Tito

He was a revisionist, Market Socialism IS revisionism. Not a Hoxhaist btw.

There's nothing wrong with revisionism

hi deng

Stalin was the first Revisionist.

look, wait a few years before you post on Holla Forums

or at least don't tripfag

why, will i be doxed like rebel? ha

no because we don't want children on our board

FUCK REVISIONISM
LONG LIVE YOSIF VISARNOVICH STALINA WA ANVAR KHALIL HXOJA

Rebel himself while he was drunk mate

many young people visit this board

Cool. Doesn't excuse them for being here

Revisionism wasn't the problem, the problem was Deng being shit.

As long as the economic activity of the people benefits the people, rather than bourge, you're on the right track.

I don't care how you get there.

Chilean here, the PCCh is literally the definition of Chilean revisionism as they openly embrace class collaboration, by actively seeking electoral fronts with the national bourgeoisie under the guise of conquering "democratic-bourgeois demands" as if we were still a fucking agrarian country (hint: we're not).

also Market "Socialism" is not only revisionism, but actively mantaining an embrionary version of capitalism since monetary exchange (rather than democratic centralized planning) is still the backbone of the economy.

I believe the Titoist tendency in particular was a legitimate response to the inefficiency and bureaucratization of planning in the USSR, but today, implementing a way to plan the economy democratically and according to a central plan is no longer a problem given the computing and networking technologies we can access. Hell, today pretty much all stock trading is done by supercomputers running complex predictive algorithms. Porky already plans his economy this way.

I recommend you guys read the .pdfs attached (as an introduction to the idea of cybernetically planned socialism), and the Soviet Cybernetics thread where we speculate about these topics: >>>1477348

fuck got the link wrong:

...

We're doing this in another thread now?

OK. The use of capital to extract surplus value from workers is capitalism.
If the workers own the means, there's no extraction of surplus value, which makes it NOT CAPITALISM.

Same reason the USSR is not socialism - the workers didn't own the means of production, an unelected state did.

marxist leninism is revisionism too

"Revisionist" needs to stop being a word we sling around. Marx isn't Jesus, just doing something that he wouldn't have agreed with isn't inherently bad or wrong. Each idea and policy should be addressed on its own merits, not its adherence to Marxist orthodoxy.

this explains a lot