It wasn’t gish-gallop, I had a clear set of questions to ask, to which you ignored.
MLs are Socialists. Stalinists are also Socialists. You do not have to agree with them, in any way, but pretending they are not Socialists is a rejection of Marx himself.
Capitalism is defined not strictly by an employer-employee relationship, but necessarily by Capital production, accumulation, and control via Capitalists in an M-C-M’ circuit of commodity production. A worker state, controlled by the proletariat, is Socialist.
MLism enshrines a worker-state, and a rejection of Capitalism as the basis mode of prodiction. You can agree more with Anarchism, Libertarian Socialism, Syndicalism, Democratic Socialism, and even think MLism evil, all while recognizing it correctly as Socialist.
Have you read Marx? Critique of the Gotha Programme might help you understand Leftism a bit better.
I am neither a tankie nor brigading, but it’s telling that you haven’t actually explained any of your views, and just ran away.
You only successfully managed to say that trans people liking hexbear means hexbear isn’t against bigotry, which is utter nonsense, and that you don’t actually understand the prime distinctions of Capitalism from a Marxist perspective, causing you to misunderatand the entirety of the Marxist history.
Even if you take nothing else away from this conversation, I ask that you make the barest effort to understand Capitalism itself, what drives it, why it must be abolished, and how. Marx is certainly my preference, but Anarchists also have good, modern theory for you to read. Right now, you aren’t yet capable of distinguishing what is Capitalism and what is Socialism, so how can you ever hope to move forward?
I’ll leave you with an excerpt from Critique of the Gotha Programme (specifically because it is the closest Marx gets to outlining what a Socialist State may look like, which is also why I recommended it specifically earlier, as opposed to a more beginner-friendly work) so as to point out the important distinctions between Statist Socialism and Capitalism, most notably the fact that in State Socialism, Workers are not alienated from the product of their labor, as instead of belonging to a Capitalist who competes in markets, the products of a Worker State belong to the Workers as a whole, who democratically decide what to do with them:
“Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor.”
It wasn’t gish-gallop, I had a clear set of questions to ask, to which you ignored.
MLs are Socialists. Stalinists are also Socialists. You do not have to agree with them, in any way, but pretending they are not Socialists is a rejection of Marx himself.
Capitalism is defined not strictly by an employer-employee relationship, but necessarily by Capital production, accumulation, and control via Capitalists in an M-C-M’ circuit of commodity production. A worker state, controlled by the proletariat, is Socialist.
MLism enshrines a worker-state, and a rejection of Capitalism as the basis mode of prodiction. You can agree more with Anarchism, Libertarian Socialism, Syndicalism, Democratic Socialism, and even think MLism evil, all while recognizing it correctly as Socialist.
Have you read Marx? Critique of the Gotha Programme might help you understand Leftism a bit better.
Removed by mod
I am neither a tankie nor brigading, but it’s telling that you haven’t actually explained any of your views, and just ran away.
You only successfully managed to say that trans people liking hexbear means hexbear isn’t against bigotry, which is utter nonsense, and that you don’t actually understand the prime distinctions of Capitalism from a Marxist perspective, causing you to misunderatand the entirety of the Marxist history.
Even if you take nothing else away from this conversation, I ask that you make the barest effort to understand Capitalism itself, what drives it, why it must be abolished, and how. Marx is certainly my preference, but Anarchists also have good, modern theory for you to read. Right now, you aren’t yet capable of distinguishing what is Capitalism and what is Socialism, so how can you ever hope to move forward?
I’ll leave you with an excerpt from Critique of the Gotha Programme (specifically because it is the closest Marx gets to outlining what a Socialist State may look like, which is also why I recommended it specifically earlier, as opposed to a more beginner-friendly work) so as to point out the important distinctions between Statist Socialism and Capitalism, most notably the fact that in State Socialism, Workers are not alienated from the product of their labor, as instead of belonging to a Capitalist who competes in markets, the products of a Worker State belong to the Workers as a whole, who democratically decide what to do with them:
“Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor.”
-Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme