Kras Mazov

What no theory does to a mf.

But seriously, you got it wrong. We would all prefer if things go nonviolent, but that is not possible.

Not only that but the post is just a joke, adventurism is not something that’s incentivized in leftist groups/movements afaik.

And your rethoric about “anyone that have more than I do” is completely wrong. The problem is not someone earning more than other people, but the bourgeoisie, the ultra rich, the ones that lobby for their interests, that buy and sponsor politicians. Anyone else is much closer to the poor than they are to the rich.

Also this has nothing to do with jealously. You should read some Marx to at least understand what you’re trying to criticize and oppose. Or at least watch some Marxist creators like Second Thought, Yugopnik and Hakim.

You really love your “them tankies” huh. Maybe you should start engaging with reality instead of this bullshit anticommunism you always do.

People will always suffer. There’s a multitude of variables as to why people around the world suffer.

Let’s take a step back. Why does the majority of people suffer under capitalism? Because they have to live in a world where they don’t get good, free healthcare, don’t have a right to a house, don’t earn nearly enough to live comfortably, don’t have enough vacation, can’t afford to take a trip, don’t have time to enjoy their lives, are alienated from their work, have shitty jobs, work too much, etc, etc, etc.

That creates a necessity for charities for all the basic stuff everyone should have, but doesn’t currently have. If we give free good healthcare for everyone, the need for charities to threat people disappears. If we give everyone a home, the need for charities for homeless people, disappear.

Okay, so how about they don’t donate to charities… no more technical advancement in medicine, so people can be poor and die from disease.

What??? You do know that most breakthrough advancements doesn’t come from the private initiative right? It comes mainly from public, government expending, into research. This idea that private entities advance society is just a liberal propaganda lie that is peddled to us all the time since birth.

Charities isn’t something you enforce or eliminate. It is a free choice to give. Mandate it and you’re just legalizing theft by the authority.

I’m not talking about making charities illegal, I, like every other communist in the world, am talking about solving the issue at it’s roots, eliminating capitalism, and that requires eliminating exploitation through labor and eliminating the rich and insanely wealthy as a class.

They donate not because of the goodness in their heart, but because they get tax cuts from it.

Furthermore, what does donation really accomplish when:

1. People are still suffering, regardless of how many charities there are and how much money they get;

2. Those wealthy donors are the reason people continue poor since they are only wealthy by exploiting other people’s work.

Charities shouldn’t need to exist in the first place.

Just why? Every single human being deserve to have access to housing, water, food, education, etc. We NEED those things.

Companies and corporations, want their workers healthy, housed, disease free, etc.

No they don’t. They want to pay as little as possible for you to produce as much as possible, it’s literally the logic of the system. Corporations don’t care about their workers, customers or anyone but their owners and investors.

If they could slave people they would. And look at that, they actually do.

Just realized its a .world user, they can’t see my comment lol.

You’re the one applying morals where there is none.

Communism is not about morality and we doesn’t have a moral judgment of the world. It’s simply looking at the material reality of things and them formulating ideas from that, the exact opposite of idealism (religion is a form of idealism).

What that user said is an exageration, sure, but they are not far off. Your only options under capitalism are work and pray to earn enough to pay for rent, or live in the streets. There’s no choice here, you have no safety nets, no certainty.

The reality is that the biggest FOSS projects are usually bankrolled by companies that need them, not because of some moral good, but because it makes more monetary sense to do it that way.

Now for the other side, projects with no money incentive involved, where people contribute because they want too, usually are slow or in need of more contributors, precisely because, under capitalism, they don’t have enough free time, they need to worry about their full time job and all the other priorities in their lives before they can sit down and contribute some code.

Again, there no moral judgement here, it’s simply a description of the material reality.

The post is not talking in morally good/bad terms.

Also of course it is presented this way, memes are supposed to generate some sort of emotion, what did you expect?

If you were open to discussion you would have started it already, your use of ad hominem tells otherwise.

You seem to be at least a little bit interested, I suggest you watch some videos on youtube so you understand it better, the channel Second Thought would be a good place to start.

I’ll try to answer your concerns below:

The current ideology of society is the ideology of its rulling class.

Human nature, if anything is much more about collaboration and collective effort than greed, that’s how it has been for most of human history.

That is to say, we precisely see so much greed everywhere because we live in a system that heavily incentivizes individuality and greed. From the way we are taught to the media we consume, it’s literally everywhere. We are heavily influenced to think and see things in this particular individualistic way.

A society that puts human needs and collective effort above profits have a different way of viewing and interacting with the world than the way we do in capitalist societies. Besides that, if your concern is people abusing power, there should be mechanisms in place to account for that.

My knowledge on this whole topic is not deep, but I guess something you could look up is democratic centralism to understand how hierarchy works in a marxist-leninist socialist state.

Also, my understanding is that marxist theory is only dogmatic in relation to it’s method, as everything else about it adapts to the reality and the material conditions of the time and place it is to be put into practice.

In a socialist society you would be paid by how much work you do, you don’t simply divide everything for everyone equally.

You work more you get more, you work less you get less.

Also, why would anyone need a 1000 apples for?

Everything is political, buddy. Maybe stop plugging your ears every time you see a drop of political discourse that you disagree with and start listening.

You convinced me, I’ll watch it when I get the chance. Thanks!

Same, I always seen people talk about it but never seen it myself until 3 days ago. I only saw it because a video I wanted to watch mentioned it and it ended up being pretty great, it’s really well made.

I’ve been putting off watching Your Name for years at this point, is it as good as everyone online says it is?

I binge-watched Wonder Egg Priority on Saturday, on one hand it is charming as fuck with a great cast of characters while also being very empathetic with a range of difficult topics, on the other

That being said, the trans representation in this anime is great and the good stuff, specially in the first half, is so good it’s probably gonna stick to me for a while.

I also watched Perfect Blue for the first time and that was also great, I’ve managed to go in without being spoiled anything and it was a ride, that’s for sure.

Most sane and empathetic libertarian

Ah yes, because everyone on the streets “don’t care about themselves”.

People are usually on the streets because they have no other choice.

Empathy and understanding others is literally free.

Peaceful to who? It’s not peaceful for countries at war, neither for black people and other ethnic minorities in the US or here in Brazil since the police is racist and will kill for absolutely nothing. This can’t be ignored.

Carrying the collective knowledge of humanity on our pockets is impressive and yet we are pushed sensationalized lies and disinformation for profits sake at every corner. Even when its not for profit, the status quo is so strong that other views and perspectives are easily dismissed. The whole internet is so heavily monetised you can’t use it properly without an adblock.

I think this is a better perspective, since it screams that we need change, radical change, the current system cannot solve any of this.

Neither doomerism, nor this positive way of viewing the world are gonna change it for the better, only fighting for it will.

I’m gonna reply to both your comments here, so this is gonna be a massive reply.

Right, that’s the definition in the book, but in practice, for what you find in the comments sections, my description is a better fit.

I’ve never seen a single communist/socialist use your description. Like I said “capitalist” have a definition and we use it, communism is not a freestyle idea where we just say what ever comes to our mind, there is theory behind all of this. You should read Marx and watch channels like Second Thought.

If people can’t “own the means of production (which, by the way, every single person does)”

No, Private Property is also a defined term. Private Property refers to the private property of the means of production, so things like land, farms, factories, machines etc. It’s literally the means in which production happens, and the people that owns this are the bourgeoisie, the common worker doesn’t.

The opposite of Private Property is Personal Property, which is the things you personally own, like your smartphone, your TV, your computer, your toothbrush etc.

then they are not free to associate or trade freely.

How are they not? You can associate with anyone you want and trade freely with anyone you want, again the only thing you can’t do is own the means of production and exploit people for their labor.

In case you don’t know what I mean by exploiting people for their labor, it has to do with Marx concept of surplus value, which is basically the fact that the worker creates more value than they receive in wages.

Where people can associate freely, trade freely, and own property, private businesses get started.

State owned enterprises and workers’ coops exists.

Outlawing business necessitates interfering with people’s aforementioned freedoms.

Let’s be real here, what “freedoms” do the average person have? Because it’s ever so clear that the working class doesn’t have freedom or even choice for that matter.

You work 10 hours a day, your job pays you pennies and you can barely scrap by? Too bad, you can’t negotiate better pay and better work conditions because your boss can simply fire you and hire someone else that will do the same thing you do for less, or just threat doing that if you continue insisting.

If we are talking about the US, then you can’t even have the luxury of being sick or suffering an accident, the trip to hospital and the treatment are gonna bankrupt you.

In a socialist society everyone gets to have healthcare, education, work and stability. This allows for much more freedom than just being a cog in the machine with no certainty for tomorrow. It allows freedom to actually be someone and not just some product that needs to sell themselves at every corner to afford to exist.

Also, “kulaks” were a thing. If a farmer was prosperous, he was taken to the cleaners, sometimes killed, and his property taken from him. Communists reek of envy.

Do you mean gulags? (Which are just prisons, by the way.) Kulaks are just farm owners, and if they refuse collectivization of the farm for the benefit of everyone instead of themselves, they should rightfully be thrown into prison.

If by being “prosperous” you mean accumulating and controlling the grains for themselves while they let everyone else starve, them yeah, they were being “prosperous”.

Also, “the top 1%” doesn’t do nothing. They govern and regulate the business, which is something that has to be done.

There is no need for this because the workers themselves can govern and regulate the business. A business without an owner is a cooperative, a business without workers is nothing.

They take all of the risk. You might like to socialize gains, but you don’t want any part of the losses, do you? Businesses take the majority of the gains, but suffer all of the losses.

What risk? If we are talking about a random Joe that wants to start a small local bar, market, bakery or whatever, then yeah, they are taking a huge risk. If their business fails they can go into a debt they can never recover. Bezos and Musk doesn’t have to worry about anything, they can open a 100 different business and if only one is successful, it’ll pay for the other 99 that failed.

For the majority of people, simply commuting to work is a bigger risk than any risk these businesses can take. If the business closes, the workers lose their job and risk losing everything while the capitalist just moves on to whatever they want to do next. Hell, the business doesn’t even need to close, every now and then there is news about a massive amount of people being fired despite the company reporting massive or even record profits.

And no, making something does not confer ownership. If I hire you to mow my lawn, you do not then own my lawn, or my lawnmower, or the dirt. You own the consideration I paid to you to mow my lawn. Same with anything else.

You are equating doing a service with making a product. If you pay someone else to mow your lawn that’s it, that’s the whole operation you can’t make a profit of their labor, you are simply paying them to do a service for you. If someone works at your factory, you pay them less then the value they produce for you to make a profit, a profit that can only exist because of the worker, and not despite them. Again, a business without an owner is a cooperative, a business without workers is nothing.

Also, ownership of the means of production is collective, not individual like in your example. All the workers own their workplace, therefore all of them have agency over their work conditions, that’s called democracy.

If a business has parts and makes them into products, and a worker takes the parts which are not his and makes a product, that product doesn’t magically become his because he put it together. The paycheck becomes his.

If an owner that produces nothing and have workers takes the product that the workers produced to sell for a profit, that product doesn’t magically become theirs because they took it, it belongs to the workers that made it.

It’s an unequal relationship, even if the owner is the one that bought the parts that are used to make the product, the workers are not gonna be paid fairly for doing all the work.

The relationship between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is antagonistic. The proletariat wants to be paid as high as possible to work as little as possible, while the bourgeoisie wants to pay as low as possible for the highest amount of work as possible.

To work is to collectively produce something for society, so why does someone that doesn’t even take part in the production gets to individually own the labor and products of the workers?

A “capitalist,” according to socialists, esp. Marxists, is someone who engages in anticompetitive behavior, insider trading, protection racketeering, bribery, and all manner of dubious and criminal behavior.

No, a capitalist is someone that owns the means of production and doesn’t have to work to live. People like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. And since capitalism is an infinite for profit driven economy, the capitalists will do anything to increase their profit and their power, hence why they engage in the things you listed, the system literally demands it.

Someone who just believes that people should be able to trade freely, associate freely, and keep the vast majority of what they have earned or traded for fairly are routinely called capitalists by socialists and communists to shame them for being successful.

No, we call them liberals or neoliberals, because that’s what they are, “capitalist” have an actual definition, like I explained above, just like what you are describing is a lib. Besides, everyone can trade freely in a socialist society, what they can’t is own the means of production and exploit peoples labor for their own profit.

Also, we don’t shame people for being “successful”. There is no moral judgment, we simply understand how the system work and want to dismantle it, so exploitation from human being to human being ceases being a thing.

If the worker makes everything, everything belongs to the worker and not the 1% at the top that does nothing.

Oh just fuck off you transphobic, ableist piece of shit.

You come here saying the most ignorant, insensitive crap and then try to demand people to answer you?

And stop with the LGB bullshit. Will it take you imbeciles having your skulls literally crushed by fascists to realize that siding with this alt-right rethoric is the wrong fucking thing to do?