Why is it that anarchists are so childish? Most of the time they fail to see beyond western made lies...

Why is it that anarchists are so childish? Most of the time they fail to see beyond western made lies , have no knowledge of theory and are just liberal LARPers in general. I have more sympathy for left communists who actually read and learn. Very few anarchists actually know a damn fucking thing about socialism. We should just ban the dumb ones for a few months until they read some basic marxist texts ffs.

Other urls found in this thread:


Nice bait
Wtf are you talking about?

Oh look, porky's here with some more divide and conquer, what a surprise.

A pathological hatred for a vague definition of heirarchy and non-horizontal organization. Their theory hasn't been updated meaningfully in decades and frankly many of them are a bunch of phillistines just everyone on this fucking board. That being said, they have their heart in the right place and I admire their spirit if not their ignorance.

Also, gtfo cointelpro.

Lately i've been seeing some reddit tier arguments against the soviets and all that shit, it pisses the fuck out of me how the just repeat literal LIBERAL arguments.

I get called retarded for wanting left unity, but some anarchists really should try to understand things correctly, they make themselves look like teenage newposters.

90% of the anarchists, that includes anarchists on this board, use right-wing or liberal slander to defame existing socialist states. Their arguments are never based on theory, they are always going for the moral/emotional leverage by regurgitating known anti-communist authors of the likes of Conquest or Applebaum.

When you point this out, or provide evidence contrary to that narrative, they react exactly like your smug John Oliver type liberal: They will call you a conspiracy theorist, nutcase or simply appeal to the liberal dogma of conformity ("Everybody hates you! Defending Stalin will alienate everybody!").

Found your problem.

Honestly it's not really COINTELPRO because there is no reason to really try to be inclusive towards anarchist in the first place. I'm having an anarchist friend, but the historical experience is that once they would have to subordinate their personal dogma under the common good of the revolution, they will abandon you. Personally, I've tried to work with anarchist but most of the times they show up to protests drunk or similar shit. It's not really helpful.

They’re probably not anarchists tbh. Any leftist that puts idpol before anti capitalism and Marxist theory is no comrade regardless of their tendency. If it is idpol you are in fact referring to

Have you considered addressing drunks as problematic instead of expanding it unnecessarily to include anarchists? There are drunk ☭TANKIE☭s who are just as useless too.

I have my own personal reasons for ascribing to the libertarian wing of leftism, but at the end of the day I am an anti capitalist first. Whatever character the revolution takes be it authoritarian or libertarian is largely nuance. My only hope is that the opposite situation would be reciprocated by ☭TANKIE☭s as well.
Also any 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧anarchist🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 that attacks the Soviet Union/Stalin’s/insert socialist state here to normies is no comrade anyway. Here or in leftists space there is no issue with debate and you shouldn’t take this personally. It should only be seen as opportunity to strengthen your own thoughts through argument

Somewhat, other times is pure ignorance that triggers me

i bet LARPing is healthy for the brain. I bet it helps stimulate areas of the brain that were previously underestimated.

I like anarchists like you

At least it promotes creativity which is something you kind of lose as you grow older i guess?


It's my personal experience. My Marxist-Leninist chapter is quite disciplined, that doesn't mean they can't be drunks but they don't show up drunk to political events. Anarchists I meet show up in full smashie gear and smell like the 1€ wine from Aldi. But I guess most of them are Antifa and not ideologically cohesive anarchists.

I can get behind this. And yeah, the constant attacks on the USSR and other states is just annoying. You know you are doing something fishy when you spend more time attacking other socialists than capitalists. The problem is, some orgas, especially Trots, have established this as a way to lure people in, like: "You know socialism? You it's usually evil dictators, right? Well, our brand of socialism is actually against all that and just wants flowers and rainbows, and they were all capitalists or fascists anyway!"

People who join orgas under such pretext are highly prone to turn liberal once they meet an educated/more intelligent right-winger/liberal who is pulling off the "so it wasn't real socialism" thing.

Do not presume that "tankies" and other vulgar Marxists on this site and in real life are free from the phillistinism that plagues many wannabe revolutionaries. We all must expand our minds and fully understand the legacy of the communist movement to make sure we do not make the same mistakes nor repeat ineffective praxis and bad theory. Me included.

This but for theorylets too as a few in the thread have complained about. Why needlessly expand it to anarchists when you can focus on the real issue of not reading which applies to members of all ideologies?

YES, mostly those twitter/reddit "Leninists" who are just looking for a cool label. Even if we disagree on our methords the goal is the same and we should organize together as much as possible, ideological differences should strengthen us

I meant under-stimulated of course, sorry. My spell-correction sometimes gets a little strange.

There has been studies made on people that have been master painters, and on people with zero painting skills. They did fMRI scans on people that draw and people that observe those who draw and discovered the following: When you observe someone drawing, your brain thinks you are drawing and behaves just as you were the one drawing.

This means that you can generate neural experience, despite not actually moving a muscle. Which means your brain "copies" other peoples brainpatterns just by sheer imagination. spooky stuff.

I fucked up, i came here to rant and ended up eating my words when the anarcho communist user ITT showed up.


Perhaps it should be encouraged that we read works from tendencies we don’t ascribe to. As an example I think all leftists could benefit from reading mutual aid, as an example, as it provides historical and scientific arguments for cooperation and against competition. I mean I read Marx and largely agree with him but all leftists should read Marx. I think there are also plenty of things Lenin said and did that are critical to all leftists, such as the concept of dual power. And I personally find it amazing what he was able to pull off in Russia against the czar. Truly inspirational

So I’m of the opinion of:
We can argue about the government after the capitalist class has been desposed

Some of us are very critical of North Korea, though im not sure about those private propety and market claims. Also it's not really a dynasty, Kim Il Sung really opposed his son getting his position in the government.

weird how i have mostly the same opinions as you yet i feel more closely aligned with leninism. Huh

Yes and Stalin wanted to step down from his position during his time within the USSR. The fact of the matter is, it still didn't happen. Not saying that this is liable to happen again within an ML revolution should it ever occur, but it's not a mistake we should repeat twice.

This. While we could argue over theory and praxis it doesn't do much to actually build socialism within the west.

I haven't even mentioned the DPRK you idiot. There is a DPRK thread in the catalog, post your shit in there so it can be properly addressed. Your article doesn't even say what you claim btw.
I'm sure a small country threatened by nuclear extinction by the rest of the world can suspend on the state. Dimwit.

It’s whatever dude. Wasn’t about making you eat your words, and I’m sorry you were being triggered by bad comrades. Just trying to spread a little good vibes and solidarity

The Same could be said about M-Ls who have such little an idea of what socialism is that they end up supporting Dynastic Ethno-nationalists such as in the case of North korea
Or end up supporting states such as Cuba which are state-capitalist

Except I know for a fact that you constantly shill for a revisionist state.

Ancoms who think this way are mostly fine. However, we are still going to clash about how to start things. Fact is, MLs think that their system is the best way to get revolution. Part of the process of proving that is always criticizing anarchists. However, I'd be perfectly happy to support an anarchist revolution that didn't depend on imperialist puppetry like S.D.F. and wasn't engaged in opportunism or wrecking. I guess EZLN qualifies unless there's something bad I don't know about it.

Why don't you read our texts? Anarchists aren't very interested in socialism per se, because many tenants of socialist dogma are very liberal in nature. 'Liberality' / mainly democracy isn't huge for anarchists, especially Stirner, Robert Anton Wilson, the TAZ guy et al. because democracy is placing what's called Rationality at the highest pinnacle, and they believe that ordering society around a perfectly rational logic is doomed to failure. It's a matter of experience: most of us use our intuition rather than our mind.
Smoke weed or do breathing exercises and you'll start to tap into this.

What about the Greek Anarchists? If killing fascists and helping refugees is opportunist, that's pretty shitty my dude.

I agree fuck revisionism, Cuba is on the edge of pulling a China and North Korea is a grey zone for me

Well Marcos started off as a maoist who read gramsci and later adapted his views for the native communities

No those dudes are cool and would beat the shit out of any of us here

To be fair, even as an anarchist, I think if there was genuine ML who got it right it'd be Thomas Sankara. I may disagree with his supression of anarchists and his use of show trials, but economically he was able to institute ML praxis pretty well. tbh I'm a bit shocked that that some MLs hold Stalin and the Kim Jeongs as shining examples of ML.

Literally the worst poster on this board.

So why haven't you addressed your concerns in the DPRK general? So we can actually talk about them instead of derailing this thread?
Private property of means of production? Or one-man businesses that allocate their produce locally?
ffs it's common knowledge that a black market arose during the Arduous March as the state's distribution system collapsed (mostly caused by the lack of fuel to run chemical factories to produce enough artifical fertilizer and pesticides), should they just let the people starve out of ideological dogmatism? They are in the process of regaining control over meticulous economic planning, as the food situation improves, sure there might still be black markets but they are cracked down upon if possible, in the last year alone ten huge farm cooperatives and food factories have been built. This isn't the 90s anymore. Literally the only thing that happened was the reduction of the quota for agricultural cooperatives to 70% from 100%.

You are implicitly supporting imperialism as you blame eventual shortcomings and problems on the DPRK itself, questions their ideological conviction or call them revisionists, instead of being a materialist and analyze the disastrous effect world-wide sanctions have on a small country that is forced to produce everything itself with less than 20% arable land.

Some things they do seem legit, but they also seem to spend a lot of time attacking and smearing KKE.

Is there anything Stalin did that was revisionist? Serious question. Looks like you are just disliking him because of muh gorillions. Put Sankara in his shoes and you'd get a similar result

If you think that MLism is about purism in form, then you really need to read Lenin again.

It’s all names man. I fly the kropotkin flag because I’ve read more libcom stuff than anything. I’m personally of the opinion though that there’s something to learn from every tendency. And Tbh I’m just tired of the stupid fights over Syria or the Dprk or whatever. It’s all so trivial and not helping, and prolly mostly cointelpro

We generate such asshurt that we are constantly filled with childish glee.
I have met none here and very few irl that repeat muh gorgillions, David Graeber even says that stuff is bullshit. Saying that normies are spooked by MLs or that ML partcipation is a waste of time isn't buying propaganda.
And the majority of this board have not even bothered to read any more than the bread book, if even that. Why should I bother to take any of your muke-tier opinions seriously?
Go to r/FULLCOMMUNISM or ☭TANKIE☭ twitter and look at the sjwtanks. Larping and crypto-liberals are a problem of the entire left.
Or you could go to /marx/ instead of whining on here that someone doesn't agree with you.

Literally every time I attend a demonstration or organized socialist/labour event people complain about the anarchists. They all show up and start randomly smashing shit and getting in everyones faces, throwing flares and smoke and stuff all over the place, vandalizing, its sort of annoying and alienating to people who aren't total fucking angsty larpers. Tbh i dont give a fuck about the fact they're breaking the law they just cause problems and alienate people with their sperg outs. This happened yet again a few weeks ago and several people came up and complained to me and some other Marxists who were participating in the event.

You could have gone the way of having councils own the MOP as opposed to the state which was incompetent. What you're doing is making excuses for a shitty system that hasn't adapted to any other socialist principle. The fact that the """state"""" controll the MOP, merely just makes it state capitalist, which again, isn't even socialist. By your own admission you don't even deny that it isn't socialist.

Typical tank-wank response. You get BTFO in your shitty thread and make excuses for Korea's shit policies and conditions. Yes, blockades have no doubt impeached on Korea's effectiveness, but Korea itself has failed to adapt to the material coniditions.

It's state capitalist, and the fact that you defend is fucking hilarious because it's so pathetic.

Literally the worst Argument iv ever seen


Oh geez I don't know, does supporting Bourgeois republicans over anarchists count? Or maybe because they had state control over the MOP as opposed to worker control

"But, the transformation — either into joint-stock companies and trusts, or into State-ownership — does not do away with the capitalistic nature of the productive forces. In the joint-stock companies and trusts, this is obvious. And the modern State, again, is only the organization that bourgeois society takes on in order to support the external conditions of the capitalist mode of production against the encroachments as well of the workers as of individual capitalists. The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine — the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage-workers — proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done away with." - Friedrich Engels, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific

An individual in Cuba can get a licence from the Cuban Gov that allows them to operate a business and run it in a manner almost identical to small business in a capitalist economy
How is that not Private business?

Tankie twitter is WAY less SJW than reddit. It's probably the second-least SJW group of "leftists" on the internet, after Holla Forums.

You fucking psychopath, first of all, the conditions are that the world's greatest superpower is trying to SLAUGHTER THEM EN MASSE. They adapted pretty fucking good, considering. They become largely food-independent, and they developed nukes. When has an "anarchist collective" developed nukes for survival, huh you stupid fuck?


No it isn't, thoss fags are swimming in idpol.

Can you please just disprove the evidence that NK is a Ethno-Nationalist Hereditary Bureaucratic-Dictatorship?

Pic is u

Not a fucking argument.
Yeah I'm sure the fact that the state is an ineffective tool and has failed the people of North Korea by preventing this suffering really shows how "pretty fucking good they are"

Well maybe if MLs didn't frequently crush anarchist movements, we might be able to achieve something. But that's beside the point, because any good communist would know, that a system is not responsible for a single invention. That's the equivalent of someone saying "if communism is so great, why has capitalism created all these iphones". You would know for a fact that it was labour that created it, not an economic system.


Incubator baby tier imperialist propaganda isn't "evidence" mate.

so is this a piglet or just an uncomminly-successful Holla Forumsyp?

What the fuck happened here it was going so well

Tankie twitter has a specfic context. If they all claim to be MLs why should I disbelieve them?

Your brain is literally made up of shite.


New pasta?


Anarchists literally snatch defeat from jaws of victory, see Spain in 1873.

Pictured: suffering


What are you even talking about? There are councils on a local level composed of workers and a central committee representing them as a seperate institution in the government, enterprises are run democratically with a board of elected managers. I don't admit anything, you are talking out of your ass. But wait, what do they know! This user on a Mongolian throat singing board has figured it all out, how to avoid famine and stay socialist, just local councils 'n shiat!
I didn't start the thread. I've written extensively in-depth posts with first-hand experience and western sources to which I never got a comprehensive answers to, so you go into this thread to perform your shitty little pinpricks out of nowhere here, because you would surely get BTFO in the other thread, and post some random-ass article about black market in Korea that's supposedly BTFOing everything said before. Fucking end yourself.
MAKING EXCUSES FOR MATERIAL CODITIOMS. Are you okay buddy? Yeah I was totally apologizing for the planet earth there, providing Korea with only 20% arable land. My fucking god. Your own post just solidifies what I've said before, you are totally a-ok with the worst sanctions in human history until the last small bastion of socialism because you don't like their style and everybody who points out that they may not having the same living conditions like a suburb in Zürich or something because of genocidal or inhumane sanctions is a "tankfag". You are an opportunist and frankly an enemy of the working class and should be shot.

You mean like the Bolsheviks did in the Russian civil war and proceeded to back-stab the anarchists?

Or maybe how the Stalinists IN SPAIN, knowingly sabotaged Anarchists during the Spanish civil war.

Ok lad.

If the DPRK did not have a state or an army, they would get genocided by imperialism. By attacking the DPRK state, you become a de facto agent of imperialism.

Glad you posted an appropriate picture with your post.


Even if Anarchists would have sided with the bourgoise, it would have still fallen because the liberals were greatly overpowered.

I don't think there is anything in your shitty post that needs addressing. You have absolutely nothing interesting or enlightening to say besides a laundry list of talking points other people have told you.


So basically you admit that the institution is still under state control.
Who still have to answer to state authority.
That's not an argument, and again that's you just making excuses for Korea.
No, I was merely stating that the state of NK is a fucking shitty form of governance because it hasn't been able to effectively manage it. And I did say that yes, blockades have fucked it over, but this doesn't excuse the fact that NK is still shit at managing its country.

Keep crying, bitch Orwell. Anarchists haven't amounted to anything, anywhere.

It wasn't just "criticizing" it was blatant refusal to take the material conditions (yes, that includes outside aggression) in account. That is, at least implicitly, tolerating imperialism and is based on the ridiculous notion that the same wouldn't totally happen to an anarchist revolution. It's Cent "North Korea is the kingdom of evil" Ugyur tier.

Feeling's mutual, my state capitalist friend.

So i suppose Greek Anarchists shooting actual fascists in Spain and helping refugees amounts to nothing? Ok.

And like Holla Forums you try to claim the actions of greater men for yourself, despite the height of your activity is calling for gulags from your twiter account.

The absolute state of tank fags.

*shooting actual fascists
Had a bit of a brain fart. Greek anarchists aren't in spain, lol.

Serious question: Have you ever read Stalin?



I have and hes wrong
There is no point to fight a non-socialist Independence movement
Infact the indepedence of nation states only holds back the chances of socialism

I'm saying they have a say in the government. Duh. Implies nothing, you vulgar ideologue.
Not really. There are a few functionaries from the WPK in there that's all. My other thread:
It's merely stating my confusion as why you would feel to open up this can of worms here while the other thread exists. I mean there must be a motive, right? Because you did it out of nowhere.
You want them to have no prison? And yeah, the celebrity defectors lie cause they get money for it:


Neither did MLs. Unless you call a state which devles into revisionism and continues state capitalism "amounting to something".

I didn't say that. I said you left out an analysis of their material conditions. You've backpedaled in the other post but haven't provided an argument. I know how this is going to end. You will concede you are full of shit and then you will say "but what does it matter?!"

Amounted to more than anarchists, or any other strain of socialism, ever did.

Your supposition is correct.

It implies that they still function as a body of the state. Congratulations you played yourself.
Yes, and because over a dozen US military bases in Syria has private property despite most of it being organised as workers co-ops this still makes it socialist? Ok.
No surprises there.

Not an argument

No, I said that their management, even given the material conditions is still shit, while acknowledging that the embargoes of course have an effect on them. But this doesn't make NK any less state capitalist.

*lets revisionists fester in their cabinet*
*sabotages socialist uprisingsU
*purposelfuly crush anarchists*
*still becomes state capitalist or gives into revisionism*
*still has markets*

Well beats committing mass genocide and crushing other communists. But let me guess, Pol Pot was just misunderstood.

Don't forget about how he brutally barrel-tortured everyone who worse glasses.


I have no problem with something being a function of the state. I'm not an anarchist.
The difference is that the DPRK actually has production for use and not for profit. Also, nice moving the goalposts.

lmao sounds likke my crowd

Half the people you posted hate each other, you realize that right? The core ultra-tank twitter users are openly hostile to radical liberal politics and identity politics, they just don't have YOUR retarded interpretation of the concept.

Kill yourself you imperialist scum.

this is pretty much where i'm at too. i have an inherent distrust of other ☭TANKIE☭s, not because i think ML is inherently bad. I've met some great fucking ML's who didn't support authoritarianism unironically, but there is *way* too many people who embrace Stalin's legacy, or LARP old socialist regimes for the "edge" factor, or just all the wrong reasons in general.

Basically, they're your mirror image of the anarchist OP is bitching about, just the opposite. Rather than uncritically accept all Western dogma, they reversed it, and uncritically accepted literal Soviet propganda.

I think its important people realize you can be a socialist and don't have to accept either of these false pretenses, no matter whether you're an anarchist or ML you should at least be able to defend your positions with reasonable answers and solid research.

It's the ones that make weak appeals to authority and party lines that bother me. And with anarchists, its weak appeals to "horizontalism" and symbolic LARP'ing that get me.

So, idk, i can see it from both sides but i totally agree with your perspective.

I guess i'm probably a "libertarian marxist" but it sounds almost inherently contradictory, but i feel that way because there's no other way to distinguish yourself from the "tankie" stereotype as well as the "antifa" stereotype either.

Nice meme. Let me translate. You met some "Marxist-Leninists" who don't support Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kim Il Sung, Castro, or any other genuine Marxist leader.

Aye, we agree on this mate. This is what always drives me nuts with anarchists in America. It's too hard figuring out who is just a crypto-ancap and who actually understands anarchism here, so i don't even bother trying to make the whole appeal to being "anti authoritarian". Too many people here still buy into the "communism=forced labor" shit here so its basically a non starter. I am not even sure if i'm an anarchist or ML… just a regular socialist i guess, i can get down with a red flag or a red and black flag pretty easy.

No shit it's a meme, that's not the point. I'm talking about people who uncritically support shit like Pol Pot, or maybe support stupid shit Lenin, Stalin, Mao did.

You are creating a bullshit premise where someone either is "for or against communism" based on whether they deliver uncritical support to a single leader. It's bullshit – I don't have to accept Stalin is "all good" or "all bad" is my point. I can acknowledge he did both good and bad things, just like Castro and others, and move on. In my view, if you are a "Marxist Leninist" and all you can do is regurgitate lines "because Mao said so" you are lacking in critical thinking abilities and probably don't understand what the hell you're reading… or don't read at all. The message is more important than the people.

Yeah, lol nah.


North Korea, one of the world`s last Stalinist regimes, has gradually begun permitting commerce. On a four-day visit to Pyongyang in October - arranged and scripted by the government - a group of 17 Western journalists got a glimpse of the changes. Clean, new restaurants were packed with paying customers while the streets - almost empty in 1979 and only lightly traveled in 1989 and 1992 - bustled with bicycles, motorbikes and Japanese sedans.
In the state-owned Yanggakdo Hotel on an island in the Taedong River, a mostly Chinese clientele played slot machines, cards or roulette at the Casino Pyongyang. Since 1998, Macau billionaire Stanley Ho, through his Sociedade de Turismo e Diversoes de Macau SARL, has invested $30 million in the casino, whose staff is also Chinese.
Now some investors from farther afield are joining pioneering Chinese and South Koreans in plunging into a country once so isolated it was known as the Hermit Kingdom. In September, Anglo-Sino Capital Partners, a London-based fund manager, said it had formed the Chosun Development & Investment Fund, which plans to raise $50 million for investments in North Korea.
"It`s the last virgin economy," says Colin McAskill, 65, a director of Anglo-Sino and chairman of Koryo Asia Ltd., which is investment adviser to the new fund.

There are genuinely no ☭TANKIE☭s who support Pol Pot, since they support PLAF. By the way, Ho Chi Minh was constantly smeared as a "Stalinist" because he made the wise choice of purging Trotskyists and many other kinds of wreckers. Leftcoms will also tell you he was a "nationalist reactionary" or some similar bullshit.

Like what? How are you so sure of the stupidity of whatever thing you think they did? Talk specifics or GTFO.

No, being firmly for the major communist revolutions and leaders in history does not mean blind support. However, "critical support" is shit too because it's redundant at best. Communists are unequivocally for communist revolution and national liberation, and Marx himself couldn't have made that any clearer in the fucking Manifesto. We don't quote revolutionaries and theorists because we think their words are gospel, we quote them because they have a massive body of analysis and successful action backing them up. When they prove themselves with their theory's ability to predict events and get results, that gives them credibility, so we listen and aim to learn from their example. This way we can build on past success and learn from past failure instead of constantly wallowing in primitive and amateurish idealism.

Nice, the Al Qaeda PR firm.

Not an argument.

Your terrorist-loving, warmongering PR firm isn't a fucking argument, kill yourself.

Anarchists are dumb.

Sure it worked well for a short period of time in Spain but they ended up losing motivation and got crushed by the fascists. It is a nice romanticized vision but it is not practical at all, especially if you are planning on taking on the whole world (which is necessary in order for socialism to work. Trotsky for life bitch.)

I agree that ML is the better praxis for winning a revolution. The issue is post revolution I would prefer to live in a Anarchist society. We need something like Anarcho Leninism. Platformism maybe? I need to read up more on that.

Post proofs billy.

Platformism is pretty gud, but it can be limting. It does rely on implementing reform as a means of aiding the working class and then continuing to ferment worker positive policies before delving into anarchism, as they know the state won't be able to maintain the policies or reforms for longer.

Stop my sides can't take anymore.

If communists knew anything about economics, they wouldn't be communists. I'd rather talk to an illiterate autist who had some common sense than someone who injects tried and failed immoral garbage.

The article you posted is 7 years old. There have been a lot of changes since they've reestablished byungjin since 2014. Economy under songun was mostly left alone due to the focus on the military. That investment you talk about never came to pass, by the way. Also, a bunch of Chinese tourists gambling in a hotel are not proof of a capitalist economy. Surely they would provide western tourists western commodities. Again, I would like you to show me concretely where foreign investment happens in North Korea besides a few-joint ventures with the Chinese which are mostly shut down at this point (again, they can't produce everything themselves) - speculations about some investors claiming they would want to invest says nothing about their convictions. I've not seen a single private business in the DPRK, the only thing did exist are local markets where citizens exchange their own stuff, or stuff they've bought in China. All the new factories and cooperatives they are dishing out since three years are publicly owned. The black market is pushed back except for the stuff you can't get in the DPRK.
How does that matter? You can't have anarchism in North Korea. How would you go about this? It's utopian because we all know that the anarchist societies that existed had all prison camps.
They really aren't. They are at war. Obviously you can't run arround propagating western propaganda. Why do you care so much for capitalist agitators? The recommendations are literally demanding the opening up of markets.
They aren't shit at handling food. Again, please make an argument. That they are not 100% self-reliant in terms of providing a diverse diet is not proof of being shitty at handling food. You could go about this in two ways:
1.) They are not maximizing their possible production output
2.) Their allocation system is flawed
I need you to actually show me how either of these things is true, and possibly, what you suggestion is to make it better. The fact that they are crippled by the biggest sanctions in human history is something you yet again completely ignore, it's like you beat somebody up and then say "he's quite shit at handling his own health". Ridiculous.

Engels talk about joint-stock companies and the modern bourgeois state here. Marxism-Leninism destroys the old state and constructs a socialist society on top of it. There were no stocks in the USSR, MoP were collectively owned, no exchange between individual producers.

Also, what the other guy said, nice sources (Amnesty International = Al Nusra shills).

I don't understand this. What's "edgy" about eliminating child malnutrition? Eliminating illiteracy? Giving people the right to healthcare, education, and housing?

Because they had police and prisons. Ooohh so scary!

Yeah just the fact that it's state capitalist and still has markets isn't any indication of that.


A 2016 survey by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the only one ever conducted inside North Korea itself, supports these findings. That small survey of 36 people from different walks of life and provinces in the DPRK found that there was widespread anger towards government officials for their interference with citizen’s attempts to trade and to spend their limited money. All respondents agreed that Pyongyang did not provide the public goods and rations necessary to live well. CSIS also conducted a survey of 146 North Koreans refugees, in which 76.7% claimed they had engaged in market activity and bartering as a means to survive. Finally, another 2016 study by the Carnegie Endowment found that while most private enterprise is not officially allowed, it is given a pass since it now accounts for between 30 and 50% of North Korea’s GDP.



It also has a rising middle class as mention in the above source. The act that North Korea hasn't been able to to eliminate class also speaks volumes as to how it's basically state capitalism.

Why do you care so much for a capitalist state?
Which they have done.

1.) They are not maximizing their possible production output
2.) Their allocation system is flawed

I'll take 2, because it's utterly shit. You can whine about amnesty all you want, but so far you haven't provided any counter sources except that of poisining the well.

Read State and Revolution. Literally the entire book is dedicated to Lenin saying why we should smash the bourgeois state, and why the proletarian state will eventually wither away. Leninism IS "Anarcho Leninism."

The difference being however, is that Lenin had a different method of disolving the state, which was disolving a state WITH ANOTHER STATE. Not exactly anarchist now, is it?

Of course that is not to say that both Marxists and Anarchists want to achieve the same goals, they do, but they have very DIFFERENT methods of achieving them.


You've got to be fucking shitting me dude.

Not an argument. Either provide a counter source, or don't poison the well. And for the Pol Pot supporter to accuse anyone of being supported by the US, is fucking laughable.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

And if you're still skeptical, here's a source from Russia which, again, proves that NK has a market.


What the fuck is wrong with you mate? Why in the everloving shit would a self-styled "leftist" blindly trust organization whose stated mission is ensuring US global domination, and on whose board of directors sit Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, William Cohen, and "major corporate business leaders as well as prominent figures in the fields of finance, private equity, real estate, academia, and media"?

Literally eat shit and fucking die dude.

What the fuck is wrong with you mate? Why in the everloving shit would a self-styled "leftist" blindly wave a flag that represents a CIA backed dictatorship which partook in mass genocide of cambodians and crushed communist resistance?

Literally eat shit and fucking die dude.


No, learn to read. He SMASHES the bourgeois state, REPLACES it with the DOTP, and allows the dialectical process of history to dissolve the DOTP.

Except within State and Revolution he EXCPLICITLY stated that Anarchists want to SMASH the state as opposed to dissolve it.

Which, if I'm not mistaken was a vanguard party, i.e another state. You do realise that State and revolution was made in response to the fall of the Paris Commune, right?


Cellphones are distributed by the state. They have their own smartphone brand, Airang.
I've seen them, they are market halls where people can privately barter with personal property. The two big department stores, such as the Kwangbok Area Shopping Center, which aren't what the the article mentions, are state-owned and sell mostly local products and only few Chinese imports.
I thought they allow markets? Make up your mind.
Is that supposed to be representative? It's obvious that North Korean defectors would be the one most engaged in black markets.
You are using not a materialist definition of class. Class is a relationship to production. Means of productions are not privately owned. A bunch of people better off in Pyongyang isn't a class.
You don't know what you are talking about. Let's look at the actual output:
1.) The food production of the DPRK was about 5000.000 tons in 2015. Calorie intake in that year was reported to be 2000 a day.
2.) DPRK imported about 500.000 tons of food. This makes up: 550.000 tons of food resulting in 2000 calories a day for 25 million people.
3.) Let's take Argentina as a counter example. Argentina produces 60.000.000 tons of food, exports 20.000.000, leaves us at 40.000.000 tons of foods (let's be generous and not take in account the imports). Argentina has about 3000 calorie intake per day and a population of 40.000.000 citizens.
4.) DPRK has 62,5% less citizens. Alright, that means we need to take 37,5% off of Argentina's food: 25.000.000 tons.
5.) Now is where things get juicy: Argentina as an average calorie intake of 3000 calories. DPRK has a an average calorie intake of 2000 calories (probably higher but let's stick with imperialist sources). This means, the average Argentinian has a 1/3 higher calorie intake, 33,3%, despite that Argentina has 72 times more food available than North Korea.

There is no reason to doubt that their distribution system is flawed if we were to stick to these numbers, obviously it's a rough estimate because it doesn't consider the nutritional value of each type of food, but it should BTFO the claim that their food distribution sucks.

They already computerize things. It's hard when you are under sanctions. All the newly build plants and cooperatives have computerization.
Utopian and not viable when everybody wants you dead. None of your suggestions have anything to do with food allocation.

It's not a company. It's a US government think tank. Think before you post.

Seriously? Why is it that every fucking time people use this the staunches anti-communist Andrei "muh gorillions" Lankov everytime there is a point to be made about North Korea? It's kinda funny to me, every single source, article or academic work about the DPRK, can be traced back to the same 3-4 people every time. Fact of the matter is, we don't have proof for private business on North Korea, there are two market halls where people bargain about personal property, that's about it. Unless you are an AnCap and think exchanging personal items is capitalism and capitalism as existed since 100k years.

No, he says that Anarchists want to smash the bourgeois state and not replace it. Incidentally, anarchists have NEVER EVER been able to smash the bourgeois state without replacing it with their own anarchist state, complete with prisons, cops, an army, etc. They're just not as good at it as MLs. Lenin wanted to SMASH the bourgeois state and replace it with the DOTP, how many times do I have to repeat myself. The state is not some kind of continuum, the bourgeois state and the DOTP are two completely distinct, separate states that have opposing class characters.

The two big department stores, such as the Kwangbok Area Shopping Center, which aren't what the the article mentions, are state-owned and sell mostly local products and only few Chinese imports.
So again, state owned, and still a market. Still state capitalist.

I mean could also read this source which proves that NK has markets. You can still have state intevention IN A MARKET.


Ok, lad.


Nice distribution, tank fag. Your """socialist state"""" hasn't even gotten rid of social class for that matter.

Seriously? Why is it that every fucking time people use this the staunches anti-communist Andrei "muh gorillions" Lankov everytime there is a point to be made about North Korea?
Again, not an argument. And again, you can't really complain, considering again, NK is state capitalist.

It's kinda funny to me, every single source, article or academic work about the DPRK, can be traced back to the same 3-4 people every time.


How is that a market? Do you think supply and demand constitute a capitalist market?
It says the same thing that was said before except that paper talks 90% about the 90s and the early 2000s which was a time where the state distribution system collapsed. I mentioned this above. I also mentioned that they have driven this back and reestablished byungjin including dozens of new commonly owned enterprises. I know you wished that they would have been bullied into submission and to open up entirely during the Arduous March but thankfully that didn't happen. Right now, the energy supply is devised, which makes the production of fertilizer and pesticides possible again, increasing self-sustainable and a return to the old socialist distribution system of food allocation. There is no reason to believe otherwise as foreign investments don't exist and means of production aren't privately owned.
Are you just going to dismiss that calculation Well that's the newest data. Do you have an actual argument? Because the source you posted, once again, talks about the famine in the 90s, which should be revisited anyway:
How can you still claim their food distribution is shit when the data contradicts what you say? YES, the state distribution system collapsed in the 90s, but it matters that they are recovering.


He doesn't give proof for private ownership of means of production, he recounts mostly the 90s and 2000s where black markets emerged and reports about the same two market halls that were mentioned before.

Jesus Christ.

If the anarchist is in his/her (let's be honest: his) 20's: give him time to learn
If the anarchist is any older: ignore and move on


ITT: People who are butthurt because everyone doesn't subscribe to their snowflake ideology. Goes for both anarchists and ☭TANKIE☭s.

so much for "left unity"

This is what we should send to Chomsky.


Bat'ko being butthurt. Was he the one I was arguing with who got banned?

He's butthurt since BO started messing around with the anarchists. I can't blame him for it.

Might be him. Batko wrote that Sankara was the only good ML in the comments there, just like that anarchist you were arguing with in this thread did (might be a pretty common belief among anarchists though?).

I don't love the DPRK or anything, but Batko is an absolute retard if that poster was actually him.

Sankara murdered anarchists, no sane anarchist would think he was any good.

just nuke everything.

Sounds like the entirety of the board for the last 6 months tbh

you can thank BO.

He was banned for an opinion, fuck the BO for being triggered, and fuck anyone who thinks that discussions about leftism should be banned. The fact that Holla Forums can spew their bullshit in obvious bait threads but simply questioning a position is banned is reddit tier.

The anarchists I've ever seen IRL have always been shit tier people. They're either transfags, weedfags or just edgy teens. They just give the right ammunition to use against us, and not only that, they're just as much feeler fags as the Nazis.

I'm way more tank than most of Holla Forums but please stop it with this shit. There's nothing inherently wrong with being trans, or with smoking weed (unless you're an annoying stoner who's always high and never talks about anything but weed).

Yeah there's nothing wrong with it inherently, but they base their entire lives around it. Anarchists are almost always idpol in real life

To be fair that could also be said about most western leftists in general.

you know the constant shitflinging between western anarkiddies and state capitalists makes me happy that im not part of their world
the other side is that i have to live under the policies of their shitbag governments and porkies and watch them screech at eachother on whats "real socialism" or not

anyone that says that Castro and Che werent god tier are absolutely fucking retarded

My god you are just fucking stupid, go on reddit or something


Seems like it. Knew he was retarded, but didn't know he was that retarded.

Rafiq stop purging every one !



I don't think any lefty here would ever give any credence to that shitty "victims of communism" propaganda. We should all know it's nonsense.

When will you finally admit that you are a police informant?

How's this related to anything I said? Stop using strawmans on everyone who doesn't use your specific narrative.

god save us.

You can critcize it, but linking to US government think tanks is maybe not the best way to do it. I could as well quote Pyongyang state media, and you can be sure the source would be attacked just the same.

afaik Codemonkey has given out our IPs, not BO.

That's what the ban was for though.


last one looks comfy tbh

are leftcoms worse?

ban everyone end Holla Forums now

Hey Bat'ko, it was quite obvious that you didn't actually read the sources you've posted. You were supposed to prove that private property exists, right? It's also a false accusation that I've just whined about "imperialist sources". I've mentioned it, because your only sources happened to be extremly anti-DPRK, but I also addressed what was said in the very stuff you've posted. You had no legitimate response to my argument that their food distribution was in fact not shit, nor did you explain how the DPRK has classes, nor did you explain where you can find private ownership of means of production. It's kinda funny though how you'd quote my longer answer instead of my shorter one to prove I got "BTFO".

I'm attaching a North Korean work about their economy, should have about the same value than a US think tank.

No, it objectively has better value since it's a primary source and also not written by a bunch of genocidal maniacs.

Leftcoms are more peanut gallery, a la Statler and Waldorf, rather than a competing strain.

le grave robber of the revolution

When are you rubes going to realize that the BO does not want you here?

no seriously if you go with "stalin dindu nuffin" you're no anarchist and no comrade of mine

So which one of you still falls for the spooky interpretation of marxism and anarchism?


BO stay mad but you're the reason Holla Forums is splitting this much. Nobody cares about you man but we care about the "e-celebs" you're attacking, I for one consider them way more my comrades than you. WAY more useful individuals than your worthless ass.

Ciao bitch.

they're still more than you dog. MLs / ☭TANKIE☭s are irrelevant irl lol. But Antifa at least has a presence, it's the biggest mass leftist movement atm actually and it's mostly anarchist.

So what you think doesn't matters reality speaks for itself. ☭TANKIE☭s are dead, North Korea is never going to do anything for you, doesn't cares about you, not Assad, not China (Capitalist as fuck), not Cuba, nobody.

lmao, kicking over some trashcans is nowhere near as important as DPRK's successful nuclear program.

Ok dude Kim is surely going to save you with nukes one day. He totally doesn't only cares about maintaining his lifestyle not much different to any other Porkies in the world.

Jesus Christ you are delusional. Antifa are a bunch of kids who like breaking shit and putting stickers on things. They are completely, 100%, irrelevant to the working class. They have no political significance, whatsoever. If you think these literal children are gonna overthrow the government or something you're a fucking retard.

Why the fuck do you think it's about selfish individualism? Are you incapable of expressing solidarity?

All I want for Christmas is for mommy & daddy to stop fighting.

This is why I have always said there are better chances of converting Liberals and Bernie Bros to the leftist cause than Jason Unruhe types.

This is just like Holla Forums with it's praise of the Third Reich not realizing that their Nazism is a major setback for them. Holla Forums's it's their praise of the Soviet Union as if it was also a good example. Both get alienated by similar retarded shit. Fine to me.

Smart normal individuals reading this do not bother with Holla Forums types, they're in a chan board all day for a reason thats how much impact they have irl. Go for the people that matter.

Yes, because the "leftist cause" is liberalism.

Normies (in the US at least) will never get behind anything praising the Soviet Union. You can LARP all you want but any mass left movement will have to ditch that.

Anarchism is synonymous with socialism, you silly cunts.

Thats what I'm saying. Also not only on the US it's everywhere. It's pointless. Better just close the window of this god forsaken website go irl make friends and tell them whats up there, I do that, way better results.

I love how autocracy, extreme authoritarian ideologies are the to go ideology of the internet dweller, of the socially alienated dweeb. It shows his level of misanthropy. HAHAH! Anyway I'm out fuck this board, fuck internet addiction I must get better for my own sake.

No mass movement worth having will happen if you DO ditch that.

While we're at each other's throat anyway, do MLs and ☭TANKIE☭s actually read anything (except Stalin) that was written after 1920?

First of all, name ONE truly great body of theoretical work that rivals Marx since then. You can't.
Second of all, I've noticed ☭TANKIE☭s read Mao, Althusser, Gramsci, Parenti, Frankfurt school, and plenty of other material.

FUN FACT: In Italy groups AnCom and Other Communist Group not Marxist-Leninist like "Rifondazione Comunista" translated "Communist Refoundation Party" to criticize Marxist-Leninist they don't use dialectics but they use Liberist/Right Wing anti-communist propaganda.

Many ☭TANKIE☭s absolutely love Paul Cockshott as well.

Nice try promoting sectarianism, alphabet soup

"Stalin: Man of History" by Ian Grey
"Another View of Stalin" by Ludo Martens
"Stalin's Wars" by Geoffrey Roberts

nah Cockshott is revisionist tbh

No I feel you, I consider myself this as well.

Where did I mention stalin. Later in the thread I mentioned Lenin? Was that it? I guess they merged into the same person?
Also fuck off individualist. You are no comrade

The BO is a sycop

I wouldn't interfere with statist socialism (though I'd probably leave tankiland to stay alive). I'd encourage other anarchists to let it fail on its own until state socialists learn that hierarchy enables and breeds oppression. Hell, I'd help work on things if my non-anarkiddie comrades were making real improvements and they would accept me. I'd do it in good faith because hey maybe they were right and I was wrong. But I'd still be waiting to say I fuckin told you so and try to have my anarchist mates ready to pick up the pieces once the "workers' state" degenerates to the point that no remotely sane person thinks it's socialist anymore.

That's the thing though, there is no state socialist project to speak of, and probably never will be again. Marxist Leninism is literally a historical reenactment society

that picture ignores so much its painful


Retarded post #1232124 by the phillistines on both sides that REFUSE. TO. FUCKING. READ. READ MARX.

My main problem is that anarchists are dishonest and that most of them understand that their ideology is unworkable. Take the two times that anarchists have ever managed to seize power - the Makhnovshchina in Ukraine and CNT-FAI in Catalonia. In both cases the anarchists quickly realized that anarchism was unworkable and so created a de-facto state. In Ukraine they even introduced conscription because "voluntary mobilization" didn't work.

I'm 100% in agreement with you but I also take into consideration the age range of these types. A lot of them are into communism based on surface-level but that's not necessarily bad for a young person. I'm in my thirties and I started out that way with KMFDM and hammer and sickle drawings on my notebook in highschool. It's cringy as hell but once you're through that phase the theory really starts to set in. For some anyway.

The first part of this picture is kind of self-defeating. Le armchair man and le pancake man were real socialists? The ones that did absolutely fucking nothing? Also, Emma Goldman and Kropotkin who was armchair as fuck in 1917 while the Bolsheviks got shit done? I mean you could have put Rosa in there or whatever. The problem is that you guys have is that even the "nice" guys who got shit done like Sankara, or some protagonists of the Civil Rights Movement, were all ☭TANKIE☭s.

And what's the second half? Duerte? The guy who literally hunts down Maoists ("tankies")? Again, very bad choice, and you are faced with a similar problem: Most non-socialists ☭TANKIE☭s like to defend like Gaddafi were actually very beneficial for their country.

Don't forget how Kropotkin supported WW1, something most Anarchists conveniently forget.

Also notice how this picture has slight eurocentric undertones. The second half clearly is supposed to make you think along the lines of "look at this insane black tinpot dictator!!". Besides Putin there is not a single white guy, they could have easily thrown in Honecker or Ceaușescu but some African or Asian dictator makes a better boogeyman as it fits the stereotype.


FTFY r/socialism

Reminder Anarchism was the only socialist system to actually give the workers the MoP.
MLfags dishonest as usual.

It really helped in bringing down monarchies tho


I am obviously an anarchist, but I'm become more critical of most mainstream anarchists. I say this because they don't seem to have interest in theory. As much as I like David Graeber, he too admits that anarchists care more about action than theory. For me, there must be a healthy combination of both in order to succeed. Yes, I do advocate and do believe that there should be a strong government in order to keep stability. However, I think that the dictatorship of the proletariat must be inclusive, horizontal and democratic.

Even though I don't agree with a few of Marx's views or end goals, it's obvious to say that he's still extremely fundamental to leftism, regardless of whatever tendency you may subscribe to. I think that post-leftists are kind of a fucking joke because their only use is for militant direct action and that's it. I've seen many Marxists espousing similar views on anarchism as liberals, in that they seem to think that anarchism means that you don't care about anything and you just want to destroy everything you don't like. I see anarchism as more of an attitude or a feeling as opposed to something that is actually physically implemented, like an economic system such as socialism; its general definition is an opposition or skepticism to oppressive or destructive heirarchies and power structures. However, that's not to say that it's inherent socialist tendencies should be forgotten or ignored.

Even though I am obviously a staunch opponent of the state (most notably in terms of long term establishments), I do think that, depending on the circumstances, the state can be somewhat of a necessary evil, like in social democracies or, more importantly, the Eastern Bloc states. This is something which I think every leftist agrees with. Despite the Eastern Bloc being made up of repressive authoritarian dictatorships, they have made incredibly tremendous successes in the vast improvements in economic development and social services. As much as I would personally prefer these achievements to be done in a rather non-hierarchal and democratic fashion (even though the Eastern Bloc did practice some democracy), these are fundamental facts which cannot be denied. The Eastern Bloc most certainly put FAR more emphasis on egalitarianism, solidarity and social justice than the West ever has or ever will. However, this doesn't mean that they should be viewed uncritically under any circumstances (being that socialism is scientific), even though I will proudly defend the Eastern Bloc against liberal or capitalist criticisms. I find almost all of them to be useless and terrible, as they regard little to no historical or material analysis. They don't care that the Eastern Bloc had a hugely flawed and problematic interpretation of socialism (as they had little regard or openness to direct democracy or workers' self-management [to some extent]). They hate socialism and communism because it vehemently opposes the concept of private property, while wearing a mask that reads muh 100 bazillion.

Nice propaganda, Porky!

You’re off your fucking rocker if you think any tiny resistance of anarchists, or said set of beliefs could of saved Eastern Europe from Nazi domination.


Another critique I'd like to add is the issue of governance and self-defense. Marxists have always criticized anarchists for being poor at governance or defense against enemies who want to destroy them. While I do think that the implementation of anarchist or libertarian ideals needs to improve upon the area of self-defense against large hostility, I think it's important to point out that the left (Marxist-leaning) and its movements have been crushed and humiliated in Germany, Indonesia, South Korea (places where their influence was ENORMOUS), while many major events like the defeat of fascism in France and Italy were largely dominated by anarchists and libsocs. Many anarchist organizations have also taken part in huge roles in community service like in the aftermaths of Katrina and Harvey, installing electricity in Puerto Rico, and aiding the homeless and refugees in Greece.

One final critique I'd like to make is concerning co-ops. I think that syndicalism and councilism should have a huge fundamental role in socialist organization. I think that co-operation is best for implementing socialism, as it produces far healthier, productive and positive relationships between people, and allows for greater self-autonomy. This is why I really admire over a dozen US military bases in Syria, even though its economy is kind of a mix between 60s-era Titoism and an open-air Publix. However, I do think that co-ops are not inherently socialist, especially if they don't intend on abolishing capital and doing away with capitalist material conditions


oshit nice dubs

hi porky

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IN THE END ALL OF YOUR SUPPORTERS ARE FUCKING DEAD AND IN JAIL. It's the same reasoning that can be applied to the USSR, which eventually failed to established socialism due to revisionism and the law of capital. In the end, those worker collectives mean nothing if you can't keep it. Also you think that a vague statement like "we own MoP" is sufficient evidence for this being the case which is ironic especially in the case of Ukraine as peasants were the main force behind Makhno.

Yes, secret police shit totally was the leading cause of Catalonia's fall and not insufficient fire power and foreign support you absolute tard. Not to mention that Makhno's anarchists were an armed rogue group after a period of counter-revolution and instability. You cannot blame the Bolsheviks for doing what they did to protect the revolution even if Lenin didn't like it and Trotsky was kinda underhanded in his justification.

Lmao. Just read the wikipedia page m8. You cannot compare a highly experienced gureilla army hiding in jungles, tunnels, with connections with the Hanoi government to anarchist militias. Neither can you say that the Viet Cong were the sole factor of the North Vietnamese victory or in the case of WW2, small partisan groups. No "belief" defeated Nazism. It was ultimately economic conditions, industrial and military capacity, and fighting on the strategic/tactical level. The Red Army didn't win by beating Nazis with Das Kapital over their heads.


But there's no reason to believe an anarchist militia in the future couldn't be as or more effective.


Weren't the Viet Cong ML as well?


What does its show as opposed to ?


Considering Marxists are the only ones who even had real revolutions that didn't get instantly put down, it's hard to see how they could have doomed "the revolution"

Read Bordiga opportunistic swine.

I'm gonna be honest here. I fucking hate it when anarchists say that "Lenin betrayed the revolution". Even though I obviously have a lot of criticisms with some of the long-term outcome of the Bolshevik Revolution and many of the tactics, goals, and views of Lenin, the Bolshevik Revolution was responsible for bringing socialism on a huge worldly scale and inspiring millions of people around the world, and Lenin is still essential to anti-capitalist thought.

If Marxism is so terrible why did the other ideologies get annihilated by capitalists before 5 years could even pass?

Read Fight Club, seriously.

The Bolshevik revolution's legacy is the massive PR hole us communists are going to have to work extremely hard to dig out of.

Looks like you haven't read Bordiga. Why bother trying to have a conversation when you won't put in the legwork to have the bare minimum understanding of the subject you're talking about? Seems rather immature to me.

Because might doesn't make right!

Could you please summarize Bordiga's relevant argument, comrade.

trips checked

And nothing was lost, bye.

You're being idealistic, anarchism is what I'd prefer as well, from a moral perspective but morality isn't objective. The whole point of scientific socialism is the proletariat acting in their best interest, which does in fact involve winning.

there is no socialism in one country

there is only capitalist states held hostage until the world uniformly works their way into socialism

read lenin
or kill yourself

yeah, that's the common use of the term "socialism", I.E "the lower phase of communism" I.E "capitalists held hostage by the DOP".
I don't think you'll ever find an ML who'll argue that full communism can ever be achieved before global socialism.

Marx's class theory is far from scientific. Insisting on the mass murder of the bourgeois, even if they willingly want to become comrades, has not helped communism succeed. There are many bourgeois who find their materially lavish lives unsatisfying and would join the Revolution if given the chance.

It was Lenin who first spoke about socialism in one country

Why on earth would you ever trust someone who's self interest directly contradicts your own?

vernacular use of socialism in north america is sysnonymous with social democracy

m-ls are idiots

read marx then

their rational self interest - i.e. their survival - changes in the face of a succeeding revolution

"Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence, the victory of socialism is possible first in several or even in one capitalist country alone. After expropriating the capitalists and organising their own socialist production, the victorious proletariat of that country will arise against the rest of the world…." - Lenin

"I know that there are, of course, sages who think they are very clever and even call themselves Socialists, who assert that power should not have been seized until the revolution had broken out in all countries. They do not suspect that by speaking in this way they are deserting the revolution and going over to the side of the bourgeoisie. To wait until the toiling classes bring about a revolution on an international scale means that everybody should stand stock-still in expectation. That is nonsense." (Speech delivered at a joint meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Moscow Soviet, 14 May 1918, Collected Works, Vol. 23, p. 9.)

That's only true in strictly materialist terms, and only if they assume capitalism will continue forever (if they're smart they'll realize it won't) and if they don't realize that capitalism is hurdling us towards ecological catastrophe, which would doom all of us. It's in the rational self interest of anyone who wants to survive to join the Revolution.

Marx was the one who coined the term "lower phase of communism", what are you talking about?

The rational self interest of the Bourgeois class is the failure of the revolution and they will continue to try and sabotage it long after it succeeds if spared. Historical example: the constant attempts at sabotage within the USSR that eventually lead to the takeover of revisionism

Essentially instead of jumping at the bait the first chance you get to force your vague idea of communism on everyone you should have your theory solid as a rock. Otherwise your system falls apart entirely and it discourages others from even thinking of communism as a solution because it has been set as an example of failure in the past. It gives ammunition to capitalists and hinders or delays prospects of the real revolution as a result. Trying to jump at communism in one country when the rest of the world isn't even fully convinced by the contradictions of capitalism yet is just a recipe for disaster.

Unfortunately, the introduction of state capitalism with us is not proceeding as quickly as we would like it. For example, so far we have not had a single important concession, and without foreign capital to help develop our economy, the latter’s quick rehabilitation is inconceivable.


the lower phase of communism that wasn't what the ussr was

the rational self interest of the bourgeoisie is their personal, individual survival, in the face of the end of their class as a whole

do you think they all sit in a dank dark room together and plot against their end to their dying breath?

Solid argument. I like!

is historical reality just a giant conspiracy theory to you?

it will fail again and again until the rest of the world is able to follow suit with whichever country tries it next

nice meme.

What exactly do you think capitalist governments are? Because that's a pretty accurate description of one.

Did you think I was being ironic? I really do think that's a solid argument. We should organize across the globe and then launch a general strike/revolution all at once.

Xi's magic rug pull has a better chance then that.

Nice try to demotivate, Porky!

theyre a tool of the bourgeois, not the bourgeois themselves
or did you not see my damn flag

now this is fantasy


Whuts that?

I despise black pill but this is fucking insanity.

The current U.S government is essentially composed of nothing but the Bourgeoisie and their slaves.

Basically this

We win the battle of ideas and organization first and then we'll be in a position to execute a successful revolution. I agree with you that that's what China's plan is. I've been saying that for years. If they were to dump their US Treasury bonds on the market, they would cause interest rates to spike and make it impossible for the US government to meet its payment obligations, crashing the capitalist economy.

I think the point is that the Bourgeoisie states are often far from rational actors.

If you don't think your theory is good enough to be adopted by the entire world then it is a shit theory that doesn't deserve to be put into practice.

For God's sake.

That was never contested, in the long term they're incredibly irrational, but they will ALWAYS act in their immidiete self interest, which is why they cause so much awful shit and are irredeemable.


It seems like a reasonable theory to me. What would the effects of China dumping their US Treasury bonds be, in your opinion?

What if they miscalculate?


O Shit! Roasted!

It has the potential to work but I don't think it will happen. It's not likely people with that kind of power will ever give it up. China is a failure.

It's rather hard to miscalculate when the equation is self interest = remaining in capitalism = suppressing socialism

For shame, I am destroyed. 'Grats Hilldog.

How would crashing the West's economy be China giving up power?

Do they control Holla Forums too? ;^)

It would if they tried to go for full communism, if you're postulating a rug-pull that just involves a re-orientation of imperialist power from America to China I'd say it's quite likely at some point.

They could turn Holla Forums off right now if they thought it was a threat. This goes for any website on the internet. They can and do view everything here, everything le deepweb, and everything inbetween. In one picosecond the whole of it could be gone, should they wish it.

Communism developed from somebody noticing the flaws of capitalism. It didn't just appear out of thin air. Capitalism is inherently unstable, even if porky managed to control the thoughts of literally every person on the planet they too would recognize the flaws of capitalism eventually. Acting desperately and blindly upon the notion that capitalism is sustainable just shows how little read you are.

Yes, this is what I predict. They'll wait for the recession that will come in the next year or two to pull the rug.

We must make the case wherever and however we can. When they shut us down in one place, we move to another, forever evading their grasp until we are primed for Revolution. The odds of victory are long, but we have a chance, comrade!

Eventualism is an argument of sorts but it's doubtful you'll ever see the other side of it, considering it probably entails the depopulation of half the human race due to natural disaster and the collapse of capitalism.

That's not really Xi's magic rug-pull though, it's just capitalist politics. The communist party of China is a joke.

The entire internet is their plaything, you don't have a chance, maybe someone in the future will, but we are to capitalism as mid-dark-ages peasants to feudalism.

After crashing the capitalist economy they will convert back to a command economy. It won't be real socialism because an autocracy will be in control and not the people, but it won't exactly be capitalism either.

We don't have much time! Either we have a successful revolution, or we face ecological catastrophe.

I'm aware I'll probably never see communism myself but I think trying to rush it does more harm than good. If you try to shove your beliefs down a child's throat you'll often make them rebel against you purely out of spite. If you treat the child as a fellow human being and actually point out your side of the argument in a calm and civilized manner you'll be surprised how cooperative and understanding they'll be. The way this kind of behavioral psychology works is a big reason why I'm against opportunism. Shoving the revolution on others does more harm than calmly explaining your reasoning for wanting it. I'd love it if porky shut down opposing speech and tried shoving their belief system down our throats. Imagine the backlash they'd receive, and it's for this very reason they allow us to exist.

Excellent post, comrade.

They have no incentive to go back.

We've missed that bus.

They will have to go back because capitalism will have failed.

If humanity comes together soon we can save Gaia!

Now you're just shit-posting.

Tis true without lying, certain and most true.

I envy your optimism, good luck.

Thanks, we will need good luck, "comrade".



Not receiving gibsmedat from the USSR is not the same as "invading". Ukrainan landpirates got invaded because after they got their asses saved by the Bolsheviks they started acts of terrorism and robbery against the Soviet people. Bolsheviks could have just let them go down against the Whites in the first place.

It amuses me how anarchists still parrot a bunch of bandits from 100 years ago as a proof that anarchism works

So much for consistency.

The CNT-FAI never fully seized power, in fact they refused to, allowing the Catalonian government to stay intact while they created a retarded dual power system. This is what probably led to their demise: they allowed the weak state to stay around until it could get stronger and purge them.
Where are the sources for these hot opinions my man?
[citation needed]

Makhno was very explicit about how he was against conscription, nor would it even have been useful since they had less arms than people to use them. There might have specific times where there was conscription, but it was never policy, they certainly didn't introduce it.

Also, I didn't know real Socialism was pictures of Great Men and red flags.

No, not every Leftist agrees with that, there's an entire tendency called ==Anarchism== that doesn't.

Considering most workers in the region were peasants who were given control over their MoP.
They most definitely did not help.
They existed before the Civil War, and what the fuck does "rogue" mean?
What fucking revolution? Ukraine was handed over to be fucked by imperialist powers by the Bolsheviks, then the Bolsheviks came back in pretending that they still had a claim on it and an exclusive right to revolution, where they then suppressed the genuine revolution in Ukraine where all power actually was to the Soviets.

In what fucking way are you an Anarchist? Everything you say is just Marxist. Lenin did betray the revolution, he suppressed genuine workers' power and control in favor of his one-party state.
Am I blind or is it just invisible?

No, it's not the same. Only giving military aid to a specific faction and only if they enforce your will which happens to be the defense of a bourgeois state and purging of Leftist dissidents is definitely a hostile action though.
I'm pretty sure "terrorism and robbery against the Soviet people" is a new one, usually the typical Trotsky lie is raiding Red Army units, sometimes they mention something about train robbery. Also, it was precisely because of the Blacks that Moscow wasn't invaded.
It says something very poorly about the Bolsheviks that they repeatedly allied with bandits and even absorbed them into the Red Army. Honestly, find a single source that's not just Trotsky making shit up that confirms they were just regular criminals.

i liked your arguments but please stop this transphobic bullshit

No, french resistance was mostly dominated by PCF (aka Komintern's bitches). (90% if I remember correctly my history lessons) However the FTP (Francs tireurs partisans) included non communists at some point, like syndicalists and former spanish anarchist and republicans who fled Franco's regime. A friend advised me to read this book editions-perrin.fr/livre/les-ftp/9782262051303 (which I haven't yet) is pretty instructive, especially how the Komintern betrayed them in the end.
But anyway french resistance (1% of the total pop) is a joke compared to greek and balkan's resistance.

You're right never trust Engels who used to own a factory in Manchester, or Bakunin and and Kropotkin who used to be Prince, or Malatesta who used to be a doctor from a Bourgeois family.

seems legit, whats the prob

anecdotal evidence and an ad hoc example on how facists killed anarchists
-> ☭TANKIE☭ echo chamber bs, no real value

This is what "leftist" liberals actually believe.