 88d31ef9f820807eb69d6d6d67664647fcde3c73d9298cb7e26e63df42e498e9.png (25KB, 597x431px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 597x431px

>>1779690
A fundamentally flawed idea

>>1781124
>super capitalism is just co-op based socialism but called super capitalism
>marxism is a strawman about equality even thought marx didnt even like the idea of equality
It's like you faggots would actually be Marxist if you actually knew what Marx said.

>>1781156
That's what I was thinking. The "Socialism" part is completely made up, and the "Super-Capitalism" part is literally what Greece's ex-Minister of Finance and self-proclaimed "communist capitalist" (if I remember correctly), Yanis Varoufakis, proposes.

It's also a pretty neat idea, though I struggle to understand how it could be implemented in the real world.

>>1781163
"Super capitalist" capital isn't even privately owned by any sort of private right. Ownership is a universal right, and determined by productivity, not because you "own" something, and workers owning the workplaces and the full value of their labor is lifted straight out of Marx. The part about management is lifted from worker self-management and real life co-ops that exist in capitalism.

Upon reading it a second time I'm convinced it's gommie satire about how the word socialism is perceived, although it would still probably go over most people's heads.

why does communism have such a hard time dying off? it's been discredited everywhere yet you still have commies and worse of all they're just turbo sjws now (open borders lol). it is because it's pseudo-science/religion?

File: cdfca12cbed288c2659bb0ebc77a68b414a0371053f3a45c42db69a16fbdd4fb.png (143KB, 513x336px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 513x336px

>>1781156
It's a joke image, the point is that many pro-capitalists describe the definition of socialism as "entrepreneurial spirit"

>>1781038
>BAD LENIN
At least he understood Marx better than Bernstein or any other man, and found the way to improve Marx.

>>1781229
t. tankie

>>1781231
Who?

>>1781188
I found the video. The actual line was "Keynesian Libertarian Marxist".

I probably agree with him way more than I should.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB4s5b9NL3I

>>1781239
you

>>1781250
No, I'm asking who is tankie.

>>1781253
you are

>>1781269
I accidentally a grenade

>>1781038
Lenin did some bad stuff, but at least he got shit done

Even if armchair commies are more strictly Marxist, they have nothing to show for it.

>>1779773
He said the opposite actually, that capitalism would turn into socialism and then into communism.

>>1781067
He wasn't bourgeois. It's not about where you live, but which team you rep.

>>1781124
Is this bait? "Super capitalism" is basically market socialism. Especially the part about worker ownership.

Socialism doesn't mean state control, it means worker control. The Soviet Union claimed they were socialist because it was a "worker's government" but obviously that was not the case.

Socialists don't want to confiscate personal property, they want to redistribute ownership of private property. Private property means large public utilities like a mine or factory, that many people rely on yet are owned by a single capitalist.

>>1779690

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zADZqveYHKQ

File: download.png (144B, 290x174px) Image search: [Google]

144B, 290x174px

>>1779690
Marxism is the theories of sociology, history and politics developed by Karl marx.

From my shitty pleb tier understanding it's something like this.

>Society is fundamentally based on resources and the consumption and management thereof. Resources, the methods of gathering and transporting them and the main meme, the "means of production" form the basis or "infrastructure" of society. Resources are allocated according to class, and thus class is the most fundamental division in society.

>Out of this "infrastructure" arise cultural, social and political structures, collectively called the "superstructure". The superstructure directly comes from the infrastructure and exists as a method of management, for example marital customs exist as a method of managing inheritance.

>As the infrastructure informs the superstructure, changes to the infrastructure informs changes to the superstructure. Changes in the control of resources are the fundamental events of history, for example the transition to feudalism was more important than the transition to christianity, and the transition from feudalism to capitalism was more important than the transition from christianity to enlightenment ideals. In fact the latter ultimately depends on the former. Changes in dynasty are not important as long as the order of resources remains the same. The only time things change is when the ownership shifts, between countries in war for example, but most importantly to the grand scheme of things, between classes. Hence "all history is the history of class struggles bla bla bla".

>Feudalism was marked by the dominance of the Aristocracy over the "means of production"(mostly agriculture in those times) so capitalism is marked by the dominance of the Bourgeoisie over the (industrial) means of production.

>As the bourgeoisie control the means of production they are able to set the terms of any transactions between them and the proletariat. (Aristocracy are irrelevant post-feudalism)

>>1781124
This had me going for a sec

>>1779690
Communism is a form of socialism.
Marxism is a form of communism, or rather, a theoretical form that hasn't, and perhaps can't be put into practice correctly.

File: ireland-starry-plough-3699b.gif (25KB, 400x241px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 400x241px

>>1781850
cont.

>This power imbalance between the bourgeoisie an the proletariat inevitably leads to exploitation.

>Eventually this exploitation will increase class differences which coupled with capitalism's inherent instability and crisis prone nature will lead to a collapse of society where the proletariat sieze the means of production for themselves and manage them collectively.

>Once the infrastructure is controlled by the workers themselves, many aspects of the superstructure become irrelevant, as such the state will disappear, as the primary function of the state is to protect private property. This collectively organised, stateless order is called communism, and will hopefully arrive once capitalism has collapsed under it's own weight.

>t. Garl Margs

>>1780677
He meant it as anarchism in the most direct, literally translated sense of the word -- "lordless", i.e. a society without hierarchy.

File: Action Philosophers #4 03.png (871KB, 1024x1587px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 1024x1587px

>>1779690
Hold on, let me take a little dump.

File: Action Philosophers #4 04.png (867KB, 1024x1508px) Image search: [Google]

867KB, 1024x1508px

>>1781946

File: Action Philosophers #4 05.png (893KB, 1024x1496px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 1024x1496px

>>1781951

File: Action Philosophers #4 06.png (802KB, 1024x1501px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 1024x1501px

>>1781954

File: Action Philosophers #4 07.png (820KB, 1024x1546px) Image search: [Google]

820KB, 1024x1546px

>>1781956

File: Action Philosophers #4 08.png (946KB, 1024x1533px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 1024x1533px

>>1781962

File: Action Philosophers #4 09.png (904KB, 1024x1510px) Image search: [Google]

904KB, 1024x1510px

>>1781965

File: Action Philosophers #4 10.png (868KB, 1024x1499px) Image search: [Google]

868KB, 1024x1499px

>>1781967

File: Action Philosophers #4 11.png (947KB, 1024x1494px) Image search: [Google]

947KB, 1024x1494px

>>1781971

File: Action Philosophers #4 12.png (866KB, 1024x1516px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 1024x1516px

>>1781974

File: Action Philosophers #4 13.png (906KB, 1024x1515px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 1024x1515px

>>1781976

File: Action Philosophers #4 14.png (893KB, 1024x1515px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 1024x1515px

>>1781979
And that's all comrades.

>>1781124
kek

>>1781956
This is such an infantile and outdated view of the world.

>>1781869
Marxism is just a way of looking at society through class relations. A "red pill" if you will.

Marx proposed communism as a way to heal the wounds opened by class society, but not all Marxists are communists.

It's confusing because the biggest promoter of Marxist analysis was the Soviet government, who worked very hard to show that all their actions were justified by Marx.

I find two major issues

>Marx vastly underestimated the importance of management and entrepreneurship

And

>dichotomy of power, putting people into oppressed-oppressor classes which the most childish, simplistic explanation of power dynamics

>>1781951
I don't get the leap to value = labor

Can a Marxist explain it?

>>1782489
>Marx vastly underestimated the importance of management and entrepreneurship
It's very easy to reconcile this. Just consider those forms of labor. With capital not being used to support a class structure and greater availability to capital, entrepreneurship might be less of an endeavor under socialism. Management is already considered labor in modern day co-ops where worker-owners hire executives.

>>1782524
Because the price you pay is based on production costs.

>>1781758
He tarnished Marxism by trying to apply it to his unindustrialized hellhole. People in industrialized nations, where socialism is actually supposed to have happened would be more receptive to it if the USSR never happened.

>>1781869
Marxism is also a form of socialism, and a form of capitalist critique.

>>1782617
What about diamonds

File: 1472006669655.jpg (51KB, 796x776px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 796x776px

Socialism will win in someway. Recently the right-wingers (economically left but hate non-whites) are packaging it up as 'protectionism' to quell the dissonance. We saw this today at the Tory conference and Front National are doing the same

No one wants liberal capitalism, "free markets" and open borders. We are heading towards National Bolsehvism or class collaboration where the state protects against globalisation.

It's propaganda.

It will never work in any society.
Why is this still be talked about?

>>1782727
Also the only form of government that will work.

Is Democracy.

>>1782664
The average person believes that hordes of people dig for diamonds because they're valuable. The Marxist believes they're valuable because hordes of people dig for them.

>>1780628
>Homosexual movement
?????

It's like playing seven degrees of Kevin Bacon with some far right lunatic.

>>1782737
Full communism is the purest democracy

>>1782889
>The Marxist believes they're valuable because hordes of people dig for them.
No, the Marxist believes hordes of people dig for diamonds because they're "socially necessary" or in other words, someone in society is willing to pay for the labor of those hordes of people.

>>1780677
>How is chaos utopia?
>I don't know what anarchy means, I just know it's a bad word

>>1783504
How do you prevent coercive governments from forming besides muh universal spook or post-scarcity. Post-scarcity seems more likely to cause people to avoid conflict than everyone believing in some spook and banding together when some warlord comes marching through. Post-scarcity means the warlord doesn't need to warlord and people don't need to join a warlord.

>>1783529
Do you also not know what Utopia is?

>>1779773
>under capitalism society would gradually degenerate into feudalism
well he wasn't wrong
look what we're living now

>>1783011
>only the communist party holds power
what

>>1783864
Under communism there would be no state and no political parties

>>1783547
I presume it doesn't have roving warlords

>>1781991
what the hell did I just read and where can I get more?

>>1782899
what are gay pride parades, and why can't straight people have straight pride parades?

>>1785624
But you can...

>>1781203
I dunno, it's almost like people look for explanations as the contradictions of capitalism intensify...

>>1780904
Please don't do that.

File: 1474155908996.png (452KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 785x757px

>What actually is Marxism?

Its christianity minus god.