how the fuck does anyone have time to read theory. Seriously. If you had to read every work by Marx, Engels, Lenin Stalin Mao Althusser Cockshott Badiou Bordiga Wolff Hegel Spinoza, De Leon, Bakunin, Bookchin Kropotkin, Proudhon, Stirner, blah blah blah it would literally take you like 10 years at LEAST.

Attached: 1430005633926.jpg (576x635, 126.67K)

Other urls found in this thread:


You just do it in your free time
Whenever i travel by train (which are 6h long) i usually spend it reading.
Sometimes it feels good to have trains that haven't been changed since ww2

1.) You don't have to read every work of them, that's insane.

2.) Most works are rather short, literally the only really long work is Capital from Marx, there are a lot of pamphlets, essays, etc. - you can easily read Critique of the Gotha Program and Principles of Communism in one day, hell, in one hour. I've read On the Jewish Question in less than an hour.

3.) Don't buy the crap about reading Hegel or whatever before touching Capital, only brainlets like Muke think you have to oil up your butthole before penetrating yourself with the immortal hard-hitting magnum opus of Marx - Capital is fucking easy to read, it's designed to be read by workers, most of the time it just makes easy deductions and then explains them in detail. People are just scared of its size.

Is all you need in this list. Just a couple books or articles each.
The only stuffy book is Capital.

dude even the complete works of those guys put together would take you quite a while to get through

You don't need to read everything. As I've said, couple articles each.

Why don't you check out a ML/MLM study course? I'm sure there are lists online to get you through the stuff systematically and most of them are designed for 3-4 weeks.

You mean like this?
(36 weeks)

by not spending all my time shitposting on the internet like a stupid faggot

Sounds good.

This is a very basic one:

This is a more detailed one with a heavier focus on Mao (feel free to ignore the gender part):

Check out this thread, very nice recommendations!!!!

Just read Bakunin, the rest is not that important.

Why not ask this question of the proles you need for you glorious revolution? So far as I see it your big problem is that the working man thinks you're all deranged queers.

You lucky bastard, what's your country?

Serbia, the trains are slow and smell but it's really comfy when you sit down at 5am in a train to Belgrade in a empty train booth and just take a corner for yourself.

this. however, you get more out of it if you've attended a lecture on hegel at one point in your life.

No proles give half a shit about any of that, and none are attending lectures on Hegel. They're busy working, raising their families, and generally being productive and happy within the matrix of capitalism. You're not going to change their minds unless their conditions become intolerable, and even then you guys aren't going to win out over more muscular ideologies. It's a fool's errand.

I agree. libecucks will die and marxism will win

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1035x1575, 2.92M)

Coercion will always rule, always. Might as well enjoy economic freedom if the state will always be able to pound your boipucci.

Sadly, we need socialism to experience that.
That's why socialist countries had conscription. State can not afford to be too violent in long-term if all proles are trained in killing people.

Attached: 10b.jpg (642x1096 216.07 KB, 1.11M)

I have economic freedom now you mongoloid. I'm perfectly capable of making money and spending it how I choose. Am I still constrained by how much money I can earn and what other goods cost? Of course. So what?

You lads have trash memes.

left one - 10/10 meme. I especially liked muke's artistic photo.
second one - 10/10 thanks to great amounts of unreadable text

thanks bro

Good for you!
Just like people in early stage of socialism will! Money, in their current form, will be abolished eventually.
Most of wealth your labour produces is being stolen, you sound like cuck for being OK with that.

Multi task and stop wasting your time on useless shit.

The proletariat definitely appreciates that sort of thing. Heaps of unreadable text is probably the reason your ideology is spreading like wildfire.

I'm self-employed, own my own tools, and negotiate my own wage. The wealth produced by my labor is enjoyed by the people who pay for it, and I make a profit that allows me to make and purchase my own goods and property.

It's great, maybe you should try it some time instead of moaning like a bitch about how porky's stealing your surplus value.

Petit bourgeois, you will be dealt with on the day of the AK

Come and try me faggot, I'll be waiting.

lmao lurk moar faggot

So am I. I work two jobs - "normal" employment and freelancing - because I do not have family and want to generate as much capital as I can so I have enough money for some comfy house.

Yes, wonderful feeling. I personally love it.
"profit" in marxist terms is difference between how much wealth workers produce and how much are they payed. But what interests me more, why are you so proud for being """middle""" class defending """upper""" class?

I ain't defending the upper class or any class, I don't care. If somebody makes good money that doesn't bother me as long as what they're doing is productive.

What I don't like is usury, financial fuckery, and self-important faggots who think they know better than everyone else and tragically accept the necessity of grinding everyone else under their boot heels in the service of implementing their utopian idea.

So capitalists then. Got ya.

We don't claim that just because you are self-employed you are not a slave to capital itself. You still need to exploit yourself by adhering to the market value of whatever you produce, you are still alienated from your own labor, and experience reification of your own social relations you maintain to sustain yourself.

Attached: 47618248b5f3dd2008466de0aa3f80dcaa6758a0ed71a45ced372977b0dec481.jpg (1173x882, 269.79K)

More like private central banks.


No you sperg, that's part of the superstructure. Reification and alienation are a direct result of material social relations between humans to commodities and humans to humans under capitalism. It doesn't fucking matter if you believe in it or internalized it, it happens to you anyway. The law of value doesn't care about your feelings.

Again, you are confusing us with liberals and intersectionalists. Patriarchy or matriarchy is a result of the division of labor and hereditary distribution of an estate. Today, it's largely irrelevant as most jobs aren't phyiscal anymore and agricultural estates don't really exist anymore in the traditional, feudal sense - I mean, there are still things on the labor market that objectively oppress women due to them often being forced to make a choice between career or a child, but they are not signficantly more oppressed than man.

The idiots in my backwater corner of my country thought it would be a good idea to tear up all the rail tracks in the 90s.

OP you should try reading philosophy – specifically reading on critical thinking & ethics, as these are the two fields that are the most relevant to political theory

Fuck Hegel and fuck you for supporting him you troll.

So, yeah, Capitalism

It's only unreadable if you're a brainlet moron.

Considering one out of three people under 50 and one out of two under 30 support socialism, I think it's spreading just fine.

Attached: generations.jpg (505x507, 65.77K)

Plenty of summaries that introduce you to the main ideas so you can read the actual material.

Marx for Beginners by Rius
Introducing Marxism by Woodfin

Read the sticky for book torrents.

Attached: bobby books.jpg (500x375, 48.72K)

That's not petit, know your terms correctly

Your using this meme wrong, the simple answer is supposed to be the big brain one. Flip it.

Be more selective, no one said you have to read anything.

If you want to learn about Socialism on a tight schedule, here's a tip: focus on the conflicts. Read about the Reform-Revolution beef in the Second International, read about Marxists vs Populists in Tsarist Russia, read about Utopians vs Scientific socialists, the factional struggles of the 20s in the Soviet Union, Bukharin vs Marx, etc. These are not only far more engaging and enlightening, they also help you understand theory and how it guides strategy and policy-making.

That data can be accounted for by young people being more leftist in general while older people only care about their Medicare and Social Security benefits, both of which were created by Democrats. Not that I necessarily disagree, the problem is that most leftists today are only leftist on social issues, not economic ones. If it was broken down by issue we'd probably find that older people would tend to be more hardcore economic left but socially rightist while younger people economic right but hardcore social left.

You were so close and then you regressed into retardation

No one gives a shit about theory irl. At some point you will get the question 'does it work in practice' and you will have no answer.
Its better to start some project people can actually join.

So I've been flirting with Sun Yat Sen and Henry George, what is it specifically about Georgism that petered out and failed as an economic school? How did Keynes take over the reform movement?

As an ex-Georgist, extreme infighting which cost him the election in New York and later To get a hint of how bad it got, DeLeon used to be a Georgist in the party, the ongoing false two-party dichotomy, his theories being mocked and dragged through the dirt by both parties and large landowners (land was and is a big economic determinator, especially back then) despite his large popularity and in the most absurd ways such as:
And the development of other socialist movements which focused more on the class dichotomy and conflict then just rent. I still hold George in high regard and his theories on land were later exonerated and affirmed by Stiglitz who showed it worked in a SocDem kind of way by producing the Henry George theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George_theorem. My main critique of George now is that he didn't go far enough and didn't address the effects of other forms of rent that arise from capital like the ones Marx described in Capital III or the extraction of surplus. I still personally hold that land ownership still operates as an extremely exploitative and critical component of capital of which large amounts and even sometimes most profit is derived from as a capitalist needs only to buy land and hold on to it to obtain eventual profit, as land is for now permanently fixed and scarce meaning someone will always end up needing it for either living or further speculation. I also always keep the idea of citizen dividends for use of land and natural resources in the back of head as well, especially this sentiment:
I feel if you use a limited natural resource that was also open to the rest of the community to use, you should pay some dividend based on mutual credit, labour, product, or labour voucher for having used it (unless this is done with the community as a whole or with consent).

Attached: DisassemblingTheLand.png (874x1248 466.71 KB, 308.85K)


Thanks, this is valuable. Arguably more pertinent than ever with regards to pollution and climate change.

By not playing video games and jerking off all day.

there is literally no reason for anyone to read lenin or mao or bookchin in the 21st century

lenin and mao are still relevant.

Where can i it happening?

*see it

Wow I must be a fucking cretin because I haven't been able to get through Capital in 2 years.