First of all, im newfag here

Jesus christ.

Marx wasn't talking about Medipods like in Prometheus you fucking faggot.

Marx was taking specially about labor vouchers in a potential transitory society progressing towards communism. Why don't you read Marx yourself?

No, by the entire society. The state in Marxism-Leninism becomes so encompassing that it ceases to be a state, and rather becomes the entirety of society. Proletarian state is totally different from a liberal state, it doesn't adhere to the dichotomy of the public sector and the private sector.

bookzz.org/book/862537/add33c

Read this my nigga (Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism), good entry stuff. Don't bother with most meme ideologies floating around this board like Bookchin.

whats wrong with bookchin?

It's a cheap cop-out because it abandons class struggle and materialism for some vague shit like human essence and hierarchy.

It pretends to be the successor of Marxism but it is in fact just a bizarre bastardization of it with some hippie stuff mixed it. Bookchin was pissed at some Trots because they were authoritarian so he decided to craft some ideology against Classical Marxism.

there was hierarchy in the USSR
and why do you think that it abandons class struggle?

You collect medicine at the distribution center, obviously.

There nothing inherently wrong with hierarchy per se as it is such a nebulous concept that hardly anybody can define. Bookchin himself admitted that. Marxism is about exploitation and unjustifiable hierarchy. If someone with a medical degree tells me how to treat an injury, it's a hierarchy, but one I gladly submit myself under.

Basically he has some weird cultural concept of the proletariat, claiming that the industrial proletariat doesn't exist anymore in the First World. He thinks the proletariat is a milieu and not a relation to the means of production. It doesn't matter if you are a hipster graphic designer in an advertisement agency or a worker at an assembling line. You are both proletarian.

This is why it abandons - in praxis - class struggle. You can see this in Rojava where they basically keep private property because they don't recognize the explotive nature of wage labor or surplus extraction, but rather have some superficial notion of hierarchy which they want to overcome by voting on how they infringing the property rights of the resident Kulaks there instead of dissolving such a notion altogether. It's some sort of leftist version of collaborationism. I don't support this because not only because of its rejection of materialism, but also because it's economically inferior if you want to progress towards a communist society.

Hope it goes well!

That's not hierarchy(a fixed chain of command), but authority. Anarchist generally support your example of authority, calling it "rational authority" and pitching it against illegitimate authority, which they call "irrational authority". Irrational authority for example is a police officer telling you what beverage you're allowed to drink in public.

And if you'd actually read Bookchin you'd know he simply didn't see the proletariat as a revolutionary subject anymore, instead emphasizing the role of the "citizen".

Why not? Its free and doctors are normally not the psychotic types.
Because it cures people and it really doesn't take that much work nowadays.

Someone because they think its usefull
See above. Also robots.
He does. He will see his medicine save lives.

Little tip. Moneyless society cant happen tomorrow.

Lmao, no. More reminiscent of a universal healthcare system. Not utopian in the slightest, but already a reality in many countries. Seriously tankie, get your shit together.

Which is retarded and based on a wrong interpretation of Marx. The entire society is divided between proletariat, bourgeoisie and unemployed lumpen. Everybody working for a wage is a proletarian. Why the fuck shouldn't the proletariat be the revolutionary subject anymore? Honestly the entire discussion is stupid. Why even care about this if you don't eventually aim to undermine class struggle?

And btw, I'm someone who doesn't use Marxist jargon outside of leftist circles.

If you really are, good luck on your surgery, user. Surgery isn't as scary as it seems. Having a good anesthesiologist is important as well. Take care.

Why do you want to get rid of money?

I can understand not liking fiat currency, and governments printing and shitting on it for war, but why get rid of money as a concept?

I personally think moneylessness is in the far future only and there are countless things to do before that. It's not really fundamental to focus on for now.

There's nothing inherent in moneyless society that makes it unable to function. If you run a farm there's nothing actually stopping you from giving food to whoever you want. It might sound like hand waving but I think this is not as complicated as it seems. Imagine it working like this: if you don't do your share of work in society, then you get a basic subsistence or perhaps nothing. If you do your share, then you get access to whatever you want. If there's a shortage in certain areas of work then make this known and people will fill them up.

Basic income trials have been shown to not make people stop working. Doctors in Cuba still choose to become doctors even though their pay is far below what they would get in the US, in enough numbers to send more abroad than the G8 combined. There are some instances of production for use being implemented. People do actually want to make a positive difference in the world and will do it if their needs are taken care of. If there's an opportunity to have a society where every person is entitled to the fruits of all labour with minimal work then they'd want to keep it going, and do their part to keep it up.

It would be like today's moral imperative to work meme except you actually have an opportunity to do meaningful work and you only have to do 4 hours a day or less and can have anything you want in your free time.