Log in

View Full Version : Marxist-Leninist



Peacekeeper
12th June 2008, 02:22
A reactionary you say? Really? :confused:

I present to you the work of an hour in the school library:

I'll cover a series of issues, including my views on class conflict and antagonisms, the problems of bourgeois democracy, worker organization, the vanguard party, worker control of the means of production, and the issue of post-revolutionary society, both under a socialist state and afterwards, in a communist society.

To begin with, class conflict. Starting with the rise of unequal economic systems (pre-capitalism), there have been economic classes. In feudal society, for example, there was the landlord class, which owned the fields and the manors and the serfs or slaves. In addition, of course, there were the serfs, and the bureaucrats who collected tax money or undertook other administrative tasks. Then there were the "enforcers," the brute force of the feudal lord, which could take the form of a small private army or "foreman" who would beat the serfs if they did not work.

In modern capitalist society, the means of production changes, but parallels of the feudal class structure can be seen. The capitalist now owns factories, and buys the labor of the proletarian working in "his" factory.

To see the origin of class conflict in a capitalist society, we must examine the actual economics of factory work and production. If the workers shows up and works, he creates a product, with the use of the factory equipment owned by the capitalist. The capitalist then pays the proletarian a sum of money for his labor. However, if we examine the following course of events, we can establish that the worker is being paid less than the product is worth, to produce it!

For instance, the capitalist sells a product to a middle man for $100 the middle man sells the product to a retailer for $150. The retailer then sets the product on the shelf at the price of $200, where a consumer buys it.

Now, we return to the factory. The capitalist, receiving $100 for the product manufactured by the worker, pays the proletarian at the end of the week for his work. If you add up the amount of products he produced, and divide his pay by it, we find that he is being paid far less than the capitalist is selling the product for!

Therefore, a factory worker may produce 50 products in a day. At the end of a six-day week, that means he has produced 300 products. Should he not be able to then buy 300 o the products he has manufactured then, with his pay? But he is not able to. This is where the alienation between worker and product begins, when he is producing something he himself cannot afford.

Where does the difference go, between the money taken in from the sale of the product to a middle man and the money the worker is paid? It becomes profit, and the capitalist pockets it. Has he done any work, contributed any sweat to the process of production?
No – he benefits monetarily only because of what he owns, what his bourgeois property is. He can sit at home all day, enjoying luxuries he can afford through the labor of the workers, while they toil away in the factory to make him richer. The workers, seeing this, become discontented. He does no work, why should he benefit from our labor?

The capitalist, wishing to enjoy greater and greater profits to perhaps open up another factory to exploit the wage labor of more workers, must do one of two things to ensure greater profits. He must either sell the product at a higher cost, which will likely alienate middle man or retailer, or he can pay his worker's less, and take the extra as profit.

This cycle will lead to greater and greater discontent among the working class, leading to the formation of labor unions, strikes, and worker's parties, all of which are weapons to hit back against the system of wage slavery.

The capitalists, feeling threatened, may shut down factories, or hire thugs as "union-busters" to intimidate, beat, and kill union leaders and members, and intimidate non-unionized labor, saying they will be fired at the first hint of unionization. This causes more resentment against the capitalists, and so on and so on, until violent revolution and seizure of the means of production by the working class is the only logical conclusion.

To address the issues of the bourgeois democracy, we can say this: democracy in a capitalist society is not representative of the masses, but representative of the propertied "elite" upper class of capitalists. "But from this capitalist democracy-inevitably narrow, subtly rejecting the poor, and therefore hypocritical and false to the core - progress does not march onward, simply, smoothly, and directly, to "greater and greater democracy," as the liberal professors and petty-bourgeois opportunists would have us believe." (Lenin, State and Revolution).

A bourgeois democracy is a democracy influenced by the system of capitalism. The masses are manipulated and misled by corporate media and the upper class politicians. Government is unresponsive to the demands of the workers, as the ultimate master of bourgeois government is the capitalist class, whom it serves with fewer restrictions on free trade, pollution of power plants and factories, and other laws that give the capitalists an opportunity to reach ever-higher profits.

For this reason, the reformist socialists are poorly misguided. Fundamental change in the capitalist system cannot occur with the help of the bourgeois state. You cannot seek solutions through democratic means, as the only solution to class antagonism and economic & social injustice is a worker's revolution.

The vanguard party should be made up of the revolutionary working class, an organized center for the training of the working class for the eventual revolution against the capitalist exploiters and bourgeois state.

The vanguard party should have close ties with the various labor unions, and encourage them to merge together into larger and larger unions of workers, hopefully fulfilling the IWW dream of One Big Union, who could hold the capitalists accountable, all a precursor to the revolution.

The party leadership should be democratically elected representatives of the interests of the revolutionary working class, and a base for the whole organization to rely on for necessities of revolution, such as securing mass support, then the arming of the party militants, and the coordinating of the revolution.

After the revolution, the capitalists will cease to exist as an economic class. The worst of them should be tried and executed, while others should be given the chance to be rehabilitated and labor for the socialist cause.

The workers at a particular factory will now manage the administration and production within a given factory, and be in communication with the central planning division of the new socialist state, so as to determine where their products are most needed by the people. In this way, all communities will be linked through mutual assistance through central planning, rather than the global or national markets.

In a post revolutionary society, there will be many changes to the economic and social structure of the nation. For example, communal cafeterias, community day care and schooling, the destruction of the family as an economic unit, nationalization of major industry and businesses, etc.

Some good general guidelines of what makes a nation socialist can be seen in the Communist Manifesto.

"1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c."

Media that is contrary to the new socialist state should be banned, in such cases as movies or pamphlets advocating racist hate or discrimination. Also, prostitution and pornography should be abolished, as they are in nearly all cases created by wealthy men, and women who are experiencing economic hardship. Alexandra Kollontai stipulates that prostitution, as a result of socialist society, will be eliminated without even putting restrictions on it, as it will no longer be economically necessary. "This evil, which is a stain on humanity and the scourge of hungry working women, has its roots in commodity production and the institution of private property. Once these economic forms are superseded, the trade in women will automatically disappear." (Communism and the Family).

In the same essay, she describes how the duties previously associated with the family (cleaning, cooking, raising children), will be taken care of by the State and communal cafeterias, so the family will eventually cease to be a relevant aspect of a communist or socialist society.

As Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels said, the socialist State must do its job, and then wither away. Once the workers are firmly in control of the means of production, then the State can gradually lose its political character, and will merely act in an administrative position, assuring that resources move in an effective way, to where they are needed most, and that builders are creating enough housing in the right places, etc.

I hope this explains my current view of things, and that I am worthy of being an un-restricted member of the RevLeft community. As always, feel free to take issue with any ideological errors you see (other than fundamental ones, ie criticism from anarchists, etc).

With socialist greetings,
-Comrade Demopolous (Peacekeeper)

Bud Struggle
12th June 2008, 02:57
I see you too idalistic and pro-statism. You don't see the the universalism of Communism. Your statism takes the form of your religion--while being a Communism and a Christian is a rough fit to say the least--being a Muslem and a Communist is darn near impossible.

Sorry but I vote, no.

Peacekeeper
12th June 2008, 03:04
I see you too idalistic and pro-statism. You don't see the the universalism of Communism. Your statism takes the form of your religion--while being a Communism and a Christian is a rough fit to say the least--being a Muslem and a Communist is darn near impossible.

Sorry but I vote, no.

I'm no more statist than the next Leninist.
Comparing statism to religion is nonsense, as is saying religion and communism are incompatible. There have been and are many Christian-based communal societies, as well as the Jewish kibbutzim in "Israel," and the Islamic socialism of Libya. Go learn something.

Instead of making vague statements about me not understanding universalism in communism, why not back that statement up with some examples of that from my post, rather than spouting nonsense with no basis in fact or reality?

Bud Struggle
12th June 2008, 03:21
Sorry. I already made my vote--you are to stay restricted. :(

Peacekeeper
12th June 2008, 03:23
Sorry. I already made my vote--you are to stay restricted. :(

If you're not here for discussion, don't post here.

trivas7
12th June 2008, 03:25
[...] as is saying religion and communism are incompatible.
I will say it: religion and communism are incompatible. Their goals and philosophic bases are contrary to one another. One is based on the irrational and looks for otherworldy salvation as man's end, the other is based on humanism and reason, it looks for men to better their species-being. Perhaps Marx's "Theses of Feuerbach" is a good place to start considering this important issue.

Bud Struggle
12th June 2008, 03:31
If you're not here for discussion, don't post here.

My apologies. But I stated my opposition to you getting unrestricted. You are two ethnicly and religiously one sided.

Ethnicity and religion are paradims of the PAST not of the future of Communism. To say that Arab countries are this right or wrong is like saying this TRIBE is right or wrong.

We are all eople and we are all brothers. There is NO DIFFERENCE between you and a JEW.

Or between me or you. You seem to see a difference. There is no difference between Christianity or Jewism or Islam--they are ALL THE SAME. You can't be a real Cmmunist till you recognize those facts.

Peacekeeper
12th June 2008, 04:17
My apologies. But I stated my opposition to you getting unrestricted. You are two ethnicly and religiously one sided.

Ethnicity and religion are paradims of the PAST not of the future of Communism. To say that Arab countries are this right or wrong is like saying this TRIBE is right or wrong.

We are all eople and we are all brothers. There is NO DIFFERENCE between you and a JEW.

Or between me or you. You seem to see a difference. There is no difference between Christianity or Jewism or Islam--they are ALL THE SAME. You can't be a real Cmmunist till you recognize those facts.

Ethnically one-sided! Race is pretty much irrelevant in my opinion. Anything that is attributed to a certain race is either manufactured by the media to be associated with that race, or is merely a cultural (rather than racial) difference. Besides, a White Muslim (any Muslim, but especially Muslims of a race that is not known for practicing Islam) must be racially accepting, as part of religious doctrine as well as love for Arabic, Indonesian, Persian, African, etc. brothers.

The only difference between Christianity and Judaism and Islam is that Muslims pray five times a day in a regimented way, which appeals to me, and that in general, the Muslim American community is much more tight-knit than the Christian or Jewish community. They should, of course, all be entitled to the same rights and privileges under a socialist government.

Haha - Hinting that I am racially or religiously prejudiced: cracks me up! :lol:

Chapter 24
12th June 2008, 04:46
in general, the Muslim American community is much more tight-knit than the Christian or Jewish community.
:lol:

Not necessarily. I come from a family of Jewish heritage (my mother's side) and I can tell you from experience that Jewish communities are pretty close. Since the Holocaust especially I would say that Jews are more tight-knit. I know at least that a fundamental part of the Jewish culture is helping out other Jews.

Plagueround
12th June 2008, 04:50
Haha - Hinting that I am racially or religiously prejudiced: cracks me up! :lol:

Well, there was that time you told TomK he was going to hell despite his obvious commitment to his Catholicism. You may want to clarify that one. Tom is right about us all being brothers and sisters, although my outlook on why that is is probably very different from his. Treat him like a brother...take some the peace and discipline you get from the prayer you describe and apply it here.

Peacekeeper
12th June 2008, 06:09
Well, there was that time you told TomK he was going to hell despite his obvious commitment to his Catholicism. You may want to clarify that one. Tom is right about us all being brothers and sisters, although my outlook on why that is is probably very different from his. Treat him like a brother...take some the peace and discipline you get from the prayer you describe and apply it here.

...that was said in a non-serious tone, conveyed by the emoticon immediately following the statement. Some of my best friends are Catholic :rolleyes:


Not necessarily. I come from a family of Jewish heritage (my mother's side) and I can tell you from experience that Jewish communities are pretty close. Since the Holocaust especially I would say that Jews are more tight-knit. I know at least that a fundamental part of the Jewish culture is helping out other Jews.

This is true, and I'm sure it is even more prevalent in nations with smaller Jewish populations, such as Poland.

Dros
13th June 2008, 02:56
This thread has no authority you realize.

Phalanx
13th June 2008, 04:14
...that was said in a non-serious tone, conveyed by the emoticon immediately following the statement. Some of my best friends are Catholic


Well, if a person made a racist remark, and then tried to justify it by saying "Some of my best friends are black", would you accept it?

Peacekeeper
16th June 2008, 01:27
Well, if a person made a racist remark, and then tried to justify it by saying "Some of my best friends are black", would you accept it?

...that was sarcasm. You see, I was acknowledging the cliche of saying your best friends are X group of people to prove you are not prejudiced towards X group of people.


This thread has no authority you realize.

Authority in what respect?

Killfacer
16th June 2008, 01:38
TomK is right, your religion and your political veiws dont really fit. Your a walking contradiction. Get used to OI, its going to be a long while before you un restricted.

Drosera is refering to the fact that even if every one on this thread sais you should be unrestricted - you wont be. You gotta beg the CC for that.

Peacekeeper
16th June 2008, 01:48
TomK is right, your religion and your political veiws dont really fit. Your a walking contradiction. Get used to OI, its going to be a long while before you un restricted.

Drosera is refering to the fact that even if every one on this thread sais you should be unrestricted - you wont be. You gotta beg the CC for that.

Tell that to the Christian and Muslim socialists who aren't restricted.

I am aware of that. I'm building up my reputation. :rolleyes:

dannydandy
16th June 2008, 13:24
communism has its intellectual virtue as an critic to capitalism... or else the capitalistnwould never bother to improve theri ways

Killfacer
16th June 2008, 13:36
you said that in another thread, shut up idiot.

Bud Struggle
16th June 2008, 13:42
you said that in another thread, shut up idiot.


:lol: I got fooled by him, too.

Peacekeeper
16th June 2008, 16:06
communism has its intellectual virtue as an critic to capitalism... or else the capitalistnwould never bother to improve theri ways

You must be one of those "fair market" capitalists. I'll tell you this much: no matter how much you're getting paid for your product or wage labor, you're still being exploited by the class of propertied capitalists.