What's up with tankies/ML's?

Not every non-ML is an anarchist or a leftcom.

...

The whole point of Marxism Leninism is that there are class contradictions in the world, and until those class contradictions are dealt with, we cannot achieve full communism. It is Marxism applied to real life.

If nobody is profiting off the means of production, how is that not collective ownership? It is just collectively owned by people through the state rather than through the commune.
Private property is bad because there are people starving in the streets while others are driving luxury cars. Socialism's goal is to get rid of private property. Once communism is achieved we can achieve full workplace democracy.

"The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property" - Marx

How? What would you have them do, just "hand over" the means of production to random people? If you want to delve straight into full communism go ahead and do what the CNT did so you can watch your revolution perish.
We don't want to delve straight into full communism because it doesn't work because there are still class contradictions. Not because of some evil plot to bamboozle the workers.
youtube.com/watch?v=3ufTFRGPrCM

"There are arguments against your arguments therefore you are automatically wrong"

DAE everyone is a stupid tankie and everything is not real socialism? #EnlightenedLeftComGang

can you elaborate on this? I don't see anything but buzzwords, are you trying to say that there was no regime change in countries of warsaw pact since the fall of USSR? because most of them are social democracies

Yeah, as far as I know Lenin described it as "a great victory for the proleteriat", but the issue comes when it doesn't evolve past state-capitalism. The USSR had 40 something years to change but didn't. As Orwell described it in 1984 through mr. fascist man "The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power."
Quoting 1984 makes me feel like a 16 y/o

I'm not going to apologise for everything the USSR did, the political elite had been subverted from day one and by the time Stalin died the people in charge weren't even marxists.
But you've got to be delusional to think the USSR was in any condition to be transitioning to socialism in a world where everyone hated them. The choice was stay state capitalist and hope revolutions in the third world eventually overwhelm capitalism worldwide, or try to build socialism only to get crushed because you can't out compete the rest of the capitalist world.

There was no good solution. The USSR was stuck in a catch 22 situation.

What 40 years are you talking about? The first 40 years where they were invaded by Nazis or the last 40 years when they had nukes pointed at them?

because ownership is not determined by profit?

tankies are fucking stupid holy shit

expand on this?

How do you want to establish planned economy without state? Would you like to see free market but with cooperatives instead of private enterprises? And how do you want to defend revolution from foreign argession without battle-worth army and counterespionage services?

Agreed. The social democracy that grew organically in Europe simply preformed better on a material level.

Which doesn't make it collective ownership. The workers need to own the means of production directly, not through a corrupt, revisionist hierarchy.

The fact that you speak about them as "they" clearly demonstrates the rift between the actual workers and the political elite. And yes, I would have them hand over the ownership to the workers of the respective workplaces.

Yeah, the fall of revolutionary Spain had nothing to do with the Franco nor USSR installing the PSUC as a puppet to undermine the anarchist and non-statecapitalist. But that's okay becaue CNT-FAI and POUM were just Trotskyites.

I didn't say that
Also not an argument ;)

Yes, as they had nukes pointing on those same people. Excuses, excuses, when will we achieve socialism then? Apperently implementing workplace democracy is the fucking hardest thing ever.

I'd like to see anything except state-capitalism and capitalism etc. etc.

I'm not saying disarmament and a complete abandonment of realpolitk. I'm saying we literally had a chance to install socialism on a large scale and it was curved by fascist fucks like Stalin and his like, and instead of learning from our mistakes we have apologists and revisionists who want to make those same mistakes for the sake of the lols.

also meant to reply to

sorry for grammar mistakes, english isn't my first language.

I'm not sure what kind of communists do you meet in your life, there are probably just a few hundreds people who would want 100% revisionist USSR resurrection.

They're getting worse and worse by the day. I don't understand how I ever agreed with them.

I'd say this is satire but I know better now

Is this for real?

What does he mean by this?

reddit.com/r/FULLCOMMUNISM/comments/61a05v/reminder_north_korea_is_an_ally_of_the_motherland/

I wish. On the bright side, the post only has been upvoted 43%.

But it won't be effective. First, workers have to do their direct work, not managing their factory or something. Because it is hard work too so we have a division of labour. But workers have to be able to replace their manager if he does wrong. It is called control from below. If workers will own the means directly it will just lead to a lot of separate cooperations on the free market.

ceddit.com/r/FULLCOMMUNISM/comments/61a05v/reminder_north_korea_is_an_ally_of_the_motherland/

Even more entertaining.

But market always leads to competition and capitalism. You need state to ban the private property or to try to educate people to be more altruistic or something

Pure idealism.

Which statement do you disagree?

People want actual tangible solutions and not internet manifestos.
This was achieved by the people's vanguards in both USSR and China. "State capitalism" is a libertarian meme or a meme by social democrat apologists. Resources must be managed somehow, a strong state that acts as a worker's vanguard is the most realistic and practical solution to managing a large, complex economy.

Last time I checked SFR Yugoslavia wasn't an ML state

"""""""""Marxim"""""""""-Leninism

How? Anything to contribute besides Leftcom theory?

This happened in the USSR and also in Maoist China in very beginning and didn't work out at all, especially when 90% of your proletariat are illiterate fucks. They had a choice, reverting back to capitalism or implement central planning. You are on a fucking imageboard on the internet and probably have never managed a workplace or participated in a cooperative in your life - I dare you, go to a local cooperative, join them, partake in votes over which rodenticide has to be used to get rid of the rats in the pipes. You can't just "hand over" everything to "the people", this is in no way feasible.

Are you this naive?

Why do you think the USSR didn't have workplace democracy? 10% of all USSR citizens were active in soviets as well. Also, workplace democracy doesn't fucking equal socialism. Go away RDWolff.

But you are not willing to go the necessary steps.

Yeah, it's for the lolzz xDDDD
Nobody wants to artificially imitate the 20s and 30s you faggot.

This is exactly why Lenin argued for the state to own the means of production.

That's not what he said at all.

That`s literally what he said, with all the tankie ideological bullshit removed.

"""""""""Marxim"""""""""-Leninism

...

You're taking dictatorship of the proletariat out of context. The term dictatorship was simply used to say that the proletariat should have power over the bourgeois. In other words, power of the many over the few, or true democracy. Dictatorship of the proletariat, not dictatorship over the proletariat.

Disgusting

The workers didn't control production or the political system, and the product of their labour was used to enrich corrupt bureaucrats and party officials. It literally wasn't socialism.

Literally a different version of "human nature"

FTFY, closeted capitalist.