It's not private property if the despots owns the property

Socialism is the biggest mistake in human history. Why did anyone ever think that socialism could ever lead to anything even close to communism?

That's your mother

Owned

this was the best you could do, huh?

Tankies are scum and USSR and China were never socialist. Socialism requires abolishing the commodity form, and any country with a central bank, currency, and outward/inward market exchange is in no manner socialist

No, it's socialism. It's not communism though

Show me where Marx said continuing the commodity form is socialism

Perhaps this just means Marx's model to the letter is not an implementable or workable real system? How could you tell? If it were scientific, and not merely reliant on the eternal genius of a single man, perhaps you'd consider revising the model based on its weaknesses when trialed in the field? Expanding on it to cope with exegencies such as those encountered IRL? Otherwise you can simply play the same game, "it wasn't exactly to the letter, everyone was just LARPing". Or are you accusing Lenin, and all other successful Marxist coup leaders, of being incompetent or dishonest? What did they have to say about their own failure to eliminate the commodity form, besides "not the right time yet, any day now tho boys"?

...

Alright, so do you have an argument for how something can be socialist without abolishing the commodity form?

Most definitely

...

Read Capital

I thought it just meant workers owning the means of production? That's the dictionary definition you trot out for recruitment right? I'm sure you're not waking up any normies with dense technical presentations of the MCM circuit etc. Unlike you I don't assume Marxism to be the only form of socialism, nor the correct one. You are simply arguing from the position that Marxism is correct already, which I obviously disagree with. In fact I consider it largely a scheme to usurp and squash organic socialist movements, such as were arising in Russia among the "kulaks", which might have legitimately threatened international finance if allowed to develop.

...

*war "communism".

Maybe if you're a mutualist but not for Marxists. Please do tell us how things like the tendency of the rate of profit to fall and other fundamental contradictions of capitalism are incorrect.

I'm not saying Marx didn't have some good insights. It was a masterwork of political economy. I'm just saying there are major problems with it, and there have been few, if any real updates since it was conceived, almost as if it were treated like an inerrant scripture. Seems to me as though you are unable to argue intelligently or in good faith, understand the questions I've given you, or even grasp that there could be a problem with it in principle, a congenital trait of all Marxists I've encountered. Embarrassing.

yeah it's not like they had to prepare soviet russia for a 5 front war or something

I answered your questions. You can't answer seem to answer my questions, though. Simply saying it's flawed without providing reason or evidence for how it is is arguing in bad faith.

Truly a fine marxist

stop being an idealist

Yeah, pretty much.

Incredible. Oh well, I tried, again. Enjoy recruiting from assblasted American liberals, the weakest, most universally loathed pool of dysfunctional, demoralized faggots of all time, who all secretly despise eachother anyway, further discrediting your movement in the eyes of the actually woke proletariat forever.

I think it's actually the case to some extent with all those cockshotts and communizers of the world, but it simply doesn't sell as well as maymays about historical people.

...

Cotrell and Cockshott, the guys that solve the calculation problem with a supercomputer overlord? Who else, Kliman? Some Japanese guy in the 80's? Your movement used to be worldwide, millions upon millions, all the intellectuals, and all you could do was bitch that you got muscled out of Western liberal universities economics departments (bourgie dictatorship… no shit), therefore somehow couldn't get more than like 10 guys to develop the master blueprint of the wheels of motion of your whole fucking society?

Not to mention the literally millions of theoreticians in the actual Communist countries. What did that amount to? Input output? Lol it's a spreadsheet.

I should add that you can either make the argument that socialism existed in Soviet Union or that the materiel conditions made "war communism" i.e. not socialism a necessity.

The you clearly didn't look. There exists a shitload of books engaging critically with this or that Marxist concept, as historical awareness is kind of the cornerstone of the socialist worldview.

how can someone believe such an erroneous statement?
Oh, I see

I'm having a hard time seeing the argument in this post

It's less of an argument, more of an observation that demonstrates yet another jarring detachment of action and reality, the kind of which you are all by now notorious for.


Marxists agree Capital is #1, but after that you can't agree on a single thing. Why did the commodity form fail to be eliminated? Is it important or not? I mean you can't even agree if Soviet Union was socialist or not. If it is a real materialist science that develops organically, why have you got random clowns like Cockshott, who I don't think is even a Marxist just a shill for a techno-command economy, and a scattershot of other tweaks and amendments that all contradict eachother, rather than a living body of work that improves itself over time incorporating the experiences of actually trying to fucking implement it approaching consensus?

It's all bullshit. Nomenklatura didn't even bother to read it so why should anyone else?

No, you really don't.

You're a parrot. You've got nothing. Just a smokescreen of verbiage and bluff that melts away under the slightest scrutiny.

And I don't see how it means anything. Are you trying to critique something.

Everything about this post is stupid and I feel embarrassed for the idiot that pinned it.

I like posting here sometimes because it reminds me most of you are barely even sentient. Thanks for the chuckle.

Neither Lenin or Castro were despots, they were liberators supported by the majority of the population to get rid of the real despots, and they improved things for most people.

where is the argument? You have made statements calling X theorist stupid. Where is your actual critique here? Adhoms are cheep in the way of argument, but so far that's all you have really supplied.


meant to highlight

To eliminate commodity form would require a substantial change in material circumstance, most nations that where "socialist" as indicated from some more tankie posters in this thread, where never able to preform this due to the fact that most socialist revolutions took place in countries that where playing catch-up to the west.
As I've said, I fail to see he argument in this.
Please reevaluate this statement

Marxian thought means people who came AFTER Marx. Much has been written since, do your fucking research.