the gulag archipelago

File: IMG_0589.png (759KB, 1334x750px) Image search: [Google]

759KB, 1334x750px

juicy journalese. reactionary self-help guru kermit man wants you to waste time reading 2000+ pages of Dostoevsky-lite because it vindicates his barren basic-bitch neoliberal excuse for a political position.

>>9482252
I'd make a comment about how triggered you are but you probably kind of share his positions but can't stop being contrarian out of habit

>>9482252
peterson sucks but i can't trust anyone who uses the term basic-bitch

le doesn't read but loves youdube bideos general

>>9482260
>triggered
You're degrading yrself with normie tongue. These terms were only impactful when Trump seemed like an insurgent candidate. Now it's just politics larping as transgression. I'm more of a libertarian socialist myself btw, Jordan Peterson seems to think that anything left of publically funded roads is Stalinism, and that Stalinism is comparable to Hitlerism. His opinions on Jung and evolutionary psychology are interesting though.

>>9482286
If you're part of the left I'll throw the retarded terms the left comes up with back at you.
>libertarian socialist
Are you still meming, legitimately brain-damaged or am I missing something here? How could "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" as well as seizing "the means of production" aka that small business he just started by himself, ever be compatible with libertarianism?

>that Stalinism is comparable to Hitlerism
I don't know if "Hitlerism" is different from National Socialism under Hitler but how are the two not comparable?

>anything left of publically funded roads is Stalinism
He says compelled speech is a typical mechanism of Stalinism, don't be an idiot

>>9482305
>socialism = communism
not that guy but it's clear who has the brain damage here

>>9482305
Libertarianism is a left-wing ideology bruh. The word is literally just a french euphemism for anarchy, because describing yourself as an anarchist was a jailable offense in the early 1900s. Right libertarianism is just crypto-feudalism.

>>9482319
Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning.

>>9482319
You're an idiot, both of those examples fall under socialism. Private for-profit ownership with disregard for equity isn't possible in socialism.

>>9482330
>anarchy and socialism are compatible
Uhh okay..

>>9482252
jew

>>9482342
You know that the central battle on the left is between centralized and decentralized planning right? This is basic shit dude. Like google the Spanish Revolution. I used to hate Leftism too when I thought it was about le Big Brother and speech codes and shit, it's all propaganda though.

>>9482356
Ethnically I'm Lithuanian and Bohemian. You're indistinguishable from an SJW to everyone but yourself.

>>9482356
After reading this fatwa I hate the people of the book now *bombs synagogue*

>>9482358
>I used to hate Leftism too when I thought it was about le Big Brother and speech codes and shit, it's all propaganda though.
Hahaha what? Every single "leftist" country from the Soviets over the Chinese up to Venezuela now has a "Big Brother" and speech codes. You leftists are fucking insane.

>central battle on the left is between centralized and decentralized planning right?
Literally no side of the left allows for a man to have a great idea, take out a loan, start a company, hold 100% of the shares, emply 10 people for a mediocre but acceptable wage and reap the benefits of his talents. And if that's not allowed, it's obvious where that economy is going to go, 100% of the time.

>>9482334
socialism is the means, communism is the end. try again.
>>9482342
>Private for-profit ownership with disregard for equity isn't possible in socialism.
Are you retarded?

>>9482407
>socialism is the means, communism is the end. try again.
But that's wrong. Commnism is a step up but not fundamentally different. The latter mostly refers to whether the workers themselves are the owners.
>Are you retarded?
I'll listen if you have anything to say; don't be surprised no one takes you seriously if this is all you add to a discussion.

>>9482392
>Hahaha what? Every single "leftist" country from the Soviets over the Chinese up to Venezuela now has a "Big Brother" and speech codes.
total freedom of speech only exists in America, it's foreign to every other country (this is one of the few things the Founding Fathers got right). But regardless of that what you just said is straight-up untrue. Look at Norway. Unless you're calling for the butchering of a specific ethnicity you'll be fine.
>you leftists are crazy
StefanMolyneuxdxplainshowfemaleliteracyisafeministconspiracy.png
>Literally no side of the left allows for a man to have a great idea, take out a loan, start a company, hold 100% of the shares, emply 10 people for a mediocre but acceptable wage and reap the benefits of his talents. And if that's not allowed, it's obvious where that economy is going to go, 100% of the time.
Right because the employees are being fucked in that scenario. If the guy's idea is any good he'd convince his local community to fund it in a socialist scenario, so there's still a corollary. Let's also keep in mind that the economy is a meme. It's not real. Material goods are real. Work is real. GDP is just casuistry. Canada's GDP is tiny compared to America's, but their people still live better than ours. Obviously socialism isn't gonna work if examined under a capitalist paradigm.

>>9482463
>But that's wrong. Commnism is a step up but not fundamentally different.
Not really, socialism varies and doesn't necessarily entail shared means of production.
>I'll listen if you have anything to say; don't be surprised no one takes you seriously if this is all you add to a discussion.
It was a dumb thing to say.

>>9482286
>normie tongue
>normie
you are a moron

>>9482363
>you are the REAL fascist!
>you are the REAL sjw!

you do realize that literally noone not even the most diehard "I don't agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right say it" libertarian wants their political opponents to be in power

>>9482480
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
Maybe look it up before you try to shit on people

>>9482503
>cites dictionary
Are you really that dumb?
Go read the wiki article if you're really that stupid and desperate.

>>9482467
?!
We seem to disagree what socialist countries are.
I'll grant you that Norway has tiny socialist elements because they have the luxury of putting up a public trust fund based on private oil profits but beyond that Norway is as capitalist as it gets. Please tell me which countries in the present or past you consider socialist.

File: pcmeme.png (49KB, 480x400px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 480x400px

>>9482330
>he's in the green quadrant

>>9482514
>How dare you use a dictionary to look at the meaning of a word!
Uhh okay..
>Wikipedia:
>Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production
Woops still proves you wrong
Where do you want me to look it up next?

>>9482500
A few weeks ago I met a 45 year-old Swedish security guard who couldn't stop telling me about how the "snowflakes" were ruining his country. He must have used the word "triggered" at least twice for every year he'd been alive. (This encounter also made me realize that being on here made me pretty conversant in far-right conspiracy-theories. I was asking him about pizza gate and shit. He probably thought I was one of his.) The point of this is that the guy I was talking too had no idea what 4chan was. He got all this from Facebook.
>>9482501
I'm just saying the pathology is the same.

>it's a fictionalized report from an interested party (and the most exagerated at that) on Stalinism

Not to sound like an apologist, but the thing is next to making a short story about how SS generals did BDSM to each other to compensate for their unpure ancestry. Read the NKVD reports.

>>9482529
Why don't I use the dictionary to teach me about Freud when I look psychology up? Because I'm not a retarded person.

Try reading the article you in-bred fucktard or at least skim it it won't take more than 20 seconds to realize you're dumb as shit.

>>9482532
so you are just saying what I'm saying?

also, virtually everyone falls under that same pathology yourself included m8

File: IMG_0978.png (224KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 750x1334px

>>9482528
That test's designed to make anybody who isn't in the green seem like a sociopath. 8values is better.

>>9482552
You realise that dictionary's only job is to look at the most widespread consensus and then to shorten it, right?
Are you trying to tell me the dictionary is just plain wrong in it's understanding of socialism?
The wiki passage I quoted alone has 10 footnotes affirming what's in the dictionary too.

But they are all wrong and it's YOU who is right about socialism?
Your kind never ceases to amaze me. Quick, throw some more angry results at it.

File: neocon.png (103KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 800x600px

>>9482563
I resent 8values because they called me a neocon even though I'm against corporate donorship, excessive lobbying and the cancerous overgrowth of the military industrial complex >:(

i just believe in a strong military

>>9482568
You're right the dictionary tries to give the most simple meaning with no nuance whatsoever. How that's supposed to support your argument I have no idea how. Are you really this stupid?

>But they are all wrong and it's YOU who is right about socialism?
Yes I'm just giving my opinion over here, how fucking dumb are you?
If you skim down to the 3rd paragraph you'll see
>The socialist political movement includes a diverse array of political philosophies that originated amid the revolutionary movements of the mid-to-late 1700s and of a general concern for the social problems that were associated with capitalism.[13]
>In addition to the debate over markets and planning, the varieties of socialism differ in their form of social ownership, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism

Please castrate yourself so you never reproduce.

>>9482578
Spoiler: All of these tests are absolutely retarded and if it didn't come out so officially looking but was a human processing your answers, you'd regard it as the shit it is

Psychologists have needed decades to make even the most simple of standardized tests worth something yet people will swallow this shit that spawns monthly.

>>9482589
The dictionary reduces it so the smallest common denominator which is SOCIAL OWNERSHIP.

Now even the example you use to prove me wrong because of how diverse socialism is says the common denominator is SOCIAL OWNERSHIP.

I understand that your ego won't allow you to just say "alright sorry I got that wrong" but I get sad at the shell of a person sitting behind your screen unable to admit the smallest mistakes because your narcissism would turn inward and devour your.

>>9482463
>But that's wrong. Commnism is a step up but not fundamentally different. The latter mostly refers to whether the workers themselves are the owners.
Lenin in State and the Revolution says that the difference between socialism and communism is the kind of ownership:

In socialism, the means of production are socially owned, but the property itself is private. An individual works for the just ammount of money for which he works in context. There is a form of state and that is one that reppresses the bourgeois.

Communism is the end goal, so to speak, It's an state of extreme wealth in which individuals can work according to their abilities and take according to their needs, without an state (essentially, what anarchists strove for in the times of Lenin, without the reppresive methods of socialism). Of course, Lenin mentions this as an absolute end goal to humanity itself, and claims that no one can know when it will happen (if ever, I may add).

Of course, Lenin's writings are 100 years old by now, and are based around his reading of Marx' Critique to the Gotha Proggramme, but it's good to see why every communist country is called a "Popular Democracy".

Also, mostly, from both sides, when people are talking about communism or socialism, they tend to not have read any thing on the subject matter but what they want to believe.

>>9482024
>this book

it's a series of three volumes, pleb

File: pcmeme1.jpg (26KB, 465x397px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 465x397px

>>9482594
I know, but political compass memes are still hilarious

>>9482613
Don't know why you're directing that at me - that's literally what I said until you replace Lenin's words with your own interpreation.

The difference between socialism and communism is indeed the kind of ownership, like you say. Socialism = social ownership but not necessarily in the hands of the workers, i.e. there can still be an organisation (like the government) who controls it and pays wages. Communism = the country is ready to abolish this last step too and hand property directly to the workers, the end goal and last step in social ownership.
Communism is the utopia, but unfortunately ;^) we never get there and it always ends in the government staying in control. Weird how that happens.
It's still just a gradual progression in the kind of ownership.

Ivan Denisovich is better

>>9482632
Ah, just trying to clarify in this shitshow about dictionary and no-yous.

>>9482641
I mean I'll be happy if that guy gets over himself and agrees with you but he still has trouble admitting that socialism means social ownership lmao.

>>9482024
It's like a friendly drunk russian telling you what happened at the bar. Might not be 100% accurate, but I doubt he's anything other than authentic. My copy looks exactly like that

>>9482673
I mean the good thing is that everything he describes is established beyond doubt through other sources so there's no reason to believe he made it all up, even if he should have embellished something.

>>9482024
My dad (62) has a framed copy of the Solzhenitsyn Time Magazine cover. It was hanging in our basement for years and years. My sister and I were always totally creeped out by it as kids, he looked scary and the magazine cover was old and faded.

I recently helped my parents move out of their house as they prepare for retirement and I found the Time cover again. My dad told me I could have it.

Anyway, never read any of Solzhenitsyn. I asked my dad about him and he had only the foggiest idea of who he was, but he made some kind of impact on my dad during his days as an english student in college.

I couldn't bear to tell him that Solzhenitsyn was now a meme for frogposters.

>>9482862
Kill yourself

File: 1458863970495.jpg (33KB, 500x550px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x550px

https://thechosenites.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/200-years-together.pdf

banned books dot pee dee eff

>his book about Russian Jews was banned in America

really heats up the brainpan

>>9483078
I want this on my shelf

>>9482608
>the varieties of socialism differ in their form of social ownership,
are you illiterate or a retarded person?

>>9482528
i lolled

File: image.jpg (50KB, 301x300px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 301x300px

>>9482252

>posting nabokov
>an anti-communist who supported the vietnam war and personally thanked president johnson

>book about prisons made by a political leader disproves the use of historical materialism

really made the ol' neurons fire

>Russians being savages offers us information on the correctness or incorrectness of Marx
Really boggles the noggin

should I just read the abridged version or should I shell out 100 bucks for each separate volume?

Hey, can someone else please start bumping the thread, my dad gets angry if I stay up too late, thanks.

>>9482286
>Stalinism is comparable to Hitlerism
Of course, weren't both of them totalitarian dictators and mass murderers on a historical scale?

>>9488293
Hitler single-handedly started WW2 which resulted in dozens of millions of deaths only because of his purely evil nationalistic beliefs.

Also he wanted to promote his racist beliefs towards the masses, meaning to eventually convince everyone that genocide is the way to go (and his influence is still very palpable in the far right today, whereas barely any leftists actually use Stalin as an example). He didn't even need to be hypocritical, he only hid some details from the people and was openly proud about the rest. Hitler wasn't just a mass-murder, he was dragging his entire country and the world into becoming mass-murderers.

That's why you can't compare those two. Stalin did what he had to do to remain in power, which every leader from the beginning of civilization has done. His methods are of course extremely horrific, but one can understand where they stemmed from. But in the case of Hitler it is astonishing how such a person could rise to power in modern Europe and in one of its most cultured countries.

>>9488352

Good post overall but it's clear you know nothing about the nature of Stalinist atrocities.

>>9488386
>Stalinist atrocities

Post proofs.

>>9488386
>muh 100 million kulaks

I d e o l o g y

>>9482467

The economy being a meme only ceases to matter if the entire world turns communist you utter dolt. You still need to maintain economic strength to maintain purchasing power on the global market so your people don't starve because the government can't provide for them. This is the reason why China, for example adopted a mixed model.

Also
>if the idea was good he would convince the community to fund it

Anything at all innovative has seemed retarded to begin with. In any sort of democratic workers council situation people will be hesistant to go in on investments because they will inevitably be investing a larger share of their own wealth. Such innovation requires accumulation of capital that only governments or large bodies of capital can provide.

>>9488352
Sorry but without taking either side, as a German, I will tell you you know absolutely nothing about the history of this country and Hitler's rise to power so please refrain from making stupid posts like that.

You're equally misinformed about the Soviet Union too, the entire point of OP's book is to show how the "methods" started before Stalin and were not just repression to stay in power.

Please read some books.

File: The_Captive_Mind_by_Czeslaw_Milosz.jpg (18KB, 220x327px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 220x327px

>>9488404
>>9488405

Here's a good primer.

>>9488443
>he actually thinks genocide denying Communist revisionists will ever read a book critical of their Dear Leader

File: stalin_pepe.jpg (254KB, 884x757px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 884x757px

>>9482024
I think revisionist scum like you belong in a gulag.

>>9488437
Do I have to know about Germany to know that Hitler started WW2 and used racist propaganda to win the people over?

>the entire point of OP's book is to show how the "methods" started before Stalin and were not just repression to stay in power
So if a book says so, then it must be the case, right? Why don't you prove me wrong?

The way I see it, every single Soviet who was not in the Communist Party hated the shit out of Stalin, so the noisier ones had to have been punished. But how the fuck do you explain this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRvafKSJ1ls&t=216s

File: pyeIVTbwz0ubN2k5DniucbZ1DbeaGIOHT8Mt1QUt6rQ.jpg (134KB, 1024x684px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1024x684px

>>9482467
>total freedom of speech only exists in America
Top fucking kek I'm saddened that this has 2 replies and the repliers didn't just stop reading there and haven't just moved on to do something more productive with their time.

>>9488801
>Do I have to know about Germany to know that Hitler started WW2 and used racist propaganda to win the people over?
It would certainly help you not look stupid in the eyes of a German who does know the history and understands factors like preexisting antisemitism, the effect of the treaty of Versailles, the interests of the industrious elite helping Hitler, the gamble that the politicians putting Hitler into power took and lost, the brutal oppression of any opposition, and so on.
Foreigners predicted right after the treaty of Versailles that Germany would inevitably start a war because of it - don't act like everything was fine until Hitler came along, you look like an idiot.

>Yeah okay so this book explains something but that doesn't mean I can't just say it's wrong because I want it to be wrong
Wow what a pleasure to debate with you.
There is evidence that repression started before Stalin, you are free to deny that but again, you will look like an idiot.

>>9488443
>mentality
>intellectual condition

An ad hominem lecture... I'm actually mad you didn't even try.

>>9488458
There's nothing to deny because nothing was actually presented.

>>9488874
>There's nothing to deny because nothing was actually presented.
>There is absolutely zero evidence of anyone dying under Stalin or Mao
lul modern communists crack me up

>>9488801
>Hitler started WW2
Whew, lad.

>>9488866
>Wow what a pleasure to debate with you
Lol you think we are debating? I made a point and you just called me an idiot without bringing any counterarguments. You didn't even understand what I said, you just spouted a few words that you keep in your "red-pill" collection.

I guess this board really is lost. The new wave of /pol/ has taken over and they are not even ironic anymore.

>>9488874

>Surely attacking the publisher's blurb on the cover of a book will demonstrate that I am above reading anything criticial to my pre-conceived notions of Stalinism!

Finished the second volume today. Definitely worth reading. And if it didn't destroy marxism, it is because
1) very few people know about it
2) you'll get the eternal catchphrase that it was not real™ communism

>>9488900
No, I called you an idiot after giving you my arguments for why it was more complex than just Hitler telling peaceful people "uh racism and stuff let's war".
You really are not as smart as you think you are, sorry.

>>9482673
> I doubt he's anything other than authentic
Speaking from my experience with Russians, they like pretending to be kind simpletons when you're looking at them, but as soon as you turn away, they're the quickest to stab you in the back.

File: 8values.png (59KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x600px

>>9482563
> being this reactionary
>>>/gulag/

>>9488995

>Economically communist
>Likes civil liberties

Maybe when you grow up you'll realise that these things aren't compatible

>>9488437
> the entire point of OP's book is to show how the "methods" started before Stalin and were not just repression to stay in power
Solzhenitsyn was a clearly schizophrenic nationalist with incredibly skewed priorities as to what was good for Russia and Russians who was systematically accused of outright lying by other anti-Stalinist writers who passed through the gulags. Not saying that Stalin was a saint, but Solzhenitsyn is out there among the worst sources to base one's opinion on the Soviet Union on.

>>9489008
> political freedom is only possible when you have no say over how your company works and have no rights as a worker whatsoever
Sure thing, friendo.

>>9488995
>he wants a gulag without a state
dude you are fucking retarded

Does anyone know where this sudden revival of pro-soviet sentiment has come from? I'm seeing it everything.

>>9489025
No, I'm saying that civil liberties will cease to exist under the kind of government and regulations that will make the economic freedom you communists speak of possible.

>>9489028
> bigger pensions means gulag
Blackwhite classique.
>>9489029
> I'm seeing it everything.
You're just suffering from persecution complex, friendo.
>>9489029
> civil liberties will cease to exist under the kind of government and regulations that will make the economic freedom you communists speak of possible
Let me guess, because of le human nature meme? Every single time I ask a rightist to explain to me exactly how would that happen, you cunts always find a reason to change the subject. Is saying "I just want to own a personal yacht and see other people not have one" that hard?

>>9488995

Gas yourself faggot

>>9489054
> waaaah, waaaah

>>9488926
>I will tell you you know absolutely nothing about the history of this country and Hitler's rise to power
Ok then, tell me, let me see what you've got.
>You're equally misinformed about the Soviet Union too
Ookay, how so? When are the concrete arguments rolling in?
>the entire point of OP's book is to show how the "methods" started before Stalin and were not just repression to stay in power.
This one comes somewhat close, but it's not your argument and it's not related to what I was saying about Hitler being worse than Stalin

>factors like preexisting antisemitism, the effect of the treaty of Versailles, the interests of the industrious elite helping Hitler, the gamble that the politicians putting Hitler into power took and lost, the brutal oppression of any opposition, and so on.
This is just a list of events. If you don't attach your interpretation of them it's useless.
>Foreigners predicted right after the treaty of Versailles that Germany would inevitably start a war because of it - don't act like everything was fine until Hitler came along
Of course there were historical circumstances. There always are. But Hitler planned and executed the war. He is as responsible as any other leader in history. Anyway, good job in the argument. Too bad it only addresses half of my point.
>There is evidence that repression started before Stalin, you are free to deny that but again, you will look like an idiot.
There is evidence somewhere but you don't bring it and if I don't believe it I am an idiot. Got it.

>>9489047

No not fucking human nature you dolt. Because of the essential nature of revolution and the the necessities of consolidating power in a post revolutionary state. You must oppress or risk your state collapsing. Moreover, the accumulation of political power in the hands of a few unchecked individuals inevitable in a postrevolultionary state should be unacceptable to anyone. A few idealogues now have the power of life or death over all citizens. It's unacceptable and highly abuse able, allowing for things like Mao's cultural revolution.

Also, I think your understanding of Marxism is skewed. I can still own and operate a yacht, it is personal property. I can't however force people to work the land and take the fruits of their labour as profit. This is a good thing, and not necessarily a utopian unachievable goal, however I do not think the means of revolution are suited the the ideal end.

I think you have taken me for a right winger. I am not. I am skeptical that communism is the answer, and I have no desire to be "guided into a brighter future" by a vanguard party of intellectuals who think they have the right to decide for the masses.

>>9489135
> I think your understanding of Marxism is skewed
Concern trolling? I'm out, have a nice day.

>>9489149

What do you mean concern trolling?

I don't agree with Marxism, but it is an actual fact that I can accumulate personal property all day long and no one gives a shit. Your argument seemed to imply that.

I was trying to transition into having an actual spirited discussion outside of the previous funposting. But hey, if you're not interested because your ego doesn't like anyone to say that you're not the smartest most knowledgeable little Marxist around perhaps you're not meant for debate.

>>9489157
> I was trying to transition into having an actual spirited discussion
No, you weren't. I'm not here to be your strawman.

>>9489170

Had you replied sincerely I would have had the discussion with you. I am willing to change my mind on Marxism if I can be given a satisfactory answer on how it can be implemented without oppressive dictatorship and violent revolution.

>>9489084
>There is evidence somewhere but you don't bring it and if I don't believe it I am an idiot. Got it.
Sorry, but if you don't know that the oppression had already started under Lenin, there's little point to argue anything with you. You can keep being angry or you can show some humility and accept that you're not very well-read on these topics.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/aug/09gff.htm
>Comrade Fyodorov,
>It is obvious that a whiteguard insurrection is being prepared in Nizhni. ... Organise immediately mass terror, shoot and deport the hundreds of prostitutes who are making drunkards of the soldiers, former officers and the like.
This is literally from Lenin himself.

If you're going to tell me you might be wrong about some stuff and want to learn, I'll show you more arguments. Not gonna waste my time with someone set in their way though.

File: FB_IMG_1493952714089.jpg (44KB, 552x710px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 552x710px

>>9483839
Not that guy but you misinterpreted the sentence, it says that the common denominator in socialists theories is the social ownership, not that the different types of socialism differs in forms of social ownership.

Looks like you're the retarded one lad

>>9489578
Where does it say that? Quote it faggot.
>Not that guy
You said that you retarded cunt.
If you're not that guy you're still a retarded cunt.

>>9489607
No it's literally a different guy but I'm still here, I just stopped bothering with you when you couldn't understand a simple sentence from wikipedia.

And I was right, since you still don't get it after the guy explained it to you. "Where does it say that" - LITERALLY IN THE SAME SENTENCE. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO GAVE THIS SENTENCE. You used it to confirm your viewpoint but it just does the opposite. And I don't have any hope you'll understand that.

>>9482608
The dictionary guy said
>Now even the example you use to prove me wrong because of how diverse socialism is says the common denominator is SOCIAL OWNERSHIP.

>>9483839
You replied
>>the varieties of socialism differ in their form of social ownership,

You fucking misinterpreted it and misquoted it man, now cease your faggotry and admit your mistakes

Will I like this if I liked Ivan Denisovich?

>>9489187
M8, people who actually are willing to change their minds about socialism don't keep spouting old and tired memes about the vanguard party, and they certainly don't presume to teach commies their own ideology. You don't actually think that you're the one clever little twat who can pass undetected under the radar, do you?
>>9489527
> enemy forces are dealt with by every available means
You can call each and every single country that ever engaged in warfare a state of terror, then.

>>9490075
I don't know if you're stupid or willfully ignorant but I guess with communists it's usually both:

It's not ME calling it terror, it's Lenin himself.
It's not "enemy forces", it was shooting innocent civilians who were distracting people. His own countrymen. Civilians. Women.
>dude it was just normal warfare

Everyone leaning towards communism but not completely blind yet should pay close attention to people like you.

>>9490114
> It's not ME calling it terror, it's Lenin himself.
And? Words have different connotations at different point in time; before WWII, the word "propaganda" had no negative associations, and now it's practically a buzzword.
> It's not "enemy forces"
Yes, I misread.
> it was shooting innocent civilians who were distracting people. His own countrymen. Civilians. Women
Don't you even attempt to play a humanist, you massive fucking hypocrite. Yes, it was fucking awful; no, it had nothing to do specifically with communism. Or what, Abu Ghraib and My Lai don't count now, especially given how they didn't even serve any practical purpose?
> b-but bad apples
Of course it is.
> Everyone leaning towards communism but not completely blind yet should pay close attention to people like you.
Fucking despicable. You deceitful cunt talk about humanism, yet have no problem with billions of people living and dying in miserable conditions, just so long as you can have your iphones produced by slave labour. Oh, but trying to fix it will result in gulags! Lying fucking liars and the shameless lies they tell.

>>9490148
Okay try to calm down again.

1) All around the world, the proben way to lift people out of poverty has been capitalism. China under Mao = people eat their babies, China under capitalism = superpower with less and less poor every single day
Same pattern all over the world

2) We have one system that is proven to help fight poverty and one system that promises to fight poverty but results in violent oppression and poverty EVER SINGLE TIME. Can you at least understand why you're not allowed to pretend that only communists care about the poor?

3) Apart from some metal mines in Africa, Europe functions pretty much entirely without slave labour unless you count Foxconn workers and the textile industry WHO ARE NOT SLAVES. Bad working conditions, yes, but they do it because it's still better than having no job at all without those evil corporations

4) Comparing isolated incidents that affected hundreds with state-wide totalitarian regimes that killed millions makes you look kind of silly. It's the same who yell LITERALLY HITLER all the time.

By the way, Lenin was a rich man living off his inheritance and when the feudal farmers on his land were dying due to a famine, he still made them pay the full "rent"
>what a great Communist humanist ;^)

File: Laughing_Marx.jpg (141KB, 480x563px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 480x563px

>>9482252
>mfw reactionaries still can't come up with a good critique against dialectical materialism so they use muh feelings as an argument

You lost the war fascist, deal with it.

>>9490249
>mfw reactionaries don't have to prove me wrong because even my followers admit that my ideas have been proven wrong as society developed

>>9490249
>lost the war

>what is NATO
>what is EU

>>9488886
Strawman.
1. Prove deaths were greater or worse than any other country.
2. Prove Marx or Communism was the cause.

>>9488903
>"Just because it's covered in shit doesn't mean it'll taste like shit."
How about you bite it, and tell me what you find.

>>9490249

>mfw reactionaries still can't come up with a good critique against dialectical materialism so they use muh feelings as an argument

Most people don't bother to critique political fads from the 19th century. Marxists are for the most part simply ignored as an irrelevant minority, outside of college resentment studies programs.

>>9490629

I suppose that those show trials and deportations to Sibera were just capitalist propaganda. When Stalin announced the "liquidation of the kulaks as a class" he was probably just talking about giving them free vodka, right?

>>9490249
>dialectical materialism
any system based on unfalsifiable claims is to be discarded.
You faggot westerners wouldn't be so pro-marx if you experienced the USSR

>>9490665
The only commies left are the ones living in 1st world capitalists countries

>>9482024

Sorry, brah, I'm not that into fantasy-fiction

Under one post per hour
Bump limit at 310
Limited chance of anyone but OP replying
This Youtube thread will likely last over one week

>>9490832

This is true

>>9490629

I have! It's a fantastic book. The author has a great talent for observation both on the personal and historical levels - I guess that comes partly from being a poet first and a prose writer second. Plus, if you read it you'll have been forced to open a book for the first time in your life, which is not as bad a thing as you imagine.

File: 1494025836476.png (9KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 420x420px

>>9490977
Hmm

File: Malema.jpg (23KB, 630x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 630x400px

>>9491036
No it's not. But it's a comfortable talking point for those with a vested interest in not taking socialist ideas seriously

>>9485724
>you're either a follower of con artist Jordan Peterson and eat up his shitty recommendations or you're a communist

lovin this political landscape not!!!!

>>9490249
What critique is even needed? Communist countries were all shitholes, that never achieved Communism, or anything beyond state capitalism, except when it's convenient for someone with nostalgia for the idea of the USSR to say that they did.

Daily reminder that Solzhenitsyn is a hack who snitched on his mates in an exchange for a comfy desk job in camps

>>9489084
>it's not your argument and it's not related to what I was saying about Hitler being worse than Stalin
You're being intellectually dishonest

>>9491076
If every time a country try to implement socialism/Communism ends as a fucking disaster (and without actually achieved socialism) how could anyone take the socialist ideas seriously? On a practical and economical level.

Serious question btw

>>9491282
>Sweden
>Finland
>Netherlands
>Denmark
>Norway
>Belgium
>Paris commune
>Revolutionary Spain

File: Chairman.jpg (38KB, 473x600px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 473x600px

>>9490249
>reactionaries

>>9491284
>Welfare capitalism is socialism
great meme

>>9491284
>1-6 not socialist
>7-8 failed

good system
>when you base your ideology on exercising power in a revolution in order to ban the future the exercise of power or hierarchy through private property, the state, etc., then get crushed by people who exercise power on you because the magic of historical dialectical necessity hasn't made aggression impossible

>>9491284
>Sweden
>Finland
>Netherlands
>Denmark
>Norway
>Belgium
All capitalist economies with an extensive welfare state; the means of production are no owned neither by the society nor the state so...

No real socialism ™

>Paris commune
>Revolutionary Spain

These were legit tho, but how can be so sure that they could be successful in a long term?

I wonder if /lit/ (and society in general) would be so charitable to people who mocked Primo Levi and Elie Wiesel as they are to people who mock Solzhenitsyn.

>>9491371
no because /lit/ is full of Communists. Communism appeals to literary types who are not smart enough to grasp mainstream economics. /lit/ will never miss an opportunity to apologize for the Soviet Union.

>>9491395
I'd say communism appeals to literary types because it is benefitial for them. I mean, who else can staff all those planning commisions?

Even if they understood economics they would still be communist because who cares if the people are starving, the important thing is that the intellectual keeps his job at the bureaucracy.

>>9491484
literary types wouldn't staff the planning commission, it would be the perfidious STEMlord

>>9482024
>why does it eternally destroy marxism for good?
Because it documents its abuses.

>>9492604
I wanted to say "no, that's wrong, that's not real marxism that abused the people" but then I realized it was people USING marxism to abuse people.
Really spins the mindwheels.

File: 1476899649980.png (487KB, 366x543px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 366x543px

>when people confuse Marxism for Leninism

File: IMG_20170511_104107.jpg (66KB, 325x593px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 325x593px

At this point the communists looks like religious people to me, I mean, they read the books as gospel, they treat their leaders as saints, heck even some of them that I've met think in primitive communism as some kind of lost paradise and they expect the worldwide revolution like the second coming of Christ.

No matter how many times it fails they're just faithful.

Has anybody else this weird perception?

>>9493313
An interesting observation, anon. Do you want to tell me more about it?

>>9482024
why does /lit/ love marxism?

why are book faggots so into marx/communism/leftist politics?

>>9493313
Yes the similarities are pretty funny. It's not just the people you met by the way, the whole "no one will have to work and we will have everything in abundance" is the official doctrine.
Also the whole thing around who is the legitimate prophet of Marx, the Mormon-esque context of Engels writing down and interpreting his work, the immense hatred for every "nonbeliever" and so on.

File: Muh+communism+_25d58b7435a6b6048beabcda797289a4.png (573KB, 475x637px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 475x637px

>>9491395
I think they believe they would be paid to post about how smart they are in a communist utopia and not shot on sight for being huge faggots if they ever got another marxist state rolling under which they lived

>>9493331
- There are a lot of gay, bi, transsexual and general deviants on the board who hate conservatives for hating them and then cling to everything anti-conservative (even though most leftist leaders were the first to round up homosexuals)
- Breaking up societies and hierarchies has always been an "artistic" pursuit because creative people are psychologically less inclined to order, duty, and values
- There's a bigger "academic" tradition around it because practical concepts that simply work like capitalism or the traditional family will work quietly while any attacks on these need a lot of theoretical explanation and bullshitting
- People who have nothing but their thoughts and feel ostracized are more likely to identify with the perceived victims

More reasons, but it's always been this way. It's really funny to read about how Orwell tried to speak for the common worker but whenever he tried to hang out with them, they told him to fuck off and stop being a weirdo

>>9493331
Because they have actually read Marx.

People who have actually read the information can be reasoned decisions about it.

Usually, Marx's most dogmatic critics have not read him, and rely of second hand information.

This board doesn't love Marx, but there are enough well-read people here to not just rag on the man's ideas without any actual critical thought.

Also, reading the Communist Manifesto =! being familiar with Marx, Marxism, or even communism.

>>9491395
>smart enough to grasp mainstream economics

Literally one of the dumbest fields around, and, notably economics is the theory of capitalism, not more broadly on human society and political organisation.

Not all Marxists are communists by the way. In fact, most aren't communists.

>>9493357

its funny to read this post as someone complaining about Plato

>>9493369
not necessarily my reddit spacing friend...i see a lot of supposedly marxist kids who haven't read anything even the manifesto and just seem to believe that it's unfair that some people make more money than others than marx somehow proves this is unfair

if you actually read marx you realize he doesn't really understand economics, and misreads history

>>9493369
This is a meme that is kept alive but it's actually the complete opposite. I'm actively looking for people like that to challenge my views and I can't find a single one. It's always the "well-read" and "have you even read him?!" types who are the most adamant about avoiding any kind of economic argument, any kind of analysis of WHY Marxism led to oppression, any discussion of the lives of famous socialists like Lenin.

There are dumb right-wingers who just instinctively shit on commies, yeah, but haven't met a single Marxist able to defend his views while there were plenty of convincing "capitalists".

*SORTING INTENSIFIES*

>>9493322
Well that's just my opinion based in what I experienced with the government propaganda (I'm Venezuelan) and my few Marxist friends.

You could look many others similarities like >>9493338

>>9493466
Tell me more about Venezuelan propaganda.

>>9493466
>(I'm Venezuelan) and my few Marxist friends.
Hey, mind telling me a little bit? Really curious how widespread socialism is among the middle class, how non-party socialists rationalise what's happening around them right now, whether the common non-leftist likes you wants to leave or trusts things will get better again, etc.

File: estatuua630xc.jpg (143KB, 630x480px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 630x480px

>>9493469
Well, it's huge, widespread, and complex, is not only the media under state control (the state controls a wide set of tv channels, radio stations, newspapers, obligatory state broadcasting and censorship on nongovernment tv channels and even some street food franchises.) The sanctification of Chávez ,there are statues and portraits of him in public spaces and state offices and some statements like "We're all Chavez's sons and daughters" and so on; this article explains it very well https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivarian_propaganda

>>9493475
It's hard to tell lad, though everyone here hates the government, unless they're getting some "especial benefits" from it or they're practically brainwashed there's still some leftwing, socialist people who agrees on the failure of the "Bolivarian Revolution" but still sticks to socialists ideas, and there's people like me, a rightwing, free market defender who are a growing movement.