"i just hate their rhetoric and ideas" damn that bad huh

you've read most of marx? and are still saying that?

During his lifetime, Karl Marx published at least FIFTEEN complete works, many of them multi-volume books, as well as numerous pamphlets, articles,...

Or you've read most of the communist manifesto lol

I am i forgot to tell u

sike

english isnt my first language my bad sorry i'm trying to improve

Forgive me then, I almost feel bad now

you're still doing pretty well with it not being your first language, it's just difficult weaving together all the terminology into succinct sentences and having it all make sense...

I will say one thing though, Communist thought is not limited to the state owning all of the means of production or resources

Socialist/communist theory and practice is a much larger umbrella under which that one definition/description is just one explanation it could have imo

Many believe that socialism does need the state, to use a firm hand to eradicate poverty homelessness, hunger etc, and eliminate inequality that leaves people to needlessly suffer, until a communal system can be built to where the people are essentially the government,

I think the easiest way to see it is socialism is the larger part where we're undoing all of the abusive and exploitative systems (underpaying people, maltreatment in the workplace, uneven pay for workload (i.e. a CEO making billions upon billions while the worker is struggling to pay rent even with working double full time multiple jobs)

Socialism is adaptable to the situations specific to any country and like with any state/place, there will be different cultural aspects mixed in that look different in one country to the next

Robert earned a Bachelor of Science degree in the area of landscape architecture in the College of Architecture and Urban Planning from Texas A&M University in 1974.

^ so this man with a B.S. in landscaping architecture from 1974 is the one informing you what communism and socialism is, (on the thoughtco site)

ok

Don't worry, we all learn from making mistakes

I was trolling a bit when making this statement, but for real, I just can't stand marx rhetoric for the most part

Yes, you're right it's not limited to the state owning all ressources, but the ressources management is so so important in today's society that it's just surreal to me that someone would let a total control of that to a single state or an insitution

I get that you see socialism as a prism to human right and human condition, but these fights are not inherent to socialism

Even in a total socialist state, people would suffer as schopenhauer said; I no longer believe that all suffering and sadness can be prevented

"Many believe that socialism does need the state, to use a firm hand to eradicate poverty homelessness, hunger etc, and eliminate inequality that leaves people to needlessly suffer, until a communal system can be built to where the people are essentially the government"

many can believe you dont need a state but when you are dealing with millions of people you would have to have some form of government.

I enjoy Schopenhauer from what I've listened to about and read of him, but he also emphasizes the importance on easing the suffering, while you're here. You can't expect to be 100% happy because nothings going to be perfect. So from what I understand of Schopenhauer, easing ones suffering is the main focus, in which I connect socialism directly to being focused on improving the lives of millions of people and eliminating needless suffering.

Of course human existence includes suffering just in general, but socialism, I believe would ease that suffering so much better than the current systems in place. Because it focuses on the social aspect rather than capital. Like communism emphasizes the communal aspect over capital as well.

Therefore I do think those fights do warrant a move toward socialism regardless. Socialism also ought to allow adaptations to the creation of said changes that make sense specific to each society or otherwise. So it won't look the same in Place #1, as it does in Place #2 if that makes sense

To be fair a lot of older writing can seem very dated at times so I kinda get your frustrations with something from the 19th century, but I think Marx holds up for a reason, at least his greater points and contribution.

People who identify with Communism are Socialists, but not all Socialists identify with Communism.

Communism is ultimately an end state.

You’re a libertarian socialist?

@Synopsis

Uhm no lmao

Anyways I hate terms like that

Chomsky’s a libertarian socialist.

isn't that just fancy term for anarchist lmfao

chomsky isn't really that respected in the left anymore due to selling out in academia and spewing anti-soviet propoganda, ppl much prefer micheal parenti bc he's been based 100% throughout his life and never sold out to yale.

Yes lol

I know

I respect my anarchist comrades but all the srs ones just call themselves anarchists not lib socialists

by the same logic anarco-capitalist = libertarian ?

Nah anarcho capitalist is just a meme ideology. Right wing libertarians are just braindead individuals who are too p**** to call themselves fascist

A meme ideology