Communism Thread

Page 333 of 1355
Reply
  • Dec 15, 2021
    TragedyBerlusconi
    https://twitter.com/parasociality/status/1470862745813798917

    Lol

  • Dec 15, 2021
    TragedyBerlusconi
    https://twitter.com/parasociality/status/1470862745813798917

    this lacks context and is half assed information the twitter user doesn't understand, but since the guy at the end of is QRTing Nick Land, that's to be expected.
    Wallstreet (partially) financed the bolsheviks (mainly Trotsky) because they Tsars' feudalism was still considered prototypical and as WS looked for global investment growth, feudalism was incompatible as an investment model, and thought the bolsheviks overthrowing the tsar would modernize the country and result in it becoming a place of possible investment (which if you skip about 100 years forward post-USSR and think about it as a long game then maybe they weren't wrong (sarcasm)). They also expected the fall of the Tsar to result in more land being available to expand on because they didn't think it'd be replaced with a competent successor. Lenin basically took the money and f***ed over foreign influencers, and Trotsky is a different story I'll get to in a second.
    Now before that it's important to note that the book he's referencing has a lot of bullshit in it. He found some basic links which are interesting, but much of the book is speculatory without evidence derived from said initial findings and makes wild conclusions that aren't provable or falsifiable.
    With that said, you have to understand that there's a reason why a lot of foreign governments and private intersts were more interested in Trotsky than someone like Stalin and Lenin. It's because Trotsky's bullshit branch of Leftism is compatible with not just capitalism, but also is compatible with the concept of hegemonic asset control by private entities and the assumption that private capital could become a revolutionary force in and of itself. This bullshit theory but influential linkage down the line from Trotsky became incredibly engrained in much of western bourgeois in that overlapping area between politics and economics. Not because they actually believed it per-se (not to say they all didn't), but because it was a compatible way of providing bread & circuses through the disguise of Leftism while furthering capital interests. There's a reason Neoconservatism as an ideology emerged from former Trotskyists

  • Dec 15, 2021
    TragedyBerlusconi
    https://twitter.com/parasociality/status/1470862745813798917

    3 likes is this your twitter ? lol

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    6 replies

    some bs i found at work lol



  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    Womanpuncher69

    some bs i found at work lol



    my friends uncle went to this once lmao.
    in the city they advertise this s*** so heavily. even remember years ago in school they were giving out tickets to see it.

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    2 replies
    Womanpuncher69

    some bs i found at work lol



    I think this s*** is affiliated with Falun Gong

  • Dec 15, 2021
    Fargo

    my friends uncle went to this once lmao.
    in the city they advertise this s*** so heavily. even remember years ago in school they were giving out tickets to see it.

    i see billboards of this s*** in the US

  • Dec 15, 2021

    s*** pisses me off everytime

    not to mention its gotta be some of the corniest s*** of all time just to even say that

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    p apollo

    I think this s*** is affiliated with Falun Gong

    what makes u say that

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    spongebob

    what makes u say that

    Falun Gong expats basically started it iirc

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ASAKI

    Falun Gong expats basically started it iirc

    damn of all things 2 go and do

  • Dec 15, 2021
    Womanpuncher69

    some bs i found at work lol



    This is all over the bay

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    p apollo

    I think this s*** is affiliated with Falun Gong

    It is

  • Dec 15, 2021
    americana

    It is

    they went out big bad

    except if they getting hella $ off it then its like a big diss track which is kinda funny

  • Dec 15, 2021

    China might as well have billboards:

    "America Before Slavery"

    or some s*** to get back at this bullshit since

  • Dec 15, 2021
    Womanpuncher69

    some bs i found at work lol



    yea people keep putting these up in my work but i work w a lot of tibetan expats so i just chalk it up to material conditions

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply


    anyways yall get ur bonus check this month or what

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    edited
    ·
    1 reply
    ARCADE GOON

    First of all Marxists generally differentiate between private property and personal property. Your toothbrush is your personal property because it doesn't have any economic use. Private property is property that you can put to use economically.

    Property, both personal and private, first appeared around the Neolithic Era, so about ~10.000 B.C. It actually has a lot to do with agriculture, with climate and humans settling down after being nomads. I can't go in detail about all this, but basically, because humans went away from being hunters and gatherers into becoming town-dwelling people, many changes happened:

    1. In most climates, you suddenly needed to sow seeds months ahead and store food to survive the winter, whereas for hunter & gatherers, their rewards were more immediate. The knowledge required to cultivate land is much higher than the knowledge you needed to hunt and gather. Therefore, the younger generations had to depend more on their elders than before once agriculture appeared.

    2. Most hunter & gatherer societies were matrilocal, meaning the mother and grandmother more or less stayed in a general area while it was the men who were more nomadic and wandered off into new areas and settled into new tribes. With agriculture, this changed: You suddenly needed most men to stay in the same spot to cultivate the lands. Since men are naturally born in a higher rate than women (ratio of 105 to 100) and many women died of childbirth, the situations reversed: No longer did the men wander off to new women, but women from far away were - often forcibly - brought towards the men.

    3. With the knowledge-barrier, the winter-barrier and the gender-ratio-barrier, you suddenly had a situation where the elder members of a society had lots of power: The young people depended on them to survive and to have s***and start families, because they were the ones controlling the grains, the storages, the animals and the flow of women. Hunter & gatherers barely had any wars. Wars mostly started after agriculture appeared, and were often tied to the obduction of women from other tribes. In order to stop these bride-stealing wars, the elders of different tribes agreed to trade women and animals. Similarly, the domestication of animals began around this time. Since most people were not nomadic, they now began to develop animosities towards their settled neighbors, and started raids over abducting cattle. It is also because of this that the concept of "yours versus mine" appeared.

    4. In order to uphold this order of elders ruling over the youngsters, ideology and "state mythologies" first appeared around this time. This is when property truly started. In primitive-communism, there was no real sense of property, just like in a family, people just cared about each other and tried to share. Trading was also rare, because you can only trade if you have something the other person desires yet does not possess - this doesn't really work with hunter and gatherers who could barely build anything and did not have any trade routes to speak of. But once the first villages and towns appeared with agriculture, trading also appeared, and with it the property relations of "yours and mine".

    5. Around this time is also when inheritances played more of a role and legal systems first developed. In pre-class society, it is hard to imagine what could even be inherited. The entire tribe was seen as one extended family. But once societies switched from matrilocal to patrilocal, more emphasis was put on marriage and monogamy, on marrying into another family, on inheritance, on women marrying into the right families. Fatherhood first became a legal concept around this time, because property was beginning to become tied to settled families. Fatherhood didn't matter in one extended family-tribe, but it did matter when several families now began to live next to each other. Motherhood is of course biologically visible, but fatherhood isn't, so a legal system had to appear around this time to adjudicate this issue.

    6. Now this system continued on a for a bit ... this is way earlier than you were asking for. In between the era I described and the late ancient era/early medieval era you asked for, technology got much better and new tools were invented. With the invention of these tools, it was now possible for highly knowledgeable societies to use powerful weapons. Some tribes were ahead of others and increased the logic of taking women and cattle to all people. With this, slavery appeared and become a dominant mode of production.

    For example, the Roman Empire's economic success was in a large part based upon how many foreigners they were able to enslave. Slavery is of course also a form of property: The human is literally your private property.

    For various reasons that I won't go into here, slavery slowly progressed into feudalism, and the emphasis went from "owning people" to "owning land".

    so you say there was 'private property' in agricultural societies due to the fact of settling down and creating villages and working a plot; but there wasn't 'yours vs. mine'

    isn't this missing something? private property isn't just the relationship with eachother and saying 'ok well we can share the surplus from this'; there is that other component, the relationship the people together have with the land, no? not just the relationship the people have together?

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    krishna bound

    the economics of rome are complicated and not that distinctive from modern economies ironically. it had mortgages, credit, banking, loans, taxes, and had private property ownership. government could arbitrarily seize private property though. as far as i'm aware rome literally had actual private property except "private" meant "private until someone in the government decides to seize it", it was more like a mutual understood lease from the government itself. Even Rome had issues with land ownership - i think something like most of the north african territory was legit owned by less than a handful of people? Rome even had legit credit crises and inflation problems lol
    Greece wasnt really that different, theres a reason why early american founders soyfaced over the idea of rome & greece and wanted the early us to mirror it economically
    when it comes a lot of other kingdoms around the time even though they weren't feudal alot of them were pseudo-feudal in that they basically were in practice not that difference from feudalism albeit with nuances like standardization or state aid, but still had classes and whatnot

    was there rent in ancient rome?

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    space0cadet

    was there rent in ancient rome?

    my understanding is there's no proof of lease-style occupancy rentals in the modern sense, but there was a somewhat partial equivalent of essentially "shares" of land distributed by a formal top-level owner down to individuals who then could sleep in "apartments" from the share of land. those in apartments paid a partial share on the land tax on the property relative to their "shares" on top of whatever else the deal was. Commercial property by comparison (i.e. a shop stall in a market) was very common to "rent" in a semi-modern standard but w/o the idea of a lease and instead the simple concept of a recurring/rotating fee

    note that there were literally debtor-creditor payoffs in a manner comparable to now - this is what the Kalends day was for in rome (when debts were due). debts may represent a debt for living somewhere or renting a stall, but also could have reprsented things like loans, mortages, etc.

    some interesting links:

    cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-studies/article/abs/rental-market-in-early-imperial-rome/81ACAE358446ADBEB194FC2EC6C3A20F (if youre in college you should be able to get access to this)

    muse.jhu.edu/book/33675 (same as the above)

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insula_(building) - overview of roman "apartment building" equivalents

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    edited

    really intelligent posts by people who come in here and regurgitate some bullshit anti-communist drivel
    haven't seen that before

  • Dec 15, 2021
    ·
    1 reply
    krishna bound

    my understanding is there's no proof of lease-style occupancy rentals in the modern sense, but there was a somewhat partial equivalent of essentially "shares" of land distributed by a formal top-level owner down to individuals who then could sleep in "apartments" from the share of land. those in apartments paid a partial share on the land tax on the property relative to their "shares" on top of whatever else the deal was. Commercial property by comparison (i.e. a shop stall in a market) was very common to "rent" in a semi-modern standard but w/o the idea of a lease and instead the simple concept of a recurring/rotating fee

    note that there were literally debtor-creditor payoffs in a manner comparable to now - this is what the Kalends day was for in rome (when debts were due). debts may represent a debt for living somewhere or renting a stall, but also could have reprsented things like loans, mortages, etc.

    some interesting links:

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-studies/article/abs/rental-market-in-early-imperial-rome/81ACAE358446ADBEB194FC2EC6C3A20F (if youre in college you should be able to get access to this)

    https://muse.jhu.edu/book/33675 (same as the above)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insula_(building) - overview of roman "apartment building" equivalents

    where did you learn all this s*** dude
    probably top 5 most knowledgeable user on this site

  • Dec 15, 2021
    space0cadet

    where did you learn all this s*** dude
    probably top 5 most knowledgeable user on this site

    I appreciate it, but I think it’s a slightly skewed perception because I only reply to stuff I know about and have a tendency to write longer posts so it seems that way. I definitely don’t think I know everything or anything, there’s just certain topics I know a lot about because I just read a lot and have a good memory, and I think it’s just luck those topics surface on this sxn a lot

  • deadacc


    anyways yall get ur bonus check this month or what