I mean on the other hand Marx was anarchist (though with the exception to have authoritarianism as means to change the system, which I don’t agree with, because it’s also unrealistic to assume that people in charge just throw away their power).
I think having Authoritarianism no matter how, just gravitates towards people that should definitely be not in charge. We see this everywhere. Power corrupts and dehumanizes.
Marx was the polar opposite of an anarchist in many ways. Marx supported collectivization into one unified system, anarchists support communalization into countless decentrally linked systems. Marx supported dialectical and historical materialism, anarchists often fall into idealist and subjectivist trappings. Marx developed scientific socialism, while anarchism is largely utopian. Anarchists can be good comrades, but Marx was not an anarchist.
Power is not a supernatural corrupting force, this too is an idealist argument.
Liberalism, famously not “authoritarian” despite sending riot cops to beat down schoolkids for being against the Palestinian genocide the liberals are backing against the people’s will.
Why do you guys have such a black/white view of the world?
There’s more room than just authoritarians, and authoritarianism and liberalism are somewhat antagonists anyways.
It’s good for workers to have state authority, rather than capitalists. Both have authority, but communists use it to uplift the people and defeat the Nazis.
I have yet to see an authoritarian “state” that I consider communist (and that just doesn’t give it a bad name and fuel for western propaganda) that “uplifts the people” (and doesn’t repress them)…
It’s true though, that it’s probably better than capitalistic states (mostly, because all the systems we have are a mixture of all kinds of ideologies), I think China as example certainly does a better job than the USA at this point (various metrics, like addiction, mental/physical health etc. backs this as well).
Non the less, communism in its core is anti-authoritarism.
Oh no, how do I tell the millions of Chinese communists that you, the main character of life who clearly hasn’t read enough Marx, don’t consider them to be communist
There have been many socialist states, both past and present. Examples include the PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, DPRK, Laos, and the former USSR. In all of these countries, life expectancy, literacy rates, economic democratization, and more have skyrocketed. Life expectancies in the USSR and PRC doubled. Using only the USSR as an example, as it’s the classic one pointed to as “authoritarian,” it’s clear that analyzing the facts at hand points to tremendous success.
The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.
The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.
The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.
Death rates spiked:
And wealth disparity skyrocketed alongside the newly impoverished majority:
When you look at the US Empire and western Europe as having higher quality of life than the USSR, you are looking at the benefits of imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism and wishing the USSR also practiced this, instead of helping liberate colonies and the global south. Russia in particular was a semi-feudal backwater in 1917, and made it to space 5 decades later. The USSR was not the picture of wealth, but was for its time the picture of development and rapid progress.
It isn’t the socialist countries giving western countries ammo for propaganda, it’s just western propagandists twisting them. Communism is pro-worker authority, not against authority in general, as it’s through worker-authority that class and the state can be abolished down the line alone.
Any american will tell you our government is trash and oppressive. And yet when we point out that so is Chinas government you get pure unadulterated propaganda like this shit. And then call us brainwashed.
Lol
Remind me again about how installing suicide nets and making workers sign waivers saying if they kill themselves it isn’t the factories fault is “workers having state authority”
I bet I’ll just get banned though huh. A lot easier than actually using facts.
Removed by mod
Hell yeah dude, you’re 12
Ah you’re also not missing in the party. Nah I’m not, I’m just realistic…
Go back to reddit
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
I mean on the other hand Marx was anarchist (though with the exception to have authoritarianism as means to change the system, which I don’t agree with, because it’s also unrealistic to assume that people in charge just throw away their power).
I think having Authoritarianism no matter how, just gravitates towards people that should definitely be not in charge. We see this everywhere. Power corrupts and dehumanizes.
Marx was the polar opposite of an anarchist in many ways. Marx supported collectivization into one unified system, anarchists support communalization into countless decentrally linked systems. Marx supported dialectical and historical materialism, anarchists often fall into idealist and subjectivist trappings. Marx developed scientific socialism, while anarchism is largely utopian. Anarchists can be good comrades, but Marx was not an anarchist.
Power is not a supernatural corrupting force, this too is an idealist argument.
Liberalism, famously not “authoritarian” despite sending riot cops to beat down schoolkids for being against the Palestinian genocide the liberals are backing against the people’s will.
You really think those are “liberalists”?!
Why do you guys have such a black/white view of the world? There’s more room than just authoritarians, and authoritarianism and liberalism are somewhat antagonists anyways.
Lol. “Why are you so black and white? Don’t you know that there’s liberalism(the good guys) and everyone else is authoritarian(bad guys)!”
Not what I said, but have fun interpreting stuff into my comments…
In what way is it not an accurate paraphrasing?
It’s good for workers to have state authority, rather than capitalists. Both have authority, but communists use it to uplift the people and defeat the Nazis.
I have yet to see an authoritarian “state” that I consider communist (and that just doesn’t give it a bad name and fuel for western propaganda) that “uplifts the people” (and doesn’t repress them)…
It’s true though, that it’s probably better than capitalistic states (mostly, because all the systems we have are a mixture of all kinds of ideologies), I think China as example certainly does a better job than the USA at this point (various metrics, like addiction, mental/physical health etc. backs this as well).
Non the less, communism in its core is anti-authoritarism.
Oh no, how do I tell the millions of Chinese communists that you, the main character of life who clearly hasn’t read enough Marx, don’t consider them to be communist
There have been many socialist states, both past and present. Examples include the PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, DPRK, Laos, and the former USSR. In all of these countries, life expectancy, literacy rates, economic democratization, and more have skyrocketed. Life expectancies in the USSR and PRC doubled. Using only the USSR as an example, as it’s the classic one pointed to as “authoritarian,” it’s clear that analyzing the facts at hand points to tremendous success.
The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.
Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.
The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.
The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.
Death rates spiked:
And wealth disparity skyrocketed alongside the newly impoverished majority:
Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism and reintroduction of capitalism, and the large majority of post-soviet citizens regret its fall. A return to socialism is the only path forward for the post-soviet countries.
When you look at the US Empire and western Europe as having higher quality of life than the USSR, you are looking at the benefits of imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism and wishing the USSR also practiced this, instead of helping liberate colonies and the global south. Russia in particular was a semi-feudal backwater in 1917, and made it to space 5 decades later. The USSR was not the picture of wealth, but was for its time the picture of development and rapid progress.
It isn’t the socialist countries giving western countries ammo for propaganda, it’s just western propagandists twisting them. Communism is pro-worker authority, not against authority in general, as it’s through worker-authority that class and the state can be abolished down the line alone.
Fucking lol
Any american will tell you our government is trash and oppressive. And yet when we point out that so is Chinas government you get pure unadulterated propaganda like this shit. And then call us brainwashed.
Lol
Remind me again about how installing suicide nets and making workers sign waivers saying if they kill themselves it isn’t the factories fault is “workers having state authority”
I bet I’ll just get banned though huh. A lot easier than actually using facts.
Go back to reddit
China has a lower suicide rate than Switzerland, the UK, the US, Taiwan, etc. Suicide nets exist, but suicide isn’t nearly as widespread as you make it out to be.
“My government is trash and oppressive yet I believe everything they say about the PRC”