[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55chan / baaa / dempart / general / hydrus / lds / omnichan / s8s ]

/marx/ - Marxism

It makes you smart

Catalog   Archive

Winner of the 72rd Attention-Hungry Games
/otter/ - The Church of Otter

February 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Comment *
Verification *
File *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1428936027574.jpg (235.44 KB, 951x659, 951:659, enver_hoxha_republic_decla….jpg)


Hello, I am the new leader of /marx/.

I will continue the status quo: this board is for those who identify as Marxist-Leninist in some form, whether they uphold or otherwise identify with the Stalin-era USSR, the post-Stalin era, China under Mao, Albania under Hoxha, Cuba, the DPRK or whatever. Non-MLs are allowed to ask questions and the like.

I have a forum with a political forum area for registered users (although the forum itself is for forum games users think up and run.) If you want to get in private contact with me via PM, or if you just want to use the political forum area for whatever, feel free: http://eregime.org/index.php?act=idx

91 posts and 35 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at



I don't know why you say that. If anything the opposite is more likely to be the case: people who read Lenin but not so much Marx.

File: f06f26c37acc5ca⋯.jpg (130.31 KB, 575x800, 23:32, Patrice Lumumba.jpg)


Old thread: http://oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion/marx/res/11618.html

As the title says. I figure a general "ask me questions" thread is good. Can be questions about socialism, US history, the Marxist position on religion, or whatever else.

160 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at



Seems like the board got spammed with random shit.



Yeah I fixed it.


When Marx mentioned a moneyless and stateless society was he elaborate about it or was it just pure speculation?



Marx's main concern was to explain why a moneyless and stateless society was the logical end-result of historical development.

Marx and Engels did discuss some of the economic aspects of socialism, since (as Marx wrote) it "emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges."

By contrast, all they were really willing to say about communism was that the principle of distribution would be "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Before Marx, there were what were called utopian socialists like Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. They devised elaborate blueprints for "ideal" societies and then tried to create small, isolated communities to make them a reality. Marx saw this as erroneous, since socialism and communism are made possible above all by the development of society's productive forces. Since these forces in turn shape man's consciousness, man in the future will actually be able to address what a communist society will look like, since it will finally be possible to establish it.

Hence why Marx and Engels didn't elaborate on the future communist society. A lot would just be fanciful speculation of how things "ought" to look, having more in common with "City of the Sun" by Tommaso Campanella than anything scientific.

Post last edited at

File: d815935d23a912b⋯.jpeg (1.82 MB, 4032x2041, 4032:2041, BF15EA5C-B780-457A-9FBB-7….jpeg)

File: 7b7aff8689314ce⋯.jpeg (1.63 MB, 3452x1922, 1726:961, 53D3028A-BE4E-4302-AF6A-3….jpeg)


Time to post pics, view the shelves of others and likely learn of some new books to read long the way!

I don’t have tons of books and I probably haven’t read up to 1/3rd of these yet, but I plan to get around to all of them eventually

13 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Why is your copy of Shock Doctrine so thicc?



Lol you collect books you don't read. Either that or they're all library books. No one on the internet in the days of proclamation by tweet can read books these days and you know it.



Just because you have the attention span of a goldfish doesn't mean other people can't read. I don't get why someone would spend well over a hundred dollars on books never to read them or, even dumber, going to the library and checking out books to fill up their bookshelf to show off on /marx/.



I actually recently got rid of a lot of the books in the pics but I have read almost all of them, I either had to buy them for school or they were given to me. No way in hell would I actually pay for a complete set of Emile Zola. I spend maybe an hour every day reading plus another few hours at work listening to audiobooks.

Also I don't use Twitter



1 language Marxist, wouldn't have expected anything less.

File: 58837d671d897f7⋯.jpg (1.14 MB, 878x1275, 878:1275, It is Lenin.jpg)


Old thread: http://oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion/marx/res/4702.html

If you have a question about Soviet history or about specific policies enacted in the USSR, feel free to ask them here.

433 posts and 51 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



On some things (namely Stalin's responsibility for the Great Purges) he's basically accurate, but there are specific allegations relating to other subjects that are either misleading, weak evidence given, or are outright false (e.g. that Stalin during the Great Patriotic War planned operations using a globe, a claim Zhukov and Mikoyan later criticized in their memoirs.)

Khrushchev's speech wasn't an objective analysis. It was a political document that sought to draw a sharp line between bad stuff associated with Stalin on one hand and the CPSU and Soviet state (and Khrushchev himself) on the other. So for instance Khrushchev portrayed Pavel Postyshev (his predecessor as head of the Communist Party in the Ukraine) as standing up during the Purges against the arbitrary acts going on, since this would help Khrushchev's portrayal of Stalin having to overcome the resistance of a whole bunch of party leaders. In reality, as historian J. Arch Getty has pointed out, Postyshev eagerly partook in the Purges on Stalin's behalf until being engulfed in them. He also wrote (The Road to Terror, 1999, p. xiv):

>The notion that we have clung to for so long—that there must have been "liberal" or "decent" Bolsheviks who tried unsuccessfully to stop Stalin's plan for terror—is no longer tenable. Instead, the real picture is even more depressing than a heroic but futile resistance to evil. At every step of the way, there were constituencies both within and outside the elite that supported repression of various groups, sometimes with greater vehemence than Stalin did. The terror was a series of group efforts (though the groups changed frequently) rather than a matter of one man intimidating everyone else. This finding by no means takes Stalin off the hook or lessens his guilt. But it does mean that the picture is more complex.

I think Roger Keeran's review of Furr's "Khrushchev Lied" is a good read on the issue of "Stalinists" who try to discount literally everything Khrushchev said in the speech: https://mltoday.com/khrushchev-lied-but-what-iPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Post last edited at


Any Russian civil war books you're planning to scan or have scanned very recently?



No. I intend to scan a bunch of Soviet histories of the USSR, which of course include discussions of the Civil War, but none specifically about that period.

If you want some books on the Civil War already online, here's a short list I made: >>12220

There's also a two-volume history of the Civil War which continues to be cited to this day:

* https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.226351 (Volume 1)

* https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ungHvjshxVvBpArvvEU6gHc9RL3YbMcv (Volume 2)

Post last edited at


What do you think is the most misunderstood or lied about aspect of the Soviet Union?



There are plenty. Some are based on blatant ignorance not even anti-communist historians would claim (like that everyone was paid exactly the same and not permitted to dress differently), some are based on misconceptions (e.g. people in the 1950s-80s went around half-starving, or people waiting in line was always the norm), others are based on distortions (the USSR is expansionist; its messianic faith in class struggle compels it to invade other countries, or that the USSR and Nazi Germany were "totalitarian twins" which allied between 1939-1941, it was illegal to believe in God), etc.

I can't think of "most" in this context, just a whole lot of misunderstandings and lies about various aspects of the USSR, some more prominent at times than others (e.g. circa 1919 there were nonsense stories of how the Bolsheviks nationalized women.)

File: 39333c4e02de75f⋯.jpg (158.48 KB, 1174x738, 587:369, bolshevik-jews.jpg)


How does /marx/ respond to the talking point of the Nazis whenever talking about Marxism as some "Jewish conspiracy", then citing that the Soviet Union's government officials was made up of 95% jews. They often like to double down on Trotsky as well for some reason even though he was purged from the party thanks to Stalin. What is the official /marx/ist response to "Jewish Bolshevism" which Nazis often like to cite as anything to the left of Adolf Hitler, including moderate liberalism.


Ismail Edit: If you're a fascist and want to argue in favor of fascism and/or that Marxism is Jewish, keep all such discussion in this thread.

288 posts and 93 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
Post last edited at


File: aca849b320d9903⋯.png (52.53 KB, 616x596, 154:149, aca849b320d9903950cb5fa380….png)


Dein Hahnrei beeindruckt mich nicht.


File: 0789e2466ba8607⋯.jpg (25.82 KB, 250x329, 250:329, kill_a_commie_by_toterot.jpg)


File: 43083c36eaf770a⋯.jpg (145.06 KB, 2000x1333, 2000:1333, 56466200_HighRes-crop-56a7….jpg)


Now the truth reveals itself



Ich will Kommunisten VERNICHTEN



Oy vey, the ((((nazis)))) sure have a hardon for capitalism.

Epic Google translate >>13449

File: 1155a848c3c0c81⋯.png (415 KB, 654x702, 109:117, 1155a848c3c0c8188e23d28f08….png)


Mawxism is dangewous!! Nyaaaaa!

1 post omitted. Click reply to view.


>w< don't exploit me pls


I also kind of apologize for this namefigging thing.



is ok fren @iui


wow... nobody seemed to delete this tf



I mean, why should I? It isn't gay porn or something.

File: 760be99a6fcf8a2⋯.jpeg (61.07 KB, 471x704, 471:704, 67E6E53E-5579-461B-91D8-5….jpeg)


Can someone recommend me some ML literature? Essentials?

I am extremely into Che and Fidel if that helps

57 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Damn I was so excited. What's the difference between the editions?



The revised edition is... revised. And revision is k00l except when you add "ism" at the end.

But yeah feel free to use that $20 for whatever you want, although I could find some book(s) for you to spend the money on to scan if you want.



Don't really have much else to spend it on. Do you have a txt file of books that you're looking for? If there are any good theory/philosophical works I'd buy a couple of those



It just so happens that two or three days ago I was informed of a book titled "Philosophy and Sociology" someone asked me to scan for them: https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=22922396139&searchurl=tn%3D%2522philosophy%2Band%2Bsociology%2522%26sortby%3D17%26an%3DFrantsov&cm_sp=snippet-_-srp1-_-title1

It's Soviet, so I can put it publicly online when you scan it.




Thank you a lot for this

File: 28cdfc4bc3b393f⋯.jpg (568.87 KB, 1400x1050, 4:3, 1508544229664.jpg)


The enemy of my enemy is my friend the third position and the left must unite against the capitalist right. Capitalists care about nothing but profit they will do anything to make money. They do not care about anyone but themselves but we do we want a better future we want a future and if capitalism prevails then there will be no future. So i am calling all communists Stalinist Maoist or Trotskyist etc, socialists, corpratists syndicalists national-syndicalists distrubutists national-socialists hitlerist rockwellien or Asserist etc juche Duginists and national-Bolshevists to unite under one banner, do not let our differences divide us. Collectivism is the way forward, the way of individualism and selfish greed will only lead us to our doom. So unite i beg of you, for the betterment of the human species and the world as a whole, we can only prevail together.

10 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


An entire ideology based on memes and sentimentality. Fascism is a feeling. The ultimate feels before reals.



> higher race and lower race

Sorry, with that mindset then 5000 years ago, the Mesopotamians and Egyptians were considering you guys as subhuman cavemen. Are they right? Mankind is social being, and changed according to the level of social development, to reduce man to race is nothing but metaphysics thinking, you think you could subvert people with Marxist ideology by that way of thought? Nonsense.



>Sorry, with that mindset then 5000 years ago, the Mesopotamians and Egyptians were considering you guys as subhuman cavemen.

It’s retarded to waste our time babbling about which race or races were the original standard-bearers of human culture or what was the original human culture. I’m not talking about five thousand years ago, I’m talking about the last several centuries leading up to this very moment. Today the answer is clear: the Aryan is the highest form of the archetype known as man, that being which has blessed us with all technology of note beyond the fundamentals. The Aryan has the potential (and does) illuminate the dark corners of life, solving mysteries long thought unsolvable in the realms of science, exploration and knowledge in general. Through their might the Aryan has spread its living-space far and wide across the globe, pushing out the inferior beings and dominating the remainder and emerging as the master of all things on this Earth besides Nature herself. If, one day, the beauty of the Aryan were to fade from this Earth, there would be stagnation and even regression.

>Mankind is social being, and changed according to the level of social development

Nice tabula rasa bullshit. Reality speaks against this

<b-b-but people change their mode or production so they change completely in my ideology addled mind!

Customs and culture may change, but race will forever remain innate.

Marxism inveighs against the aristocratic principle of nature and relies soley on the dead-weight of the unthinking masses and attempts to destroy the very foundations of human civilization — attacking race, the family, culture, the individual worth of the human personality and erects in its place a thoughtless golem lead from above by a Judeo-oligarchic clique.



Spare me your fucking autistic garbage. I'm not interested in your fucking huckstery. You are a fucking schizo, no different from when your kind comes here to blather about Jewish golems and such. Fascists should be mercilessly slaughtered.


>Marxism inveighs against the aristocratic principle of nature and relies soley on the dead-weight of the unthinking masses and attempts to destroy the very foundations of human civilization — attacking race, the family, culture, the individual worth of the human personality and erects in its place a thoughtless golem lead from above by a Judeo-oligarchic clique.

What absolute fucking wordsalad garbage. Check yourself into a mental hospital.



fucking lol



>a thoughtless golem led from above by a Judeo-oligarchic clique.

There's a whole thread debunking that notion here: http://oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion/marx/res/7600.html

From now on fascist arguments can be made in that thread. I'll close any others so as to avoid cluttering up the board.

(Also no posting gore.)

File: 27a0b50ff52d34f⋯.jpg (198.17 KB, 912x606, 152:101, kke.jpg)


Thoughts on the KKE (Communist party of Greece)

Their line is imo one of the best contemporary applications of Marxism-Leninism, so are their beliefs on socialism in the 20th century.

It's also a good thing that they are one of the few communist parties with political representation in Europe.


3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.



The next election will be a landmark, but it's hard to achieve anything notable, because Greece society is mainly petty-bourgeois. Here is some concern of party's supporters (translated by Google), I will only take some notable comments: http://sfyrodrepano.blogspot.com/2019/01/2019.html

> The Captain Gatos said ...

> @ Pr

> whether petty or 'RED' 'is society is to a point in the hand of a KK however, there is a natural phenomenon.

> As for the rates, 4.5% of the second elections of '12 are equal to that of 1993 as the lowest percentage of the KK, and even in 12 was the vote less. From 2004 until the beginning of the 12th the KK was 6 and over. There was a momentum for 4 consecutive elections that was postponed.

> The KKE surely had a world of delusions, but that was too much in his hands. The KKE has already been largely clarified with opportunism after the split, and much more after the 2009 Congress. Theoretically, the edits existed, but for some reason it could not pass it on to the world.

> And it seems that this is a general problem of the KKE this period, that is, while it is in the most correct rotation that has been here for ten years, it can not communicate its positions in the world.

> Also, the fact that it has been a very awesome world in 2012 (however insignificant it may be) was Papariga's unfortunate statement that the KKE does not want to rule. What was theoretically correct but communication was suicide.

> January 16, 2019 - 5:43 pm

In the comment, he explained his concern on the "low resonance" of KKE on the mass base, which I think existed deep down in any communist mind. Also he commented on Papariga statement of "we don't want to rule", which he think is theoretical correct but PR disaster. However, there are some warming comments:

> The Post too long. Click here to view the full text.



Here is the comment which I think explain the key difference of old and new KKE:

> Sechtar the Terrible said ...


>Today's appeal of the KKE must be judged by the current criteria, and I can not define the ceiling of knowing the threshold of "reasonable" rates at a time when the people themselves often arrive at the ballot box without having end up! The sure thing is, as many friends have observed here, that the quality of today's influence is far superior to that of "old-good times". What we can, what the KKE can and must do, of course, is another big chapter, which I do not consider to be exhausted at all but I leave it for space economy reasons.


>I think reasonably, thoughts that might have been in the back of our head before, but that we would have been ashamed of them, that reality would bring us forward.

>That things were not as rosy as they were, for example. the European elections of 2004 and the '09, there were indications. It was the mismatch with the organizational development of the Party, the hiatus of its autonomous mass operation. I remember remarked here that the KKE's broad (but also close ...) influence continued to function as a "other democratic power": When "all democratic forces" were mobilized, the work of the PAME / KKE had 30-40 thousand people, while when calling PAME / KKE on its own, it fell to 5-6 thousand. Similarly, they happened with the massification of the unions. Nowadays, with "pan-turkey" or not, PAME is down and 20 thou. You do not say that, and a little while, when the raiders have set up on the couch and the extra-left-wing villagers have evaporated.

>Let's make a decision, how we are adjusting, or rather, we have to adapt more quickly to the new situation, which had surprise us in '89 -'91. The "rationalization" would have been better to have been pre-celebrated, but "better than ever".

>-------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------

>TPost too long. Click here to view the full text.



Comments on success of Peletedis: http://sfyrodrepano.blogspot.com/2019/02/2019.html

>The kolokotronis said ...

>Terrible and turbulent divorce was the day-long gathering of the People's Congress in Patras. And joy and satisfaction to the people of wages.

>The local media (systemically and dipped in interweaving) went through all the stages of despair: at first, with blurred responses and blurry pictures showing almost nothing, then extinguishing (!) The subject from their first pages in a couple hours, they tried, with great zeal, to "bury" the concentration. There was a storm of angry phone calls in their call centers and a lot of critical comments under their articles, to such an extent that they were forced today to slam their stern and show up part of the truth. The factions of the other factions are all day disappearing from the hangouts.

>Unjust their effort! All Patras today discusses (with obvious surprise) the incredible, quantitative and qualitative, yesterday concert!

>Our anxieties about whether we can fill the 2,000-seat stadium of the ORF (see, it was the first event and psychologically would create a climate) lasted only a few minutes. Where did all this world come from? Young and old, men and >women, droned faces of laborers and grasped doctors, chickens students and hefty farmers. Everybody flock to the densely populated neighborhood of Agios Dionysios, where the stadium is located. What the hell! Where were all these found? (to be continued)

>February 7, 2019 - 7:40 pm


>At around 6.20 the image of the area was as follows:

>all the field positions (2,000) were full, there was no seat or for sample, many even sat on the steps. The playing area was pie (at least 600 people), another could not get in. In a large adjoining room, something like a vestibule, there was >a TV set and there were 300 people (mostly smokers, Post too long. Click here to view the full text.



>What do you think the next steps for the KKE should be? How do they advantage of that legitimacy moving forward?

I think the conditions is not really ripe yet, we must continue the "somewhat not-taking-power" struggle from below, because of the following reasons:

1. Petty bourgeois consciousness is till going strong (the recent rise of XA - Golden Dawn) despite the unemployment and bankruptcy of middle class. This is natural, because they cannot change overnight.

2. World condition is not good enough, NATO and US is still reign in Europe, any attempt to go outside of the system would be punished heavily

In my thinking, the next step of KKE would be followed:

1. Enforcing their leading role on working class by PAME. This process in my opinion was and still progressing nicely, the GSEE (state controlled union) now need to resort to dirty tricks (fake votes, etc.) in order to stop PAME.

2. Not losing mass support (keeping the voting rate stable), at the best case increase it. Neutralise the petty-bourgeois by spreading our key points on the state, politics, economics. We don't need them to voting or following us for now, without understanding what is communism, instead it would be better to have them agree with our viewpoints. In the moment of revolution, this would be beneficial because they would not side with the capitalists to stop us.

3. Educate the youth, because they are like a blank slate, without preconception. By the rapid proletarianisation of society, we can expect good result, and indeed it has happen. KNE (KKE youth movement) is consistent 2nd place in university election, with the decline of SYZIRA, I think this process would be speeded up.

My formula for success would be: Revolution = Strong working class + Weak capitalist state + Inactivity of middle class. Capitalist state (EU + NATO) is still going strong (but they would be weaken) and the middle class is still hostile to us (but it will be lessen each year). KKE has the first factor right already.



> On a more superficial point, KKE is one of the last major parties in Europe that has not only stuck to proper class politics, but kept the visual stuff, the communist aesthetic, the communist fashion, whatever you want to call it. They didn't abandon it for the fucking awful eurocommunist salmon which makes me wanna gouge my eyes out. Their propaganda is always impressive, and out of all the left-wing propaganda and aesthetic I've seen, theirs is always the stuff that sticks out most in my mind.

It's not superficial. Dialectical philosophy has always understand that when form and content are in agreement with each other, the power would be amplified. The form of eurocommunist aesthetic is the expression of their petty-bourgeois world outlook, while the old-style hardcore propaganda of KKE is the expression of their proletarian nature.

File: 5aefa89dd52e8f1⋯.jpeg (151.24 KB, 1200x1109, 1200:1109, 7E557176-932C-42D3-938A-8….jpeg)


old thread: >>>/marx/10096

A continuation of the thread for general questions on socialism, history, Marxist positions of X Y Z, etc. In a break with tradition I am making the thread. If there ends up being a duplicate or you want your own thread for whatever reason, feel free to delete this

746 posts and 112 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


How accurate is this take on Hungary, over at leftypol: http://oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion/leftypol/res/2835129.html#2835370



Barre took power in a coup and proclaimed his adherence to "scientific socialism" (he avoided using the term Marxism-Leninism.) Progressive reforms were carried out with Soviet support.

However, in 1977 Somalia invaded the Ogaden region of Ethiopia in order to obtain the ambition of a "Greater Somalia." This would have led to the demise of the Derg government in Ethiopia, which was further to the left than Barre. The Organisation of African Unity also denounced the invasion.

Castro tried to mediate between Ethiopia and Somalia, but Barre refused to agree to anything short of recognizing his blatant aggression as legitimate. Thus the USSR and Cuba sent troops to repel the Somali troops. Barre did a 180 in his foreign policy, denouncing the Soviets and becoming a US ally. The progress made since the coup was halted.

Barre and many other Somali army officials had been trained in the Soviet Union, hence where they got their left-wing ideas. They were more nationalists than socialists (and despite the moniker of "scientific socialism," Barre tried to infuse his conception of socialism with Islam.)

During the early-mid 70s the USSR considered Somalia as an example of a socialist-oriented state: not socialist, but beginning the road towards it. Obviously that changed after the Ogaden War, since as I said Barre turned to the right.

>Why did it collapse in the end?

The government became increasingly corrupt and Barre relied more and more on his own clan to stay in power, which led to his government's demise and Somalia thrown into anarchy.


Some of what he says is correct, and the Hungarian Communists themselves acknowledged problems of dogmatism and lowered living standards as major factors leading to the counter-revolutionary uprising. For a good read on the subject see: Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Post last edited at



Very interesting, thank you.

When would you say the cold war started, if that's a definable date at all, and what do you think the overall causes were? Soviet-Allied relations seemed to be very high during WW2, of course noting that it was an alliance of convenience, nonetheless, the friendship seemed at least somewhat genuine, what with Soviet publicity tours in the U.S. and so on. Stalin even conceded on Greece for geopolitical reasons. Why did it have to come to almost nuclear war at times? Surely the Soviets had no realistic plans of militarily invading the west unprovoked? Was there any particular event that sparked the "coldness", a provocation from either side perhaps? Or was it something that happened naturally now that the alliance of convenience was no longer necessary? Or was it just motivated by western fear of Soviet strength and legitimacy threatening the status quo in the west?



>When would you say the cold war started, if that's a definable date at all

Well it obviously was never a formal "war," so it's a bit academic to determine when it actually started. One date generally accepted is Churchill's Fulton, MO speech on March 5, 1946 where he says "an iron curtain has descended across" Europe.

>what do you think the overall causes were

There's a whole book on the subject I scanned a while back: https://archive.org/details/WeCanBeFriends

Basically as you note the USSR's foreign policy was defensive. American and British imperialism instead portrayed it as offensive.

>Was there any particular event that sparked the "coldness", a provocation from either side perhaps?

The Americans claimed "Stalin violated Yalta." The Soviets argued that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was meant as a warning to the USSR and a way of the US "getting to Japan first" (before the Red Army did.) The Americans claimed that Browder's removal as CPUSA leader was because Stalin didn't want to continue wartime cooperation. Can go on and on about the various incidents in 1945-46 that are seen as "causing" the Cold War or at least contributing to its existence.

At the end of the day it boils down to what you said, "western fear of Soviet strength and legitimacy threatening the status quo in the west." The spread of socialism threatened capitalism.


what do you know about the claim that the Soviet Union brutally killed deserters in the war?

File: 7cf22449ffed244⋯.jpeg (534.15 KB, 1024x680, 128:85, 2F17844F-7FA3-43B7-BBE7-A….jpeg)


Interested in the DPRK and Juche? A fan of /leftypol/‘s DPRK general? /jucheidea/ is the board for you. This board was just created and is in its early stages of development, but the groundwork has been laid. Please check it out and help it get some traffic if you’re interested


7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.



I don't even remember, but like only one thread can be created per hour. That alone goes a good deal toward preventing the board from getting wiped out.

>I wish traditional forums were more alive

You can always go on my forum (eregime.org), which has some leftist discussions for registered users plus two active Discords (one public, one mostly consisting of leftists.)

It isn't a replacement for /marx/, and it's mostly used to run forum games, but still.


As a note, while we're on the subject, you can actually find a whole bunch of writings by the three Kims here: http://www.korean-books.com.kp/en/search/?page=work-leader1

Post last edited at




Thanks, Ismail! The thread creation limit per hour sounds like a good idea. I’ll also have to go check out your forum



>I wish traditional forums were more alive

Shamelessly gonna plug https://leftist.site



How much information is collected?

File: d028806cb80b5af⋯.jpg (2.67 MB, 2500x1472, 625:368, __shana_shakugan_no_shana_….jpg)


I'm looking for help with a Marxist-Leninist critque of the Antifa movement. Here are my points:

Fascism is not a beast that exists outside of Capitalism, as they seem to allege, it is Capitalism.

Many Antifa seem to buy into Russiagate.

This is effectively a call for a united front with the Democratic Party, NATO and the FBI.

Is U.S. capitalism in decay or crisis - No.

Does the Bougeoisie want the "Alt-Right" - No.

They want an American version of Justin Trudeau or Emmanuel Macron.

The favored Bourgeois ideology is still neo-liberalism.

What I am not looking for:

<punching nazis is bad uwu

If anybody could help with fleshing out these points, that would be great.

126 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



>we should ask: why did they all turn into soc-dems? did everyone just succumb to liberal brainwashing at the same time?

Some parties had been deteriorating for an extended period, for example there was the spread of "Eurocommunism" in the 1970s (which among other things rejected the dictatorship of the proletariat as irrelevant to Western Europe) in Italy, France, Spain and Britain.

The "collapse of communism" in 1989-91 placed pro-Soviet parties in an ideological crisis, and in many cases also a financial one (since the Soviets heavily subsidized them.) As a result, numerous parties disbanded or adopted social-democracy.

It wasn't a case of "brainwashing," it was a case of capitulation or disillusionment.

>as an aside: what happened to revleft, and is there an alternative forum you'd recommend which is more active than /marx/ and isn't the dumpster-fire which is /leftypol?

RevLeft simply died out due to lack of activity. reddit and other more popular places for leftists to talk killed it.

I have my own site, eregime.org, which has a Discord oriented toward leftists, but the main purpose of my site is to run historical simulations (e.g. right now we have one set in the world of 1919.)


File: f5ab8bb8ac84da5⋯.jpeg (89.04 KB, 916x660, 229:165, 1815344f6aee2d363509ec731….jpeg)


>She attacked the CPUSA from the right, arguing it was insufficiently reformist and suffered from "dogmatism."

But it's okay when the Chinese communists do it!



Well yes, because the CPC legitimately criticized dogmatism. The "Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism" (which Davis and other ex-CPUSA founded) took a look at the existing CPUSA line of endorsing Democrats against the "ultra-right" (i.e. Republicans) and decided it didn't go far enough and that adhering to Marxism-Leninism was no longer appropriate.


>Many Antifa seem to buy into Russiagate.

Where is the support by "Antifa" for Russiagate? I don't see it, personally. Are they marching around with signs that say "Trump is a Russian spy"? Where do you see it? What am I missing? Even if there would be some groups who support it, there are many others who clearly do not. I would wager most don't, considering Antifa tactics kind of imply the opposite. You would have to be extremely confused. Antifa in the U.S., as we should all be very well aware of, is after all not a centralized group but a loose collection of various different anti-fascist groups, many which are not affiliated with one another. Another thing, when you see videos of Antifa rallies, most likely only a small amount of the people there are organized and dedicated anti-fascists from Antifa groups, whereas the majority are there to support anti-fascism and/or to reject racism. The groups don't have 500 people on standby, even many of the black blockers are unaffiliated. The crowds bring everyone from the center to the far left. So if you see patently liberal signs or whatever, that doesn't necessarily mean that the Antifa groups are subscribing to those views.

>Fascism is not a beast that exists outside of Capitalism, as they seem to allege, it is Capitalism.

I've never heard an Antifa analysis of fascism that does not inherently involve capitalism.

>The favored Bourgeois ideology is still neo-liberalism.

In my country, in the 90s, we had a growing street fascism with a series of brutal racist murders and beatings, assassinations of leftist leaders, bombing plots, attacks on leftists and our spaces and organizational efforts. This is where the anti-fascist movement came from in my country. We did not think that there was a serious chance of a fascist coup or a Nazi takeover. But we were defending our homes, our neighborhoods, our families, our friends and our comrades. The Antifa tactics did not come from a vacuum. And they were successful. The situation in America is not very different, except in that the fascists now have an alarming amount of legitimacy which I never experienced when I was organized, that they are all armed, and that they are American.



To add onto the last part, in my country, that all blossomed into a sort of subculture within young people. So it's now "cool" to be antifa, it's "sexy", it's almost like a "brand" of sorts. All the propaganda of various forms is modern, clean and youthful, and easily recognizable through different formats and mediums. It's easily relatable in the modern age. Exposure to that "brand" then also draws people into the political side. I was somewhat skeptical at first, but I've seen the success that strategy had first hand vs. the leafleting and such that other people engaged in. We had thousands of people at our rallies, whereas others were insignificantly small.

File: 8082717e331c3c1⋯.jpg (70.4 KB, 960x716, 240:179, rise up workers.jpg)


Like is there anyone that's NazBol or rejects the constant identity pandering or legitimately wants to imprison the nameless global elite or is just pussyhats and rainbow parades all the way down?

Every "commie" in America is just a neoliberal that wants more welfare. Half the reason many of these communist organizations get nowhere is because they're so fucking tied to the diversity olympics that they let Shaniqua, who thinks that middle-class white people are the epitome of being rich, run things.

American "socialists" talk about the lack of union power in America while advocating for the import of the foreign scab labor that undermines that power.

Also you guys should really recognize elite Jewish influence in Western politics.

40 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Why should I support internationalism over nationalism?

>That's why I said if you try uniting workers on the grounds of being pasty white people you'll only teach them to view pay cuts and other rollbacks as a preferable alternative to immigrant and migrant laborers, rather than unionizing and protecting these same laborers so that the capitalists can't use them against the native-born.

It "teaches" nothing of the sort. The plutocrats are our enemies, brown people are their pawns. What makes you think only your ideology can put a gun to the head of plutocrats and make them do what you want?



>Why should I support internationalism over nationalism?

Because, as Stalin (and obviously other Marxists) pointed out, "the final victory of Socialism is possible only on a world scale."

It is also through internationalism that labor is best able to solve many problems the capitalist creates for it. Again there is the example given by Marx of the First International's role in preventing transnational strike-breaking here: >>12879

When the World Federation of Trade Unions was set up in 1945, the imperialists were frightened and the CIA intervened to split that organization with the support of the right-wing leaders of the American, British, etc. labor movements (including those who saw scapegoating immigrants as more important than exposing the capitalists.)

>The plutocrats are our enemies, brown people are their pawns.

Your strategy involves focusing on the pawns, not the enemies. Same reactionary logic that led to pseudo-socialists calling for the defense of their bourgeois "fatherlands" in WWI because German/Russian/French/American/etc. soldiers are mere "pawns" of this or that state to be ignored at will.

>What makes you think only your ideology can put a gun to the head of plutocrats and make them do what you want?

It isn't a question of ideology, it's a question of the working-class organizing for its own interests. As Marx and Engels noted in the Manifesto, "The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement. . . . they never cease, for a single instant, to instill into the working class the clearest possible recognition of the hostile antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat. . . . Finally, they labour everywhere for the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all countrPost too long. Click here to view the full text.



Stalin was the coauthor of Socialism in One Country, and he was clearly not opposed to deporting into Siberia or killing large numbers of undesirables.

>Your strategy involves focusing on the pawns, not the enemies

I don't care how many 3rd party contractors are working on the Death Star

>bourgeois "fatherlands"

modern plutocrats are cosmopolitan, "patriotism" for them means wars to expand the empire and eliminate Israel's geopolitical rivals



>Stalin was the coauthor of Socialism in One Country

It was Lenin who first spoke of the possibility of socialism being victorious in one country. Him and his successors held that the final victory of socialism could only be assured on a world scale.

To quote Stalin from the same 1938 text:

>Can our working class and our peasantry, by their own efforts, without the serious assistance of the working class in capitalist countries, overcome the bourgeoisie of other countries in the same way as we overcame our own bourgeoisie? In other words: Can we regard the victory of Socialism in our country as final, i.e., as being free from the dangers of military attack and of attempts to restore capitalism, assuming that Socialism is victorious only in one country and that the capitalist encirclement continues to exist?

>Such are the problems that are connected with the second side of the question of the victory of Socialism in our country.

>Leninism answers these problems in the negative.

>Leninism teaches that "the final victory of Socialism, in the sense of full guarantee against the restoration of bourgeois relations, is possible only on an international scale" (c.f. resolution of the Fourteenth Conference of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union).

>This means that the serious assistance of the international proletariat is a force without which the problem of the final victory of Socialism in one country cannot be solved.

As for "deporting into Siberia or killing large numbers of undesirables," I don't see how that's the least bit relevant.

>I don't care how many 3rd party contractors are working on the Death Star

That doesn't remotely address my point, nor is the example relevant. We have over a hundred years of the scapegPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Post last edited at


Locking thread so as to confine pro-fascist posts to here: http://oxwugzccvk3dk6tj.onion/marx/res/7600.html

That way the imageboard isn't cluttered.

File: 20b380d489281ff⋯.png (56.14 KB, 968x614, 484:307, communist trinidad.png)


Does science prove dialectical materialism to be the correct way of viewing the world?

If any of you know about quantum mechanics/physics, do they prove diamat to be true?

I heard that Stalin had outlawed the study of quantum mechanics for contradicting diamat, but was Stalin right that quantum mechanics contradicted diamat and was idealist?

1 post omitted. Click reply to view.



File: 078bb32f96ff9be⋯.jpg (21.7 KB, 255x396, 85:132, Kwame-Nkrumah.jpg)

Nkrumah has some interesting insights about theoretical physics (as of the mid-20th century) and dialectical materialism. Not totally in line with "orthodox" diamat but certainly developed out of it. If anyone's interested I could post a bit about it later.



Go ahead. Not OP but I'm very interested. I didn't know Nkrumah was big on theoretical stuff outside of direct political analysis.


What the fuck is up with that picture? Why would idiotic, ignorant, stupid Trinidadian would embrace Marxism?



Paul Cockshot started a youtube channel less than a year ago. In one of his videos he talks about this - quantum mechanics and materialism. Check it out.

File: bec269498242591⋯.jpg (64.04 KB, 447x601, 447:601, 1460131773459-1.jpg)


Questions about China today and in the past

58 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



Great post anon.



What an inspired, intelligent response. Bravissimo, Comrade.


I know you responded on Tibet, but do you have an opinion or any insight into Xinjiang? I don’t see any evidence that there is any kind of concerted effort to actually kill Muslims there (which seems to be the implication of a lot of media around it), and most of the sources about “a bajillion Uyghurs are in concentration camps” go back to state department outlets and stuff like separatist Uyghur media in Turkey, but the Chinese state admitted there are re-education camps and there is video of the heightened security there. It seems like this would just increase tension, so I’m not sure what the logic is or where the policy is coming from.



I haven't studied modern Xinjiang. My reading on it is limited to the 1930s-40s.


I would recommend everyone interested in China or just in general geopolitics to read Jude Woodward's recent book "The US versus China". Lots of detailed information and analysis about the ongoing US-China trade war from a left-wing, more or less pro-Chinese perspective.

Delete Post [ ]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 55chan / baaa / dempart / general / hydrus / lds / omnichan / s8s ]