this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

46385 readers
112 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Any "leftist" that thinks the fact that China has billionaires and therefore isn't actually Socialist needs to read Marx and Engels. There are many such liberals here in these comments. Marx predicted Socialism to be the next mode of production because markets centralize and create intricate methods of planning. As such, he stated that folding private into the public would be gradual. From the Manifesto:

The essential condition for the existence, and for the sway of the bourgeois class, is the formation and augmentation of capital; the condition for capital is wage-labour. Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the labourers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the labourers, due to competition, by their revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie, therefore, produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable.

In even simpler terms, from Engels in Principles of Communism:

Question 17 : Will it be possible to abolish private property at one stroke?

Answer : No, no more than the existing productive forces can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. Hence, the proletarian revolution, which in all probability is approaching, will be able gradually to transform existing society and abolish private property only when the necessary means of production have been created in sufficient quantity.

That doesn't mean billionaires are good to have, necessarily, either. It remains a contradiction, but not an uncalculated one. I highly recommend anyone here read China has Billionaires. As much as Marxists want to lower wealth inequality as much as possible, in the stage of developmemt the PRC is at this would get in the way of development, and could cause Capital Flight and brain drain. Moreover, billionaires provide an easy scapegoat that the USSR didn't have, and thus all problems of society were directed at the state. It's important to consider why a Marxist country does what it does, and not immediately assume you know better.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (8 children)

All those uyghur CEOs man.

Laughs in temu/shein

[–] Grapho@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Are you dumb libs still claiming an Uyghur genocide despite being like 10 years, zero evidence, and multiple western sources calling out the atrocity propaganda? How does that look like, if Xinjiang's economy is growing enormously, there's tons of video evidence from travel bloggers of the bustling cultural and religious activities there? Plugging your eyes and ears to let the state department guide you doesn't seem like a wise way to go about anything.

The people boosting claims of an Uyghur genocide are still denying and aiding the fucking Palestinian genocide ffs.

[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (14 children)

Ah yes! Vloggers funded by Xi showing the bustling life there. Of course this is a clear indication of good faith acting from the Chinese government. Usually i reject authority, but I'm taking the word of Chinese authorities here because it advances my agenda. Look at me, I'm a Marxist that likes to operate under logical and scientific praxis

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This thread is funny because it’s filled with a bunch of libs criticizing but bringing nothing of value to the table except vibes, and communists and comrades providing extensive source material to support their arguments, while avoiding low-hanging fruit like ad hominem.

If you’ve ever done any sort of research into democratic socialism, you’d quickly learn that this is the way. Criticism and self-criticism are at the forefront of cadre training and will make you a better person. If you view a person trying to provide you with educational material as your enemy while you spout off vibe-driven nonsense, you’re not getting the picture and are still hindered by your country’s propaganda, as well your own apathy and ignorance. You’re criticizing people that are passionate because they see a chance to have a better world for all working class—you included—while responding with empty words.

Unchain yourself from the criticisms of figures your country has implanted in you over your lifetime, and think in terms of ideas.

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

and communists and comrades providing extensive source material to support their arguments, while avoiding low-hanging fruit like ad hominem.

sorry I'm late

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Really, I thibk anyone considering themselves a Leftist needs to read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of "Brainwashing." Both are excellent examples of why people don't change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn't mean Communists don't do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these "licenses" to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

One is authoritarian in nature, the other is protestant in nature. These are not the same thing

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)

What are you talking about?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›