Cowbee

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (24 children)

My point has never been that their actions are the same. You boiled down complex relations to simple "trade," when the complexities and directions make it entirely different in outcome. That's like saying a surgeon and a knife-murderer are the same, because they both cut people.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (26 children)

As I said earlier, they are not doing the exact same business. Feel free to go back earlier in the thread!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (28 children)

China builds up countries it deals with, the West keeps them underdeveloped and over-exploited. I already showed how that is, so I will not copy and paste what I already did.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Communism isn't just providing everything for everyone no matter what. Overpopulation is a problem any economic system will have to deal with, and that's not something that has hard binary boundaries.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (30 children)

No, they are not at all the same, and I explained why already. To put it another way, the average Chinese person lives off of far more Chinese labor, while the average person in the West lives off of far more Global South labor.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (32 children)

The actions aren't the same, though, and I explained and elaborated on why. You never engaged with it, but glossed over it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (34 children)

It feels like you glossed over that I just said trade isn't Capitalism. Your point relied on "there being no ethical consumption under Capitalism," but that original analysis has nothing to do with the ideology of those producing goods, nor with trade. Trade is a mechanism employed by both Capitalist and Socialist systems, and isn't inherently exploitative.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (36 children)

You need to do more investigation than just that.

Secondly, trade is not Capitalism. Capitalism is not trade. When people speak of that, it's because consumption within a Capitalist framework will always go to the bourgeoisie and usually support Imperialism overseas, but that isn't an inherent quality of trade.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Sure? I read theory but that's not my job.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I appreciate it! 🫡

I said it elsewhere, but I do think now is an excellent time for agitation and developing clear lines.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Fair enough, my wording implied the reforms of Deng Xiaoping were painless and not without their drawbacks. Certainly, some pain and misery would have come, but not nearly to the extent that the dissolution of the Soviet system entirely has wrought upon Eastern Europe and its connected trading partners in Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, the DPRK, etc.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You can just stop arguing, because all you've done thus far is make me appear more correct thanks to you dodging my arguments and personally insulting me. Seriously, if you want to delegitimize me, just downvote me and don't engage, I have consistently provided more sources and demonstrated more knowledge of what we are talking about, so every time you avoid that, it rhetorically strengthens my own arguments. I'm only telling you this because pointing it out makes it even more apparent for onlookers, especially when you call me a "mongrel."

To start, your argument is self-defeating. I explained how Public Ownership is the principle aspect of the PRC's economy, and showed how large firms and key industries are firmly in the public sector. You contradict Marx and call that "Capitalism," which I already showcased earlier as well, with the quotes on gradually appropriating property in the hands of the State.

Next, your opinion on markets contradicts Marx's. Your argument is about the PRC not following Marx, not whether or not they follow your opinion. Your only source on the CPC's lack of dedication to continuing the same process of increasing the productive forces and maintaining public ownership of large firms and key industries? Your word. That's it, really, just your vibe.

Next, you make the unbacked claim that the CPC is a "small elite" that makes a fuck ton of money. Also false, you can check the sources I included earlier, as well as trying to describe a party with 96 million members as "a small elite." Quite silly, considering the number of billionaires in the PRC is shrinking as the economy grows and purchasing power of the working class is steadily rising.

Next, you just say not approving of the CPC will get you shot. This is silly, and not backed by the Harvard study I linked earlier:

Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread in China, these findings highlight that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being. Satisfaction and support must be consistently reinforced. As a result, the data point to specific areas in which citizen satisfaction could decline in today’s era of slowing economic growth and continued environmental degradation.

Or the graphics proving this to be the case:

The western pollsters freely admited that propaganda exists within China, but found most importantly that public opinion was shaped most by the fact that China keeps improving their conditions. It's that simple. Nazi Germany dramatically repressed the people and brutally lowered conditions. This isn't a serious argument.

I do find it funny that you admit that I'm well-sourced, but provide none of your own and then personally insult me, rather than address my arguments. More legitimacy for my own arguments for free, I guess? Thanks!

Sorry to inform you, but the Black Book of Communism was debunked long ago, from including Nazis killed during World War II as "victims of Communism" to literally making up numbers to get to 100 million dead to being outright disproven once the Soviet Archives were opened up.

More personal insults, more free legitimacy. No, I'll keep this going for as long as you help me show others here why anticommunism is founded on a rejection of facts and an adherance to the almighty "because I said so."

 

The theory that large segments of populations are manipulated through indoctrination holds little water, and serves to stem real revolutionary efforts to change the minds of people. Roderic Day makes the case in this essay I consider to be required reading for any self-respecting leftist that instead of brainwashing, propaganda instead works by providing a narrative that is easy to "go along with" as tacit benefactors of present systems. Propaganda does not need to hold under scrutiny to be effective, because it serves as justification, it "licenses" the populace to adopt stances that align with state interests.

Because these narratives are easy to go along with and stem cognitive dissonance, this means that we can convince others, primarily through focusing on positives in the primary and debunking negatives in the secondary. We can convince the proletariat of the benefits of adopting Socialist stances and subvert that way, rather than focusing on debunking atrocity propaganda which gets ignored due to a still-existing belief that the present is the best that is possible.

1
"Tankies" (redsails.org)
 

In current discourse on Lemmy, there is much fearmongering about “tankies,” yet this term is frequently ill-defined and moreover used as a thought terminating cliché. Roderic Day goes over the term, and offers contextualization and explanation for those who uphold and defend Actually Existing Socialism, in this short 8 minute article. My favorite paragraph is as follows:

“Anyway, the basic point is that socialist revolution is neither easy (as the Trotskyists and ultraleftists would have it) nor impossible (as the liberals and conservatives would have it), but hard. It will require dedication and sacrifice and it won’t be won in a day. Tankies are those people who think the millions of communists who fought and died for socialism in the twentieth century weren’t evil, dupes, or wasting their time, but people to whom we owe a great deal and who can still teach us a lot.”

If you consider yourself a Socialist, you have a duty to try to better understand and contextualize historical Socialist movements. It is only through correct analysis based on fact and not fiction that we can move onward.

 

There are many strains of Socialist thought. Why should Socialists adopt a Marxist line today? This question is answered concisely in this article by Roderic Day.

1
Why Public Property? (taiyangyu.medium.com)
 

This article goes over why Marxists advocate for Public ownership of the Means of Production specifically, and not cooperative, communal, or otherwise similarly "worker owned" structures.

1
What is Socialism? (taiyangyu.medium.com)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

A common point of conflict among leftists is understanding what constitutes Socialism. This article explains common errors among Leftists in analyzing what a system needs to look like to be considered Socialist. If an economy has 10% in the Private Sector, is it Capitalist? What about 51%? Does the direction matter?

The short answer, proven in the article, is that it is determined by which class is in power, what the driving force of an economy is. Does the Private Sector drive the public, or does the public sector drive the Private? This can be accomplished by including heavy industry and inftastructure in the Public Sector, making the Private Sector reliant on socialized production and thus subservient to it, and maintaining Proletarian supremacy over the Private Sector.

The presense of Private Property and even billionaires does not mean Private Property drives the direction of the economy, and as Engels elaborates in Principles of Communism, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat can only absorb Private Property in the Public sector by the degree to which markets have formed large monopolist syndicates ripe for central planning, not out of pure decree:

Question 17 : Will it be possible to abolish private property at one stroke?

Answer : No, no more than the existing productive forces can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. Hence, the proletarian revolution, which in all probability is approaching, will be able gradually to transform existing society and abolish private property only when the necessary means of production have been created in sufficient quantity.

Now, of course this doesn't mean Private Property is Socialist! This instead means you cannot look at individual aspects of a system, as was common of the Metaphysicians, but instead the entirety of a system with the context of the interactions of the various transformations and movements of all of the parts of the whole, as Dialectical Materialists. This is why philosophy is crucial to understanding Socialism, because you can't simply break up a system into its component parts, and analyze each sector. I repeat, you cannot accurately judge a system by breaking it up into its component parts and analyzing them individually in their own vacuum.

Therefore, dominance and direction are required. As no system is static, it will necessarily be heading towards either full socialization or privatization, and this vector is determined by what class is in charge. Social Democracy is Capitalist, therefore, as Private Property drives the economy and the bourgeoisie are in control. The fact that Private Property can only be abolished by degree, and not pure decree, means that Socialism is necessarily a transitonal stage, and can't be considered only a fully socialized economy.

Ultimately, the reason Marxists believe Socialized Production to come after Capitalist Production is because Capitalism prepares the grounds for Socialized Production as markets coalesce into monopolist syndicates, allowing for central planning. At different levels of development of various industries, markets or centrally planned public property might make more sense, you can't just decree large syndicates into existence. Throughout developmental stages, markets eventually stagnate as they naturally centralize, and this happens at different paces in different industries, therefore socializing production happens at different times, yet the system is still capable of being considered Socialist as a transitional phase to Communism.

For more information on Marxism, please check out my Introductory Reading List!

And please, discuss below! What do you believe constitutes Socialism, and why? Do you agree or disagree with the article?

 

"Without Revolutionary theory, there can be no Revolutionary Movement."

­— Vladimir Lenin, What is to be Done? | Audiobook

It's time to read theory, comrades! As Lenin says, "Despair is typical of those who do not understand the causes of evil, see no way out, and are incapable of struggle." Marxism-Leninism is broken into 3 major components, as noted by Lenin in his pamphlet The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism: | Audiobook

  1. Dialectical and Historical Materialism

  2. Critique of Capitalism along the lines of Marx's Law of Value

  3. Advocacy for Revolutionary and Scientific Socialism

As such, I created the following list to take you from no knowledge whatsoever of Leftist theory, and leave you with a strong understanding of the critical fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism in an order that builds up as you read. Let's get started!

Section I: Getting Started

What the heck is Communism, anyways? For that matter, what is fascism?

  1. Friedrich Engels' Principles of Communism | Audiobook

The FAQ of Communism, written by the Luigi of the Marx & Engels duo. Quick to read, and easy to reference, this is the perfect start to your journey.

  1. Michael Parenti's Blackshirts and Reds | Audiobook

Parenti's characteristic wit is on full display in this historical contextualization and analysis of fascism and Communism. Line after line, Parenti debunks anti-Communist myths. This is also an excellent time to watch the famous "Yellow Parenti" speech.

Section II: Historical and Dialectical Materialism

Ugh, philosophy? Really? YES!

  1. Georges Politzer's Elementary Principles of Philosophy | Audiobook

By understanding Dialectical and Historical Materialism first, you make it easier to understand the rest of Marxism-Leninism. Don't be intimidated!

  1. Friedrich Engels' Socialism: Utopian and Scientific | Audiobook

Engels introduces Scientific Socialism, explaining how Capitalism itself prepares the conditions for public ownership and planning by centralizing itself into monopolist syndicates and cartels.

Section III: Political Economy

That's right, it's time for the Law of Value and a deep-dive into Imperialism. If we are to defeat Capitalism, we must learn it's mechanisms, tendencies, contradictions, and laws.

  1. Karl Marx's Wage Labor and Capital | Audiobook & Wages, Price and Profit | Audiobook

Best taken as a pair, these essays simplify the most important parts of the Law of Value.

  1. Vladimir Lenin's Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism | Audiobook

The era of Imperialism, which as the primary contradiction cascades downward into all manner of related secondary contradictions.

Section IV: Revolutionary and Scientific Socialism

Can we defeat Capitalism at the ballot box? What about just defeating fascism? What about the role of the state?

  1. Rosa Luxemburg's Reform or Revolution | Audiobook

If Marxists believed reforming Capitalist society was possible, we would be the first in line for it. Sadly, it isn't.

  1. Vladimir Lenin's The State and Revolution | Audiobook

Further analyzes the necessity of Revolution and introduces the economic basis for the withering away of the State.

Section V: National Liberation, De-colonialism, and Solidarity

The revolution will not be fought by individuals, but by an intersectional, international working class movement. Solidarity allows different marginalized groups to work together in collective interest, unifying into a single broad movement. Marxists support the Right of Self-Determination for all peoples and support National Liberation movements against Imperialism.

  1. Vikky Storm & Eme Flores' The Gender Accelerationist Manifesto | (No Audiobook yet)

Breaks down misogyny, and queerphobia, as well as how to move beyond the base subject of "gender" from a Historical Materialist perspective.

  1. Leslie Feinberg's Lavender & Red | Audiobook

When different social groups fight for liberation together along intersectional lines, they are emboldened and empowered ever-further.

  1. Frantz Fanon's The Wretched of the Earth | Audiobook & Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed | Audiobook

De-colonialism is essential to Marxism. Without having a strong, de-colonial, internationalist stance, we have no path to victory nor justice. These books are best taken as a pair, read in quick succession.

Section VI: Putting it into Practice!

It's not enough to endlessly read, you must put theory to practice. That is how you can improve yourself and the movements you support. Touch grass!

  1. Mao Tse-Tung's On Practice & On Contradiction | Audiobook

Mao wrote simply and directly to peasant soldiers during the Revolutionary War in China. This pair of essays equip the reader to apply the analytical tools of Dialectical Materialism to their every day practice.

  1. Vladimir Lenin's "Left-Wing" Communism, an Infantile Disorder | Audiobook

Common among new leftists is dogmatism over pragmatism. Everyone wants perfection, but dogmatic "left" anti-Communists let perfection become the enemy of progress.

  1. Liu Shaoqi's How to be a Good Communist | Audiobook

Organizing is a skill. If we are to be successful, we must work to better ourselves.

Congratulations, you completed your introductory reading course!

With your new understanding and knowledge of Marxism-Leninism, here is a mini What is to be Done? of your own to follow, and take with you as practical advice.

  1. Get organized. The Party for Socialism and Liberation, Freedom Road Socialist Organization, Red Star Caucus, and Marxist Unity Group all organize year round, every year, because the battle for progress is a constant struggle. See if there is a chapter near you, or start one!

  2. Read theory. Don't think that you are done now! Just because you have the basics, doesn't mean you know more than you do. If you have not investigated a subject, don't speak on it!

  3. Aggressively combat white supremacy, misogyny, queerphobia, and other attacks on marginalized communities. Cede no ground, let nobody go forgotten.

  4. Be industrious, and self-sufficient. Take up gardening, home repair, tinkering. It is through practice that you elevate your knowledge.

  5. Learn self-defense. Get armed, if practical. Be ready to protect yourself and others.

  6. Be persistent. If you feel like a single water droplet against a mountain, think of canyons and valleys. With consistency, every rock, boulder, mountain, can be drilled through with nothing but water droplets.

"Everything under heaven is in utter chaos; the situation is excellent."

­— Mao Tse-Tung

 

Ranking by themes, enjoyment, and how well these builds are actualized, what general build is most fun in each game? An ideal case, "fun maximized" run. What are your thoughts?

 

Just what the title says. I know New Vegas is the fan favorite (and it's mine as well), but what do you personally like replaying the most? Is it Fallout 1, with its tight narrative and quick replay value? Is it 2, with its massive expansion on Fallout 1's formula? Is it 3, with the most atmospheric Wasteland to explore? Is it New Vegas, with the best roleplaying and replayability in the series? Is it Fallout 4, with the best gunplay and survival mode? What are your thoughts?

 

Could be wabbajack, a guide, or even a list from a YouTuber. What curated mod list is your favorite? I'm partial to Viva New Vegas and like some of the Mojave Express Guide, but lists like Lost Liberty and The Sands, which have very clear visions in mind, have been a ton of fun as well. Especially looking for any for Fallout 4, I haven't played 4 in years.

 

Everyone knows about Fallout 4: New Vegas, but what about the other projects? Fallout: London, Nuevo Mexico, and other large scale mods are on my radar. What's on yours?

view more: ‹ prev next ›