>just because of a few failed attempts, the concept in its

>>2018867
>few
All

throw yourself out of a helicopter

previous results don't really give me an incentive to try it yet another time

>>2018867
>just because of a few failed attempts,
It was more than a few, m8
>the concept in its entirety does not work
I recall something about insanity defined as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results

>>2018867
Those "attempts" weren't even accurate to what Marx said.

The means of production was taken by Nomenklaturas in Moscow, Warsaw, Budapest, etc. and were never given to the workers, thus becoming state capitalists

>>2018867
Communists are so eager to compare communism to the lightbulb or human flight, but the big difference here is that the development of neither the lightbulb nor human flight cost the lives of millions of unwilling people to perfect.

How many more millions will need to die in order for people to figure out how to get communism to work? Personally, I'd rather we just set that shit aside, at least until I'm dead and won't need to suffer for some egomaniac's utopian experiment.

>>2018867
>>just because of a few failed attempts, the concept in its entirety does not work

Well that, modern economics and everything we know about normal human behavior

Of course nobody is ACTUALLY going to apply his ideas honestly. Twisting his ideas for your own immediate purposes and repressing people terribly is the only way you can actually pull it off, thereby not ever actually pulling it off because it can't actually work like that, then people will just say it has never been tried.

>>2018867
>few

Anyone ever tell you the definition of insanity OP?

>>2020660
Sadly this. Communism as defined by Marx has never been tried, not is it even something that can be tried. It was a prediction for the eventual advancement of capitalism.

Communism can only come from a developed capitalist economy that has reached post scarcity.

The revolutions of the 20th century were just bsstardizations of Marx's rheoteric. He flat out said his model of communism was only applicable to Western Europe.

>>2018874
And they were all dictatorships.
Coincidence? No, it the communism which is to blame, right?

File: 1479160017325.jpg (100KB, 498x460px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 498x460px

>>2018867

>>2018867

>few

Communists (the authoritarian sort) shouldn't listen to Marx. If anything, I believe more validation will come from Kropotkin.

>failed attempt

name one

>>2021897
Why would authoritarian varieties find more validation from an anarcho-communist's writings?

>>2021933

Doubt it. Most authoritarians can't be reasoned with. Look at /pol/ and the communists from /leftypol/. Hell, there was a thread on communism on /pol/ and they think they know who Marx was thinking """waaahhh he thinks everyone is equal""" without actually reading him and rejecting his "each to their own, according to their need".

File: 1480119836543.gif (1MB, 800x667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x667px

>>2021654

>>2021948
>"each to their own, according to their need".
How could that ever work?

I'm a useless lazy NEET and I need everything handed to me

[COLLAPSE]

>>2021863
this is the most retarded analogy i have ever seen

>>2021654
>>2021951
>>2021863

See: >>2021510

>>2021965
Considering according to Marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a necessary stage, yes.

>>2021972
>according to Marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a necessary stage
If you post a source for this, I'll believe it. Up to then I'm calling bullshit.

>>2021981
So let me get this straight. You're a "marxist" yet you've never heard of the term "dictatorship of the proletariat"?

Reddit pls leave

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

>>2021981
>In Marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism, when the government is in the process of changing the ownership of the means of production from private to collective ownership.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

literally took 10 seconds to find this.

>>2021955
You don't get to define what you need. Society decides what you need. And society decides to need to spend some time in the gulag.

>>2021955

Well say you need certain resources to do a certain thing or support your family. This ought to help you understand. Again, not a commie, but I understand the ideology to an extent.

Word of advice, it's best to actually read the ideology rather than rely on memes from /pol/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_needs

>>2021992
>>2021997
But did either of you actually bother to read what it says about dictatorship of the proletariat?

>>2022003
>And society decides to need to spend some time in the gulag.

followed by the useful idiots who promote "true" communism. By that point they will have outlived their usefulness.

>>2021992
Why did you think I was a marxist? Also calling liberals redditors is useless to the discussion.

Either way, I concede that the dictatorship of the proletariat would be an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism according to marx.

>>2021972

Which is why I hate commies.

"Oh hey guys lets enable an ideology which calls for the abolishment of class state and wealth, by implementing the state to control the wealth and denying the workers the means of production."

This is why I prefer anarchism, because the people control shit from the get go

>>2022009
It says several things like:

>On 1 January 1852, the communist journalist Joseph Weydemeyer published an article entitled "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" in the German language newspaper Turn-Zeitung, where he wrote that "it is quite plain that there cannot be here any question of gradual, peaceful transitions", and recalled the examples of Oliver Cromwell (England) and Committee of Public Safety (France) as examples of "dictatorship" and "terrorism" (respectively) required to overthrow the bourgeoisie.[8] In that year, Karl Marx wrote to him, saying:

> Long before me, bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this struggle between the classes, as had bourgeois economists their economic anatomy. My own contribution was (1) to show that the existence of classes is merely bound up with certain historical phases in the development of production; (2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; [and] (3) that this dictatorship, itself, constitutes no more than a transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society
> —Karl Marx, 1852[9]

Notice Marx in no way rebuked his idea of a true dictatorship in the style of Cromwell or revolutionary France.

>>2022009

Please, enlighten us.

File: 1431487791553.gif (2MB, 209x213px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 209x213px

>>2018867
>>2021930
>>2021981
Where do Plebbitors get this kind of bullshit from and why did they decide to call it Marxism?

>>2020947
/thread
Everyone can go home

>>2022003
>And society decides to need to spend some time in the gulag.
Or as Pravda calls it "great strides in eradicating homelessness"

>>2022007
>Well say you need certain resources to do a certain thing or support your family.
I need resources to support myself, but I spend my days masturbating to chinese cartoons.

>>2022009
I didn't because I've actually read Marx...

>>2022011
>Why did you think I was a marxist?
Because you're a retard.

>Also calling liberals redditors is useless to the discussion.
Redditors need to be sent to the gas chambers.

>Either way, I concede that the dictatorship of the proletariat would be an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism according to marx.
I'm glad I've enlightened you.

>>2022014
I hate to be the guy to say it but...

Anarchism is incompatible with human nature. If by anarchism you don't mean ancapism.

The more I read about this stuff, the less I'm able to see avowed Marxists as human beings.

Where do you fuckers get off? What is your major malfunction?

>>2022028
They usually have a deep hatred for humanity fueled by their personal failures.

File: 1473856162549.jpg (59KB, 497x750px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 497x750px

Calling All Marxists, I have an earnest question for you;
How would the world adopting the beliefs of Marx En Masse be beneficial?
Not Being facetious, I genuinely want to hear your answers

>>2021972
The first line of the wikipedia page:
>In Marxist sociopolitical thought, the dictatorship of the proletariat refers to a state in which the proletariat, or the working class, has control of political power.
How did the working class have control of political power in the USSR or anywhere else?

"Dictatorship of the proletariat" =/=
"Dictatorship of the party"

>>2022028
property is a spook

>>2022040
see
>>2022015

>>2022042
No, a classical liberal idea of property is a spook. property in terms of something you have direct power over is not a spook

>>2018875
>If I don't take it seriously then it's not true

>>2022051
Your mothers a spook

>>2022040
How would you define "the working class having control of political power"?

>>2022021

>I need resources to support myself, but I spend my days masturbating to chinese cartoons.


Well then you can have that. Just not under authoritarian communism. I would guide you more to anarchism.

Don't be a NEET.

>>2022047
He's saying a generality about revolutions m8. He's saying you can't just hope for a decentralized peaceful revolution. Revolution is revolution and all it entails.

Communism has been tried and succeeds...on small scales(and it's hard to say they're truly capitalist when they don't have actual factories). There are dozens of communes around the country.

Try scaling it up from "small village" and it starts to fall apart.

>>2022028

Because they're spooked AF.

>>2021863
All I see is linear progress famalam

>>2022061

Which kind of communism exactly? Because if we're talking about the anarchist-communist free territories, they were actually starting to see progress until the Bolsheviks backstabbed them.

File: e20.png (6KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 400x400px

>>2022058
I'm a Hoppean ancap

>>2022059
Yes and he specifically list terrorism and dictatorship ala the committee of public safety as examples of things that are necessary.

I really dont think of system best summed up by the phrase: "pity is treason" is good even as a placeholder

>>2022064
Socialism and warlordism are the only logical options when you realize property is a spook. And most people would rather live under socialism than a warlord.

How many millions must be sacrificed before you finally figure it out?

>>2022073

Really? Why not anarchism?

>>2022077
Just leave

>>2022069

Then I would recommend reading Stirner, Kropotkin and Proudhorn. Then you will truly master the elements and become the Anarchtar.

>>2022073
Everything is a spook, man. Just give up and don't try anything

>>2022078

You first

>>2022047
You may have quoted the wrong post.

>>2022015 wasn't really relevent to >>2022040 's question.

File: image.jpg (129KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 600x600px

>>2022077
Anacho-Syndicalism?

File: Funny reaction pic Will Smith.png (545KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 640x640px

>There are people who still think communism is a good idea

>>2022075

It'll never be enough. These Kabbalistic rats feed on the blood of the sacrificed. These leftist ideologies all lead back to the Zionist.

>>2022081

>implying Stirner's ideology involved being a lazy shit, as opposed to doing the stuff you want because you want to.

k

>>2022083
It was relevant to his last point about proletariat not equaling party.

The quote specially calls for power to be vested in a small group of people acting on the behest of the proletariat

>>2022072
It's a revolutionary ideology. He was telling pacifists to fuck off. Property is what you can defend and make use of. If you want to change the nature of property, you have to be able to defend it against capitalists and their conception of property because he was reading too much Stirner. That's not the transitional phase from capitalism to communism. That's the transitional phase from revolution to socialism, just like democratic revolutions generally have a transitional government run by a dictator that may or may not succeed in transfer to a democratic government.

>>2022084

That could also work.

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

>>2022089
>implying Stirner wasn't himself a spook

>>2022092
He's saying political power ends up in the hands of the working class, and they go around oppressing capitalists that don't work, that's what he means by dictatorship of the proletariat.

>>2022097
desu stirner was just some guy engels made up

>>2022097

he was an astral man, beyond mere mortals. The ultimate shitposter

File: 1187.gif (982KB, 390x259px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 390x259px

>Marxaboos and spookposters in one thread
>The entire canon of human history, art, creativity, philosophical and intellectual thought is at our fingertips thanks to the internet
>and everybody in here decides to review two philisophical footnotes from the 1800's for the umpteenth time

Fucking hell, /his/. You guys really gotten broaden your horizons

>>2022094
>just like democratic revolutions generally have a transitional government run by a dictator that may or may not succeed in transfer to a democratic government.

Its true that democratic governments are usually set up by a group of people, They more often than not come from some existing power structure already in place rather than something as disastrous as CFPS or Cromwell which he cites.

Besides which the argument was over whether a dictatorship of the proletariat was synonymous with democracy of the proletariat

clearly there were early communists Marxist who did not necessarily think it has to be

There's at least a dozen other all-encompassing ideologies whose "true" form only exists in the aether.

Why this one? Good branding?

>>2022100
>He's saying political power ends up in the hands of the working class, and they go around oppressing capitalists that don't work, that's what he means by dictatorship of the proletariat

That is not what he said

>>2022015
and recalled the examples of Oliver Cromwell (England) and Committee of Public Safety (France) as examples of "dictatorship" and "terrorism" (respectively) required to overthrow the bourgeoisie.[8] I

>>2022111
>clearly there were early communists Marxist who did not necessarily think it has to be
And they ended up with a shitty centralized system with a huge bureaucracy that no one except tankies like, proving the Luxemburgists were right. His main point was you need actual power to succeed in redefining classes and property like in previous revolutions.

>>2022092
>The quote specially calls for power to be vested in a small group of people acting on the behest of the proletariat
Read it again. The magazine doesn't say anything like that, and Marx doesn't even endorse what they did say.

>>2022121
>That is not what he said
Yes it is.

>and recalled the examples of Oliver Cromwell (England) and Committee of Public Safety (France) as examples of "dictatorship" and "terrorism" (respectively) required to overthrow the bourgeoisie.
Yes, he also said that. The problem if you can't seem to wrap your head around what he meant by it. He was trying to make the point that you can't get shit done if you don't have power and don't get your hands dirty, that's just history. He also expressed favor for the relatively democratic model of the Paris Commune.

You're right he doesn't outright rebuke dictatorship like historical examples. But neither did he specifically advocate for it, which is what you're trying to stretch his lack to rebuke to.

>>2022075
None.

>>2022158
>and recalled the examples of Oliver Cromwell (England) and Committee of Public Safety (France) as examples of "dictatorship" and "terrorism" (respectively) required to overthrow the bourgeoisie.
Marx didn't advocate that.

>>2022100
>>2022121
>>2022158
>>2022217
Someone find a quote for fuck's sake

>>2022294
>Long before me, bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this struggle between the classes, as had bourgeois economists their economic anatomy. My own contribution was (1) to show that the existence of classes is merely bound up with certain historical phases in the development of production; (2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; [and] (3) that this dictatorship, itself, constitutes no more than a transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society
It's already been posted in the thread.

File: 1479268958497.jpg (30KB, 540x402px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 540x402px

>>2018867

Communism can't be "tried" you mongoloid. Real communism either happens or doesnt. You can't just adopt communism without going through the capitalist phase according to Marx which would explain the failures of all the former "communist" states. Communist manifesto not very prophetic. Has yet to happen as Marx imagined

>just because of a few failed attempts, the concept in its entirety does not work

I am open to the idea that some specific implementation of communism might work. What I am not open to is using experimentation on my country to try to find out. Either you prove to me 100% that your idea of communism will work, or fuck off. My country is not a societal petri dish.

communists on MY 4chan?

But no really, get the fuck out.

>>2018867
>he thinks it's been tried

>>2018867
How many more million do you need to kill until you realize Communism is always shit and there's nothing smart "on paper" about naive altruism and working less but earning as much as someone who works more

>>2020947
>Hoh man, when will they ever learn. The only reason the system was fucked was because asshole governments took advantage of people's weakness and manipulated Marx's vision to better suit their own agenda, maybe in the future this won't happen despite happening almost 100 percent of the time anyone tries Communism.

Go fuck yourself it doesn't work because Communism requires everyone to be fucking participating idiot sheep who are so concerned with the happiness of those around them that they can't spend so much as a minute worrying about themselves

>>2022450
Except thats wrong because according to communism, you no longer need to worry about other people or yourself because post scarcity has been reached and basically everything can be produced and sold at minimal cost.

If we love each other and never do harm and no money no border?
I call this utopia

If you believe this is imposible then you are an ignorant sire

File: 1478544288826.png (31KB, 1234x246px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 1234x246px

>>2021510
>>2018867

>just because literally every attempt has failed miserably and the ideology itself is dead and buried, that doesnt mean the idea itself is flawed in any way! Please ignore the fact that we kill people for questioning the dogma of the ideology and the founder of it was a huge hypocritical wannbe aristocrat preaching a bullshit utopia to desperate peasants

>>2021510
well, seems like you have to find a better way to manifest your system then.

>>2022158
>Yes, he also said that. The problem if you can't seem to wrap your head around what he meant by it. He was trying to make the point that you can't get shit done if you don't have power and don't get your hands dirty, that's just history. He also expressed favor for the relatively democratic model of the Paris Commune.

I understand it, but the point is like you said he did not outright rebuke it. In fact he didn't seem to care a lot about the form of the transitional period, given that his direct statements are vague.

But that he would ally himself with people speaking favorably of those models is in my mind enough to condemn his vision.

>>2023850
>>>2022072
>It's a revolutionary ideology. He was telling pacifists to fuck off. Property is what you can defend and make use of. If you want to change the nature of property, you have to be able to defend it against capitalists and their conception of property because he was reading too much Stirner. That's not the transitional phase from capitalism to communism. That's the transitional phase from revolution to socialism, just like democratic revolutions generally have a transitional government run by a dictator that


"but but muh real communism never been tried"