Author Topic: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism  (Read 1912 times)

Offline etienne (OP)

Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« on: March 10, 2017, 05:50:59 AM »
2 stupid 2 live.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2017, 05:54:43 AM by _Xenu_ »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Baruch

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2017, 06:12:30 AM »
Thanks for playing.  Some of us need to consider the alternatives ... and Jewish guys with big beards are an alternative ;-)

I do know something about Communism, and can discuss it neutrally.  But most posts by most people here are SJW ... they really don't have the stomach for getting out the guillotine.  They want to virtue signal, not get their hands dirty.  I am particularly fond of the Chinese.  Do you think they have gone "capitalist"?
שלום

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2017, 06:58:52 AM »
Thanks for playing.  Some of us need to consider the alternatives ... and Jewish guys with big beards are an alternative ;-)

I do know something about Communism, and can discuss it neutrally.  But most posts by most people here are SJW ... they really don't have the stomach for getting out the guillotine.  They want to virtue signal, not get their hands dirty.  I am particularly fond of the Chinese.  Do you think they have gone "capitalist"?

I'm currently reading Xiaobo Liu. What I'm getting from his writing, if I interpret it correctly (which is a hard feat I'll admit), he seems to believe so; in the most perverse of ways the communist party retains in power but lead to a very dark form of society. I'm not sure if he'd closer qualify it as a communist society pretending to be capitalist one. Or a capitalist society pretending to be a communist one. (Though I'd lean to the latter.)

Then again, this is one of the most difficult books I've read so far. (I'm not used to non-fiction.) And I'm not familiar with Chinese history as well as I could be. I could be misinterpreting much of what he's saying.
Interesting read though.
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2017, 07:07:12 AM »
Thanks for playing.  Some of us need to consider the alternatives ... and Jewish guys with big beards are an alternative ;-)

I do know something about Communism, and can discuss it neutrally.  But most posts by most people here are SJW ... they really don't have the stomach for getting out the guillotine.  They want to virtue signal, not get their hands dirty.  I am particularly fond of the Chinese.  Do you think they have gone "capitalist"?

Ain't it the truth.

 The SJW, identity politics liberals/progressives yuppies/petit bourgeois are capitalists, they just want "nicer" capitalism with more "free stuff" for them with little to no regard for the working class that does all the heavy lifting of society. So, yes, they don't want tho get their prissy hands dirty either @ work or politically:  they don't DO, and are pretty much incapable of doing, revolution. They don't want revolution. Capitalism is serving them just fine, but all their "democratic-socialist" demands put more intensified pressure of the working class, especially in the Third World--i.e., the people that have to make the "free stuff".  I've had lib/progs attack me MORE viciously than your standard right wingers when I tell them I am a So-Comm.  They are CAPITALISTS, make no mistake about that.

Anyway, the Maoists took So-Comm the furthest, as far as I can tell, and some of their communes were WAY ahead of their time and actually practiced moneyless barter, etc, with little to no influence from the State.  The Maoists were way ahead in terms of women's rights and freedom.  Women were completely empowered, pretty much.  Today's China still controls their major industries via the State, as far as I know, so they are still heavily socialist in that regard.  But they have had a heavy overlay of capitalism, no doubt about it.  Too bad for them, workers still have to rebel all over the place to get higher wages and rights that weren't so much an issue under Mao, because the workers were in charge then, FTMP.  I don't know if they still have any communes, I don't think they do.

One thing that bothers me about most atheists, is that most are still capitalists and don't seem to have thought about that too much while voicing all their alleged "freedom".
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 07:09:54 AM by etienne »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2017, 07:10:02 AM »
One thing that bothers me about mosts atheists, is that most are still capitalists and don't seem to have thought about that too much while voicing all their alleged "freedom".

You believe a change in religious/spiritual beliefs should lead to a different economical point of view?
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2017, 07:12:38 AM »
I'm currently reading Xiaobo Liu. What I'm getting from his writing, if I interpret it correctly (which is a hard feat I'll admit), he seems to believe so; in the most perverse of ways the communist party retains in power but lead to a very dark form of society. I'm not sure if he'd closer qualify it as a communist society pretending to be capitalist one. Or a capitalist society pretending to be a communist one. (Though I'd lean to the latter.)

Then again, this is one of the most difficult books I've read so far. (I'm not used to non-fiction.) And I'm not familiar with Chinese history as well as I could be. I could be misinterpreting much of what he's saying.
Interesting read though.
  I'm not familiar with that author or book, but the remarks sound fairly oversimplified.  If you read the writings of Mao in "real time" back then, there was a helluva lot going on that he had to deal with as they were actually transforming a backward feudalistic society into an industrial so-comm one.  I will comment more on that a bit later.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 07:14:19 AM by etienne »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2017, 07:24:47 AM »
  I'm not familiar with that author or book, but the remarks sound fairly oversimplified.  If you read the writhing of Mao is "real time" back then, there was a helluva lot going on that he had to deal with as they were actually transforming a backward feudalistic society into a so-comm one.  I will comment more on that a bit later.

I'm reading it in Dutch. It's called "Ik heb geen vijanden, ik ken geen haat.", translated that'd be "I have no enemies, I know no hate." Though it exists in english as "No enemies, No hatred." It's a collection of his writings, finally translated from Chinese.
He's a human-rights activist and pacifist awarded with the Nobel prize for peace in 2010. Only he couldn't accept it as he was detained by the Chinese government in 2008 and sentenced to 11 years in jail in 2009 for making the charta 08. A manifesto calling for political democratic reformations.

The title of the book is, if I'm right, from his final statement in his trial.

And yes, you're probably right in that I'm putting it bluntly. That's why I must emphasize it's my layman's interpretation. Though I suggest the book wholeheartedly.
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2017, 07:26:00 AM »
You believe a change in religious/spiritual beliefs should lead to a different economical point of view?
I think that it should, yes,through logical extension.  My contention is that it frequently doesn't:  that is, in my view, anyone--say Dawkins-- who has given enough thought to conclude there is no God and religion is bad and harmful might also think about the state of humanity as a whole, in political economic social terms, especially when they go around proclamating "freedom" and "free thought", etc.  There is no freedom in capitalism. 

I get pretty annoyed with these people that tour around as speakers making big bucks on the atheist circuit, proclaiming "truth' etc, when they have given ZERO thought or consideration of the untruths of capitalism and it's vicious assault on most people(the working class).  So, an atheist capitalist is pretty much as dangerous as a religious capitalist, sans the religious violence, of course.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 07:27:43 AM by etienne »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2017, 07:37:27 AM »
I'm reading it in Dutch. It's called "Ik heb geen vijanden, ik ken geen haat.", translated that'd be "I have no enemies, I know no hate." Though it exists in english as "No enemies, No hatred." It's a collection of his writings, finally translated from Chinese.
He's a human-rights activist and pacifist awarded with the Nobel prize for peace in 2010. Only he couldn't accept it as he was detained by the Chinese government in 2008 and sentenced to 11 years in jail in 2009 for making the charta 08. A manifesto calling for political democratic reformations.

The title of the book is, if I'm right, from his final statement in his trial.

And yes, you're probably right in that I'm putting it bluntly. That's why I must emphasize it's my layman's interpretation. Though I suggest the book wholeheartedly.
First of all, there's this thing called "anti-commie" Western propaganda and it is pervasive.  A Western publisher and Dutch translation throw up red flags for me immediately.  And the author sounds like a capitalist apologist and therefore they gave him the Nobel Prize.  They don't give Communists the Nobel Prize.  Well, Alfred Nobel was a capitalist armaments inventor/manufacturer, so I don't give any credence to his "prize".

Really, it's difficult to get good info re Maoist China.  You have to go to archival sources which is difficult OR read a good historian's account of the period, and those are few and far between.  I don't believe much of anything coming out of the West re China, DPRK, Cuba, USSR, etc.  It's mostly propaganda.  There's this young guy up in Canada, Jason Unruhe, who is ideologically Maoist and has done some great research work on the subject.
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2017, 08:11:43 AM »
First of all, there's this thing called "anti-commie" Western propaganda and it is pervasive.  A Western publisher and Dutch translation throw up red flags for me immediately.  And the author sounds like a capitalist apologist and therefore they gave him the Nobel Prize.  They don't give Communists the Nobel Prize.  Well, Alfred Nobel was a capitalist armaments inventor/manufacturer, so I don't give any credence to his "prize".

Really, it's difficult to get good info re Maoist China.  You have to go to archival sources which is difficult OR read a good historian's account of the period, and those are few and far between.  I don't believe much of anything coming out of the West re China, DPRK, Cuba, USSR, etc.  It's mostly propaganda.  There's this young guy up in Canada, Jason Unruhe, who is ideologically Maoist and has done some great research work on the subject.

You'll find propaganda anywhere though. Best to look at multiple sources. Even the once you don't like. (Now I have no moral high-ground here, don't get me wrong. As I said, this is like the first non-fiction book that's not for school that I ever read.) Give it a read sometime, before you judge it or it's author. I'm not saying it will change your life or your point of view. But it can't hurt, now can it?
(Important sidenote is that he's not mainly writing about China under Mao. But China today. Though a comprehension of the historical background is always necessary in understanding something like this.)

And what's wrong with Dutch, by the way? (I sure as shit ain't gonna learn Chinese.) :p

In any case though, eleven years in the big house for writing a manifesto calling for social security, freedom of assembly, protection of the environment and other things seems a bit much.
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2017, 10:26:21 AM »
You'll find propaganda anywhere though. Best to look at multiple sources. Even the once you don't like. (Now I have no moral high-ground here, don't get me wrong. As I said, this is like the first non-fiction book that's not for school that I ever read.) Give it a read sometime, before you judge it or it's author. I'm not saying it will change your life or your point of view. But it can't hurt, now can it?
(Important sidenote is that he's not mainly writing about China under Mao. But China today. Though a comprehension of the historical background is always necessary in understanding something like this.)

And what's wrong with Dutch, by the way? (I sure as shit ain't gonna learn Chinese.) :p

In any case though, eleven years in the big house for writing a manifesto calling for social security, freedom of assembly, protection of the environment and other things seems a bit much.

There is propaganda--the distortion of fact, or lies--and there is fact, I am interested in the latter.  Thats why I go to prime sources, Marx, Lenin, Mao, Guevara, etc. 

I don't claim to know much about China post-Mao.  The State still controls most of the advanced industry and resources, I presume, and then you have private capitalism that has come in and most of the working class is back to being very low wage slaves.

Doing a quick Wiki search re Liu, he comes from a petit bourgeois intellectual family and he is the same.  While he was studying and teaching in the US, did he take up the issues of human rights there?  No.  Prison system with the most prisoners on the planet?  No.  Critique of the totalitarian nature of corporate capitalism?  No.  Is he agitating for socialism in China?  No.  So, from this, I gather he is a petit bourgeois capitalist of dem-soc leanings.  If the Chinese State is still mostly so-comm, thats why they put him in the clank.  One wonders who his potential "handlers" are as well.  I am anti-capitalist, rev socialist--I probably wont read him.

If you would like to grace us with a presentation on Xiaobo Liu's critique of contemporary China here, feel free to do so.  ;)

Really, "The Communist Manifesto", IMO, is the most profound and inspiring book on the planet, so all these "human rights" type liberal capitalist writers pale by comparison.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 10:45:57 AM by etienne »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2017, 10:53:25 AM »
"Democratic Socialism" is NOT Socialism/Communism

"Revolution" w/o Revolution

Jason Unruhe(Canada)



« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 10:58:02 AM by etienne »
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Mr.Obvious

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2017, 11:41:10 AM »
There is propaganda--the distortion of fact, or lies--and there is fact, I am interested in the latter.  Thats why I go to prime sources, Marx, Lenin, Mao, Guevara, etc. 

I don't claim to know much about China post-Mao.  The State still controls most of the advanced industry and resources, I presume, and then you have private capitalism that has come in and most of the working class is back to being very low wage slaves.

Doing a quick Wiki search re Liu, he comes from a petit bourgeois intellectual family and he is the same.  While he was studying and teaching in the US, did he take up the issues of human rights there?  No.  Prison system with the most prisoners on the planet?  No.  Critique of the totalitarian nature of corporate capitalism?  No.  Is he agitating for socialism in China?  No.  So, from this, I gather he is a petit bourgeois capitalist of dem-soc leanings.  If the Chinese State is still mostly so-comm, thats why they put him in the clank.  One wonders who his potential "handlers" are as well.  I am anti-capitalist, rev socialist--I probably wont read him.

If you would like to grace us with a presentation on Xiaobo Liu's critique of contemporary China here, feel free to do so.  ;)

Really, "The Communist Manifesto", IMO, is the most profound and inspiring book on the planet, so all these "human rights" type liberal capitalist writers pale by comparison.

Heh, if I seem qualified to do a presentation on his critique, either you've not been reading my attempts at making clear I'm not an expert on this matter, or I come across far more eloquent than I'd figured.

Gotta say though. Claiming off the bat that critiques of your point of view are inherently propaganda and not worth your time or dismissing them on the basis of the heritage or different political vision of the author does not make for good discours. And not reading criticisms because you are convinced your own sources are excempt of propaganda or are at least not colored by their own visions, aka not looking at the world through a different pair of glasses but must absolutely be the 'factual' way of looking at things, is far more close to dogmatic thinking than I'm willing to get. Sorry if that sounds rude, but it's what I'm getting from all this.
And if for nothing else, while we can always respect the classic grand works, like the communist manifesto, which I can appreciate for what it is, we can't only get our current visions from texts over a 150 years old. The world changes. And even the great ideologies must adapt. I'm a socialist myself, though in Western European useage of the word. And I can say our socialist party in Flanders sucks, imho. They tried to hold onto a system that worked a hundred years ago, but isn't adapted to today's world. And by doing that, they turned out to be amongst the least 'socialist' in their core, on certain principles. Which brought a lot of problems.
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline etienne (OP)

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2017, 12:29:57 PM »
Heh, if I seem qualified to do a presentation on his critique, either you've not been reading my attempts at making clear I'm not an expert on this matter, or I come across far more eloquent than I'd figured.

Gotta say though. Claiming off the bat that critiques of your point of view are inherently propaganda and not worth your time or dismissing them on the basis of the heritage or different political vision of the author does not make for good discours. And not reading criticisms because you are convinced your own sources are excempt of propaganda or are at least not colored by their own visions, aka not looking at the world through a different pair of glasses but must absolutely be the 'factual' way of looking at things, is far more close to dogmatic thinking than I'm willing to get. Sorry if that sounds rude, but it's what I'm getting from all this.
And if for nothing else, while we can always respect the classic grand works, like the communist manifesto, which I can appreciate for what it is, we can't only get our current visions from texts over a 150 years old. The world changes. And even the great ideologies must adapt. I'm a socialist myself, though in Western European useage of the word. And I can say our socialist party in Flanders sucks, imho. They tried to hold onto a system that worked a hundred years ago, but isn't adapted to today's world. And by doing that, they turned out to be amongst the least 'socialist' in their core, on certain principles. Which brought a lot of problems.

Ok, let me back up and say that I don't know if Liu's work is "propaganda" in the distortion sense, but we can agree on "propaganda" in the relaying of information sense.  If Liu is a revolutionary so-comm as say, Mao, then I may be interested in reading him.  But I think he is as I described, a liberal capitalist, or "dem-soc" capitalist, of which position I am well familiar and dont agree with and therefore dont see a reason to take time to read him when I have plenty of other things to read that are more pertinent to my interests.  Thats why I suggested you give some synopsis of his critique of today's China, so I/others can have an more elaborate idea about Liu's position.

Flanders is in Belgium, correct?  If I am not mistaken, they do "socialist democracy" or "democratic socialism" like other Western Euro countries which is essentially capitalism at it's core:  the bourgeoisie owns the major means of production, the workers do not.  Correct me if I am wrong there.  I will repeat, I am not interested in dem-soc or soc-dem, I am interested in revolutionary, proletarian socialism, which is doable now or anytime:  it is the overthrow of the bourgeois class by the working class, the latter of whom then control the means of production.  I dont think that us what Liu or Belgium are about.  And I'm not quite sure where you stand, my guess is you are a dem-socialist, which is capitalist "plus extras", thru redistributive taxation.

Watch the critique of Bernie Sanders vids above.
The Revolution does not fall like an apple when it is ripe:  you have to MAKE it fall...

Offline Baruch

Re: Marxism 101: Socialism and Communism
« Reply #14 on: March 10, 2017, 02:28:38 PM »
I think that it should, yes,through logical extension.  My contention is that it frequently doesn't:  that is, in my view, anyone--say Dawkins-- who has given enough thought to conclude there is no God and religion is bad and harmful might also think about the state of humanity as a whole, in political economic social terms, especially when they go around proclamating "freedom" and "free thought", etc.  There is no freedom in capitalism. 

I get pretty annoyed with these people that tour around as speakers making big bucks on the atheist circuit, proclaiming "truth' etc, when they have given ZERO thought or consideration of the untruths of capitalism and it's vicious assault on most people(the working class).  So, an atheist capitalist is pretty much as dangerous as a religious capitalist, sans the religious violence, of course.

A skeptic of religion, isn't necessarily a skeptic of anything else, particularly if their cultural echo chamber is involved ;-)
שלום