/lit/ - Literature

WHY ARE YOU A "MARXIST"/"COMMUNIST"?

>>4334471
WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?
Sheesh.

I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist because I want the national liberation for oppressed nationalities. This can only be done through a struggle for communism, a stateless, classless society.

>>4334508
>I want the national liberation for oppressed nationalities.

WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

EXPLAIN YOUR REASONS IN DETAIL, AND BE AS CONCRETE –NON RHETORICAL– AS POSSIBLE.

I AM GENUINELY INTERESTED IN COMPREHENDING HOW CAN ANYONE BE A "MARXIST"/"COMMUNIST" IN THE TWENTYFIRST CENTURY, WHILST UNDERSTANDING ALL WHICH HIS/HER IDEOLOGY ENTAILS. THIS, OBVIOUSLY, PRESUPPOSING THAT YOU ARE NOT IRRATIONAL.

>>4334508
Christ, why do we get so many kooks on the left?

>>4334508
How exactly does the socialist party bureaucracy lead to a stateless society? Or a classless one, for that matter?

>>4334508
Why do you care about "oppressed nationalities"? What are "oppressed nationalities"? If only certain nationalities are oppressed, does this mean that other nationalities are irrelevant to the question of communism?

>>4334508
how do you intend to prevent markets and inequality from redeveloping in the face of disaster (drought destroys crops, disease outbreak, you built your [thing] near an active volcano, super *storm, tsunami...)

>>4334531
because /lit/ is the most reddit like board on 4chan. everybody with a not US liberal opinion is traditionally shouted down here, the US isn't allowed to be right or good at anything and saying otherwise makes you a flaming lolberterian /pol/tard who's just here to shitpost. I blame the rand spammers from the days of yore on /lit/, completely discredited anybody who doesn't hate almost all aspects of the US government and/or capitalism.

>/lit/ thread on Marx/Communism today
>filled with people shouting down anyone who says anything positive about either whilst claiming that /lit/ is some kind of left-wing /pol/
>mfw it used to be possible to talk civilly about Marx on this board

>>4334525
PLEASE STOP WITH THE CAPS
Stop exploitation (the marxist definition) and class antagonisms for a objectively better society.
>>4334531
Are you calling me a kook?
>>4334545
bureaucracy isn't mutually exclusive with socialism. Anyway, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism leads socialism into communism through the development of the masses, as opposed to the overemphasis on the economy by some Marxist-Leninist and what you might consider "Stalinist". An example of this would be how the people of China would have ousted Mao for being a revisionist. They started realizing that Mao was holding back the revolution.
>>4334548
A person belonging to a nation that is oppressed under imperialism.
>>4334551
Loaded question, can I let someone else answer that?
>>4334577
This.

I'm offering stuff on what are the most generally asked questions about communism. I really don't feel like answer a lot tonight. I just gathered as much shit as I could and booked mark them.

Misconceptions about the USSR
http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm

For the Nazis:
http://www.blackherbals.com/walter_rodney.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/62566203/Lenni-Brenner-51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-With-the-Nazis

>>4334545
Leninist theory postulates that the state is a product of needing to manage class antagonisms first and foremost. In the absence of class antagonisms there is no state.

To this end there's the dictatorship of the proletariat, which fundamentally exists for the same purpose as the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie it replaces, except in the interests of that class rather than the bourgeoisie. The Party bureaucracy exists to serve the proletariat first and foremost, and so when the proletariat no longer has a bourgeoisie to oppose, through the development of socialism and the gradual diminishment of the bourgeoisie and other hostile classes, the Party bureaucracy becomes devoid of purpose. When a socialist state reaches the stage of development where this is supposed to happen we'll know for sure how well this - most vital - part of Leninist theory holds up. Really, there's no concrete examples to go off of.

Deaths-Mao
http://monthlyreview.org/commentary/did-mao-really-kill-millions-in-the-great-leap-forward

Naxalites, Maoist insurgency in India, very big
http://anti-imperialism.com/2011/08/15/naxalite-rebellion/
http://sdonline.org/57/is-the-torch-passing-the-maoist-revolution-in-india/

On Stalin and Stalinism
http://anti-imperialism.com/2012/11/02/an-introduction-to-stalin/

>tfw you found legal exploitation doesn't exist in the first world and all your problems are imagined

>>4334619
That's cool, align yourself with the struggle of those who are exploited and oppressed in the first world.

>>4334628
and by the 1st world

>>4334577
The /pol/ rats make me sad too. It's a fucking disgrace.

P-power to the w-workers...

Anti-Communist, you need some Stalin in your life.

Bumping for Maoistbro destroying /pol/scum in this bread

>>4334604
this. I don't immediately associate bureaucracy with power. I think of taking 8 weeks to fix something small on a car in Post-Stalin USSR

>Captcha: Mechanical Pimpten

Stalin is alive
>>4334601

>>4333774

Post all of that in here

>>4334508
>because I want the national liberation for oppressed nationalities.
Yet communists today want to do away with natives in favor of third-worlders through mass immigration.
Do you favour that viewpoint and if so doesn't that conflict with your view of liberation for the oppressed?

>>4334464

The initial premise is correct, murders under Stalin probably did not exceed 1 million. But then the rest of his argument is just a long list of "what ifs" and "possibilities" that are suppose to lead to the conclusion that everything in Stalinist Russia was actually perfectly normal.

Mass transfers of nationalities that were "suspected" and a general lack of freedom is not mentioned.

But the worst part is that it tries to sweep another fact under the carpet, namely that it weren't reactionaries and fascists who died in the Gulags but Leninists and other communists opposed to Stalin. It's even stated as such in Getty's article I believe, which he claims he read.

I have nothing against people being communists, I have nothing against communists being critical of the historiography of the Soviet Union which indeed has long been a complete pile of shit.

But please accept that mistakes were made in the name of communism. Grow up and learn from the mistakes, it's the only way forward.

>>4334611
>http://monthlyreview.org/commentary/did-mao-really-kill-millions-in-the-great-leap-forward

This however is a great article.

>>4335839

So we want masses of impoverished immigrants fleeing poverty and exploitation washing up our shores welcomed by the capitalist class as cheap labour?

Your image of communism is sadly faulty.

>>4334619
Exploitation in the Marxist sense doesn't mean what you think it means. It's not "some evil smelly badwrong kkkapitalist is being mean to other people and that's bad", it's paying a worker less than the value they produce. There's no morality here, it's a simple observation of supposed fact.

In a (first) world where the middle class is feeling the economic squeeze this is of paramount importance.