I'm new. Some questions...

[ilikebacon3000]

Best not to give out personal information such as name, exact location, etc. Otherwise, welcome to the forum. - Bobkindles

Here are some questions I have about..... Well.... Shyt!

-What is the goal of this "Revolution". Like are we specifallcy trying to accomplish one thing?

-Who IS Che Guevera? I have read on him, but I dont really get what made him so... So revolutionary. To be honest, I just dont understand what he did. (No disrespect. I just want to know so I can educate people who dont know about him)

-Explain communism in a way to where I wont be like "the Fuck??"

-One last question, who is enemy number 1? Is there some crazy ass culprit behind the evil in the world, or are these just the ways of the world?

Thanks!
btw this site seems pretty cool Im glad I ran across it.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Here are some questions I have about..... Well.... Shyt!

-What is the goal of this "Revolution". Like are we specifallcy trying to accomplish one thing?

The role of the revolution is to establish a Communist society.


-Who IS Che Guevera? I have read on him, but I dont really get what made him so... So revolutionary. To be honest, I just dont understand what he did. (No disrespect. I just want to know so I can educate people who dont know about him)

Che Guevara was a revolutionary active in the Cuban Revolution of 1959.

Here is some more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara


-Explain communism in a way to where I wont be like "the Fuck??"

Communism is a stateless, classless society whereby there is neither private property or capitalism. Instead the people have common ownership of the means of production. Decisions will be made in a truly democratic, horizontal manner through workers councils and voluntary agreements. A gift ecomony will be in practice meaning each person can contribute to production as they wish and each person can take what they need from a community store.

I seem to have deleted your final question but there is no public enemy number 1. The enemy in this war is the bourgeoisie.

[Post-Something]

Here are some questions I have about..... Well.... Shyt!

-What is the goal of this "Revolution". Like are we specifallcy trying to accomplish one thing?

-Who IS Che Guevera? I have read on him, but I dont really get what made him so... So revolutionary. To be honest, I just dont understand what he did. (No disrespect. I just want to know so I can educate people who dont know about him)

-Explain communism in a way to where I wont be like "the Fuck??"

-One last question, who is enemy number 1? Is there some crazy ass culprit behind the evil in the world, or are these just the ways of the world?

Thanks!
btw this site seems pretty cool Im glad I ran across it.

Hey Taylor, welcome to the board! :)


You're asking some very good questions at such a young age, so I'll try to answer a couple of them for you:

First of all, this is a website for those who believe in "revolutionary leftist" ideals, as you may have gathered. This means we strive for the goal of egalitarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarian). This means that we want everyone to be treated equally, and free from oppression.

What kind of society would this look like? You might ask.

Well, there would be no such thing as "class" for example, where people are divided based on how they earn their money.

There would be no more "state", ie, the government using unnessessary violence.

You would have access to products you need to survive, such as food clothing, housing, and healthcare, in abundance.


This system is called communism.


So, whats wrong with the society we live in today, you might ask? Well, we live in an economic system called capitalism. This is where a tiny group of people own the "means of production" (ie, the factories and machines necessary to make "stuff"), and where they employ you to work for them for "wages". We'll call them Capitalists and workers from now on.

So whats the problem? The problem is, how do you think those capitalists make money?

Say he has a factory that makes chairs. He buys all the resources, lots of wood, plenty of nails, and he pays a couple of workers to come and build them for him, right? Then, he sells these chairs, and somehoe, makes MORE money than what he started with! Where did he get the money? He made it off of the workers, by paying them less than their labour deserved; that is how you make profit.

This essentially means that all society's wealth is constantly dispersed unequally, making the rich get richer, while the poor don't improve, or in some cases, get poorer.

However, it doesn't have to be like that. This system, as you will find out if you stay on the website, causes wars, poverty, hunger - conflict in general. and it's unnessesary.

So, how do we go from capitalism to the society I talked about earlier? A revolution! The working class people can seize the means of production, and run them for themselves, so everyone can be treated equally.

So in answer of your question, who is the big bad culprit; it's those capitalists. They're the reason why your mom has to work two jobs, and why there's a divide between the rich and the poor even in your class.


As for Che, he was a revolutionary, using guerilla tactics in Cuba. You can read about him in the history section if you want :)


Anyway, I hope that explains the basics of it. If you need any clarifications, don't be afraid to ask!

[Il Medico]

Welcome comrade!:)

To answer your questions simply:

The goal of revolution is to establish a communist or post-class society.

Che was a Marxist guerrilla who fought in the Cuban revolution, for more see the history form or che-lives.com

Communism is the complete equality of humanity.

Number one enemy is capitalism and moreover fascism.

You have good questions, need any specifics just ask me by posting a comment on my profile. ;)

[Comrade Marxist Bro]

Communism is a stateless, classless society whereby there is neither private property or capitalism.

Well, that's slightly off. There is personal private property. Like your own toothbrush or your bed. But there's no private ownership of the means of production, which simply means that you can't take profits from the people who do the work.

[NecroCommie]

Post-Something made it pretty clear I think, but I would like to elaborate certain points.

First, I would like to clarify what it actually means to have no class differences. Society classes come in two kinds: The opressors and the opressed. Some hybrid classes may exist, but they are never large.

So for example: If your shool would be a factory, or a library where I work at, the revolution would abolish the rulers. In your case the rectors, and in my case the bosses. This would mean that in your school the community that uses the school is left free to decide what to teach, and my library workers could choose how exactly to reach our goals, set by the local community. All these decisions would have to be made democratically, since ordering people around would have been banned during the revolution.

Your lesson structure would change dramatically. Teaching would be more like discussing science, because teachers would no longer have complete authority. They would have to explain all the science, instead of just telling it. I would no longer have bosses to order me around, so me and my co-workers would take our feedback mostly from our clients, and we would democratically decide on how to achieve a better service here.

I think that should make it concrete enough.

My second point is that of the revolution.

Many people ask if revolution is necessary. My answer is: Yes! History is full of examples on how the ruling class quenches every single attempt to free the opressed, just for the sake of opressing.
-Paris commune
-Spanish civil war
-The slave rebellion of Spartacus
-The russian civil war (in this case the opressed won)
-The Vietnam war
-The war in Iraq
And on and on the list goes...

There are ofcourse those who say that the society can be changed through peaceful and lawful ways, but I think that the current rise of the income gaps in nordic countries prove that this can't be a permanent solution, if solution at all. (Nordic countries are Social democratic = peaceful reforming to make capitalism "nicer") Also, every single capitalist welfare country so far have achieved their welfare through imperialist exploitation of the third world, so it cant be very global answer for inequality anyways.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Well, that's slightly off. There is personal private property. Like your own toothbrush or your bed. But there's no private ownership of the means of production, which simply means that you can't take profits from the people who do the work.

Well of course. That is the distinction between private possesions and social possesions. When I said the abolition of private property I was alluding to as you say "private ownership of the means of production".

[ilikebacon3000]

.
So for example: If your shool would be a factory, or a library where I work at, the revolution would abolish the rulers. In your case the rectors, and in my case the bosses. This would mean that in your school the community that uses the school is left free to decide what to teach, and my library workers could choose how exactly to reach our goals, set...
So wait, this is what it WOULD be like?
I do like that.
Because I dont think we are taught enough in school about MY community. MY people I live around. Sure, I am white. But I live in a pretty much all hispanic neborhood, and probley around 10% of them are working class and have family coming from Mexico frequently to live with them. I see alot, and I see that in a white school system, we dont learn very much about any other culture but the white culture. In every attempt they have, they try to make the oppressed look bad. My social studies teacher commonly refers to Nat Turner as a fugitive and a murderer. Sure, he is both, but who is he to tell ME that its wrong to run away from my owners? I am a nihilist. There is no right. Life is life, and people live by instinct. There is however, helpful humanity and, well, non-helpful humanity I guess. But I think the idea of "right" and "wrong" should be completly ignored in school, because for example, I think that gangs, can be positive if controlled, and in school that is looked at as "Wrong" so I just decided not to think things are really morally or socially "Right or wrong", but rather to just look at things as helpful or a threat to me. Just because its helpful doesent make it right, but it doesent make it wrong either. I mean, I guess there is right or wrong when it comes down to it, but I think the school system just POUNDS this shit into our heads that this is right and this is wrong. Also, I asked him if he knew that Columbus raped, killed, and took advantage of the Indians (this was when I first started reading "A Peoples History of the untied states" by Howard Zin) and he said "Where did you hear that?" and he tried to tell the rest of the class that what I was saying was un-nessacery and un-called for. They just try to force all this biased education down our throat and really, its not right. I think society should just be a bunch of small communitys. No countrys, states, or even parishs, just communitys interacting with one another through trade things of that sort. Jeez, if only I could have been lucky enough to live, ehhh, 7000 years ago to help form society haha.

[NecroCommie]

I dont know if you realize it, but you sound like a true marxist already. :thumbup1:
Please use the "enter"-key though.

Also, In communist society a job is a duty, and house, food and healthcare human rights. In a capitalist society these are all priviledges.

[ilikebacon3000]

I dont know if you realize it, but you sound like a true marxist already. :thumbup1:
Please use the "enter"-key though.

Also, In communist society a job is a duty, and house food and healthcare human rights. In a capitalist society, these are all priviledges.

What is a marxist exactly? is that just a fancy word for communism? also does anyone know any good books besides "Steal this book" By Abbey Hoffman and "A peoples history" by Howard Zin?

[NecroCommie]

What is a marxist exactly? is that just a fancy word for communism? also does anyone know any good books besides "Steal this book" By Abbey Hoffman and "A peoples history" by Howard Zin?


Marxism

A philosophy based on the ideas of Karl Marx. Includes historical materialism, the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism and other ideas.

Further Reading

Foundations of Marxism (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.marxists.org/subject/students/index.htm)
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/p...s/marxism.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progres...ss/marxism.html)
http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/marx.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/marx.html)Coldly copied from ---> http://www.revleft.com/vb/revolutionary-left-dictionary-t22628/index.html

Also read --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

One could say that Marxism is just a fancy word for communism, but the anarchists migh get pissed off. Karl Marx is commonly considered the father of communism.

As for the books to read: Lord of the rings trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien, and the Dark elf trilogy by R.A. Salvatore...
And seriously: Communist manifesto, and Das Kapital are the basic tenets of communism.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

I think I should point out that a gift economy, complete equality, and free access to whatever goods you need are not necessary characteristics of communism. Marx believed that in communism people would receive according to their contribution until work became more automated, enjoyable, and goods were produced in abundance.

[Post-Something]

What is a marxist exactly? is that just a fancy word for communism? also does anyone know any good books besides "Steal this book" By Abbey Hoffman and "A peoples history" by Howard Zin?

I would strongly recommend you read the following if you want to get a basic understanding of communism or Anarchism:

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html

Jusr read from the introduction onwards.
You don't necessarily have to read many old texts, such as Das Kapital, which even I haven't read. There are many recent pamphlets which sum up the basic gist and main goals of radical leftist thought.

[#FF0000]

-One last question, who is enemy number 1? Is there some crazy ass culprit behind the evil in the world, or are these just the ways of the world?


Well, to answer this, you should know a little about class analysis. See, in capitalism there are the workers (the proletariat) and the big, resource controlling bosses (the bourgeoisie). There are also the managers (the petit-bourgeoisie) and the criminals (lumpenproletariat) and the cops (bastards).

The only ones you really need to focus on though are the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

So, here is how these classes play out their role in society. The bourgeoisie own all the stuff. They own the factories, the chain stores, the businesses, as well as vast amounts of resources (a.k.a. "capital), such as land, oil, lumber...etc. Since they control all of this stuff, they have power and influence.

The proletariat, on the other hand, don't own this stuff. They don't own much of anything aside from their own personal property. Because they don't own things, and because the bourgeoisie do own things, the only way for the proletariat to survive is to sell their time and labor to the bourgeoisie. This is more commonly knows as "going to work", and it sucks.

At work, the workers use what the boss owns (tools, materials...etc) to produce things to sell ("commodities"). In exchange, they get wages. These wages don't ever cover the full value of the work, though. For example, if a worker built a chair that was sold for $50, that worker would not get paid $50. They would maybe get $10, while the boss would take $40, put some of that towards the business, and keep the rest. If the workers were paid for the full value of their work, businesses could not make profit, and thus could not compete in a capitalist market.

So, as you can see, capitalism is inherently unfair. The bourgeoisie own all the resources, and restrict their use. Workers are forced to work for them, or starve. Futher, they aren't even given the full value of the work they did. And while this whole workplace drama is taking place, workers are producing a staggering amount of commodities that could be used by people who need them. However, people still starve and go without. Meeting everyone's needs, or even coming close, just isn't profitable.

This makes it look like the bourgeoisie is the "public enemy #1". That isn't quite it, though. The bourgeoisie certainly keep us, the workers, down. However, the problem is, mostly, this sort of boss-worker, "have"-"have not" class division in general, where one group of people has power over another.

Hope that answers some questions for you :)

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Well, to answer this, you should know a little about class analysis. See, in capitalism there are the workers (the proletariat) and the big, resource controlling bosses (the bourgeoisie). There are also the managers (the petit-bourgeoisie) and the criminals (lumpenproletariat) and the cops (bastards).



:lol: Very true

[ilikebacon3000]

At work, the workers use what the boss owns (tools, materials...etc) to produce things to sell ("commodities"). In exchange, they get wages. These wages don't ever cover the full value of the work, though. For example, if a worker built a chair that was sold for $50, that worker would not get paid $50. They would maybe get $10, while the boss would take $40, put some of that towards the business, and keep the rest. If the workers were paid for the full value of their work, businesses could not make profit, and thus could not compete in a capitalist market.
:)
I see how that seems unfair, but I do think to an extent it is fair.
The boss needs money too, or else he will become the worker. And also, he needs money to provide materials for his workers to use so they can do a good job. I do think however, that the boss shouldnt take ALL the money like they do. Janitors at Nike headquarters are probley completley ignored and dont get paid anything, even though they have one of the most important jobs in the whole company.
So answer this: How will the bosses make money if they are forced to give up all their profit? If they do that, then they are technically giving their equipment away for free use to ANYONE who wants to gain off it, which techinically is putting the boss back where the workers were. He is having to let people use his equipment, while before the workers were being forced to use their time and bodies to provide physical labor to boss.
Do you see what I am saying?
Can someone fix my train of thought, because I am a little confused I guess.

[ilikebacon3000]

At work, the workers use what the boss owns (tools, materials...etc) to produce things to sell ("commodities"). In exchange, they get wages. These wages don't ever cover the full value of the work, though. For example, if a worker built a chair that was sold for $50, that worker would not get paid $50. They would maybe get $10, while the boss would take $40, put some of that towards the business, and keep the rest. If the workers were paid for the full value of their work, businesses could not make profit, and thus could not compete in a capitalist market.
:)
I see how that seems unfair, but I do think to an extent it is fair.
The boss needs money too, or else he will become the worker. And also, he needs money to provide materials for his workers to use so they can do a good job. I do think however, that the boss shouldnt take ALL the money like they do. Janitors at Nike headquarters are probley completley ignored and dont get paid anything, even though they have one of the most important jobs in the whole company.

So answer this: How will the bosses make money if they are forced to give up all their profit? If they do that, then they are technically giving their equipment away for free use to ANYONE who wants to gain off it, which techinically is putting the boss back where the workers were. He is having to let people use his equipment, while before the workers were being forced to use their time and bodies to provide physical labor to their bosses.

Do you see what I am saying?

Can someone fix my train of thought, because I am a little confused I guess.

[#FF0000]

I see how that seems unfair, but I do think to an extent it is fair.
The boss needs money too, or else he will become the worker.

So? Why is the boss so important? Why does he deserve the wealth and power while the people who made his fortunes survive off of scraps?


And also, he needs money to provide materials for his workers to use so they can do a good job.

He doesn't make the money. All he does is own the machines. The workers produce the things to sell, which is what brings in the money. The workers make the money with their own labor. The bosses take a huge cut of that money. So, we don't really need the bosses.


So answer this: How will the bosses make money if they are forced to give up all their profit?

1) They won't. In fact, they won't even be bosses any more.
2) We don't just want them to give up their profit. We want them to give up their property (property meaning "the means of production", which are resources, machines, capital...etc, which I mentioned earlier)

Instead of having bosses, industry and communities can be run by the workers themselves. Think of that. Instead of a boss, all the workers in a factory get together and decide amongst themselves how they'll be running the place. Seems a lot more fair that way, doesn't it?


If they do that, then they are technically giving their equipment away for free use to ANYONE who wants to gain off it, which techinically is putting the boss back where the workers were.

Well, we aren't saying just let anyone use the equipment. It should be owned collectively, meaning, it should be owned by all the workers. And, once again, who cares if the boss doesn't have privilege and status? Why is that a bad thing?


He is having to let people use his equipment, while before the workers were being forced to use their time and bodies to provide physical labor to their bosses.

How is it "his" equipment in the first place? That equipment too was built by other workers, who were paid for less than their labor was worth. It was then bought by another boss using the money he took from the workers. How is that fair?

We don't want the bosses to be there. We want them to become workers. We want the resources he and machines and materials he controls to be owned and controlled by the workers.

The idea is that, first off, if the means of production (the equipment) was commonly owned, it would be used to produce in order to meet people's needs. Over time, the equipment would be improved upon and made more efficient, so more can be produced and people's needs can be met with less work having to be done.

So, what we hope to achieve is a world without bosses and people with power over others (classless, stateless society), and a world where we can have our needs met more efficiently (that is, with less work)

[al8]

What is a marxist exactly? is that just a fancy word for communism? also does anyone know any good books besides "Steal this book" By Abbey Hoffman and "A peoples history" by Howard Zin?

I'd like you to aquaint yourself with Technocracy; a proposal for the organisation of a post-scarity society. Here are two easy and concise youtube series on the subject; 1. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AruLkbu1z0), 2. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ps5vJrIxM)

You might also want to check this out; http://rs2kpapers.awardspace.com/theory.html
It's a collection of messageboard posts by an old plain-spoken communist aranged in a novel and accessible format about various topics regarding human emancipation.

[LOLseph Stalin]

What is the goal of this "Revolution". Like are we specifallcy trying to accomplish one thing?



The role of the revolution is to establish a Communist society.

I just thought I would elaborate on this a little. The role of the revolution is to create a Communist society, but you should be keeping in mind that there are several factors to consider. First off, revolution is neccessary as the Bourgeois won't be stepping down willingly. The enjoy using us as slaves to make millions. Revolution is our way of "breaking these chains" as Marx suggested. Of course revolution won't come right away. First off you need the support of the masses(or at least enough to outnumber the Bourgeois resistance). This could be achieved through education, demos, etc. Also, you should be keeping in mind that a Communist society won't be coming immediately after the revolution. There has to be a transition stage where the Proletarians establish control in order to prevent another uprising by the Bourgeoisie, "Dictatorship of the Proletariat". With this, the conditions will eventually improve for the establishment of a Communist society and the state will wither away. This will be true Communism as Marx described it.

[Vincent]

This is like a Socratic dialogue. I love it!

A minor subtlety, perhaps, is that these days the 'proletariat' are relatively well-off and enjoy capitalism. You get your money, and you buy your stuff, right? So why change? I can get my plasma TV and my gadgets in this world and I'm cool with that, so whatever.

Well, and this isn't something Marx predicted as far as I understand, now the poverty of workers during the Industrial Revolution has been transferred to Third World nations, who do live in poverty. A society that works on need, rather than profit, would eliminate the unequal distribution of wealth and, thus, the poverty of the exploited classes.

As a Marxist in a developed country, you need to be concerned with the effects of capitalism on a global scale. But, as we've seen recently with the recession, capitalism can effect everyone that works.

[Leaf]

I see how that seems unfair, but I do think to an extent it is fair.
The boss needs money too, or else he will become the worker.


SHOCK! HORROR! (what's wrong with the boss becoming the worker?)
lol naahh, that's what the aim is. We don't need bosses. We're aiming for a classless society (or where everyone is the same class - but then the word doesn't matter)


And also, he needs money to provide materials for his workers to use so they can do a good job.


No everybody can be workers and collectively own the materials and means of production and machines etc.

I do think however, that the boss shouldnt take ALL the money like they do. Janitors at Nike headquarters are probley completley ignored and dont get paid anything, even though they have one of the most important jobs in the whole company.

Yep.

So answer this: How will the bosses make money if they are forced to give up all their profit?

They'll work for it like everyone else.

If they do that, then they are technically giving their equipment away for free use to ANYONE who wants to gain off it, which techinically is putting the boss back where the workers were. He is having to let people use his equipment, while before the workers were being forced to use their time and bodies to provide physical labor to their bosses.

Do you see what I am saying?

Can someone fix my train of thought, because I am a little confused I guess.

You see, the bourgeoisie own, they don't work. They sit in a chair and collect the money off people working for them.

We want everyone to be workers. But the workers, ie everyone, will own all the factories and materials and be their own bosses. There will also be less work and it will be more enjoyable and the less enjoyable work will ideally be rotated. That sounds more fair right?


These are simplified answers based on my seriously limited understanding so: more experienced people please correct me. It's hardly appropriate for me to attempt to teach someone when I am in such a preliminary stage of learning myself but somehow, in a weird way, I understand a learner's questions completely and I talk in a less sophisticated way.

But it's great that you're asking such honest questions - it's the best way to learn :D Good on you.

[el_chavista]

- who is enemy number 1? Is there some crazy ass culprit behind the evil in the world, or are these just the ways of the world?

For sure the enemy 1 is the greedy vermin who historically appropriated the means of production.

[Brother No. 1]

What is the goal of this "Revolution". Like are we specifallcy trying to accomplish one thing?


The Goal of the Revolution is to put the Proletarian in power and remove the Boeguise. It is also to destroy Capitalism as a whole the opression,slavery of the workers, poverty,ect..




-Who IS Che Guevera? I have read on him, but I dont really get what made him so... So revolutionary. To be honest, I just dont understand what he did. (No disrespect. I just want to know so I can educate people who dont know about him)

Esternavo "Che" Guevera is a Argentinan(with some irish blood) who participated in the Cuban Revolution and tried to start a Revolution in Bolvia. He lived to age 35( thats the age the Army in Bolvia killed him when he was captured due to a malfuctioning radio, a Revisionist Communist party, and the CIA) and he was infact what Trots call a "Stalinist."




-Explain communism in a way to where I wont be like "the Fuck??"


Communism (by deffination) is a Classless,Stateless Soceity where no one is opressed there is no rich or poor and people work for the greater good side by side instrad of working against each other for profit. Several notes: There is no such thing as a Communist state, in Marxist theory its from Capitalism to Socialism( after Violent Revolution) and finally to Communism after the whole world has stayed long enough in a world Socialist state to set aside their differences.



-One last question, who is enemy number 1? Is there some crazy ass culprit behind the evil in the world, or are these just the ways of the world?


The enemy is the Elite Class, Boeguise. the ones who opress the working class and the poor. But those are the Capitalists enemies we also have the Facists,Nazis, and other right political factions. In short terms: the entire Right poltical wing is our enemy.