A short lesson in Marxism

Dana Point CA

Description

Hi everyone! I have enjoyed reading some of the insane ramblings of likely closeted kinky individuals who have strange fetish fantasies about our politicians and those on welfare. And I wanted to, well, actually put effort into a post! You know, something that, whoever this rightwing fascist is that is continually posting the same drivel over and over again while whining about being called out (it's Craigslist, lol!), seems to be incapable of doing. Ironically, this fascist spends all their time (I won't assume your preferred gender, so I will just call you a fascist from here on!) sitting on Craigslist and writing or copypasting the same posts to complain about non-existent problems. Now, *ahem*, to dispel a few myths. Do you have the time to sit around and post on Craigslist politics? This may seem a bit hypocritical, but I posted a service listing first, to look for work! Something this fascist apparently, uhm, doesn't know how to do! Fascists, after all, are very simple-minded, and can only focus on one or maybe one and a half things at a time. Don't think you're a fascist? Then, very well, I will respect your identity, whatever it is! But if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and salutes like a duck, it might be a duck. I came to terms with myself and I am comfortable with who I am. I think you should be, too! I am a veteran! I am a veteran of the USAF, and I worked in a career field I can't state here. Do not accuse me of being unpatriotic. I am proudly unpatriotic. This is not the country that I pledged to die for. These are not the people, YOU are not the person, that I was willing to take a SAM for off the coast of Iran as the first casualty of WW3. YOU are the privileged individual who gets to complain in safety and financial security, happy to complain about all the poor folk around you who are supposedly mooching off your... something? Nothing? Oh, right. You hardly even pay taxes! So I'm not sure what you're whining about, because California hasn't changed property laws in decades! Thanks, Reagan! Now that I have the audience either sufficiently upset, or having already flagged/blocked the post, I can now begin the real lesson in Marxism for anyone who has the patience to get through all of that hyperbolic nonsense above. I especially want to hear replies telling me how I'm wrong by people who've never read Marx or Engels, and would probably recoil at the thought! Americans really get indoctrinated into this idea that socialist/communist societies live in absolute squalor and can't progress because talent is not rewarded with wealth. I literally grew up with this mentality. I was raised on it. I even got taught the Japanese were evil, satan-led heathens that worshipped their emperor and were fascist through and through. I got taught communism failed, and therefore it can never work, without ever being shown how capitalism succeeded, because all I see nothing getting better. I'm sure a lot of you, if you are still reading, might have gotten this cancer from Trump or his kin. What I didn't get taught was what communism, marxism, or socialism, actually were, and what you actually learn by reading the texts. I didn't get taught that there was no communism in the late Soviet Union; it was becoming more like China is today, even. The markets ruined them. I was given this American-filtered nonsense that watered down everything without even expressing the nuance between private/personal property. Some of you idiots still believe they want to take your toys away, when personal property has never been a problem. The most basic, most simple thing, was denied to me in knowledge. It was something so simple, and so BASIC, that it clearly had to be kept from our youth. Otherwise, they might find a little bit of sense in it. This incongruence in the definition and perceived definition of 'personal' (your gun), and 'private' (the gun you give your hunter for 80% of his game as rental) makes the dystopia appear far more horrible than the reality of any Marxist society would be. Most communists and Marxists in the west today are pro-gun. They know they will need them to fight fascists, or protect themselves and their ideals. They don't want guns to take over. They are a small minority. NO, the democrats are not socialist, let alone anything near the left. They are what is called, in actual legitimate polisci, "Neo-liberals". These are "liberals" who believe the markets solve most problems, while also having some progressive policies- but only if they support the markets. This is anti-Marxist, and anti-Communist in nature. There are no communists among the American congress. Even Bernie is not far enough to the left. Likely, he is that way for survival reasons. Your PERSONAL *i will capitalize these to make it easier!* property is your vehicle, your house, whatever. No one cares. Your PRIVATE property are your other houses you rent out, the factory owned by big pharma, tech, oil, whatever. Property which is "rented out" to another individual, generally a manager or more likely a managerial staff, who uses the property for profit. The profit, rather than going to the individuals doing the work, goes directly to the owner of this property. It is PRIVATE because a person owns it, but they are not using it, yet taking profit from it by abusing and taking advantage of those who lack that same level of private property. It would be fair- IF private property were not inherited, stolen, legalesed, or, well, it's never fair. I guess. In return for managing their private property and accruing profits from it, the manager is given a salary (disproportionate to the amount of production), and then the manager (or company payroll, really) will also pay wages to the workers (an INCREDIBLY disproportionate amount compared to the production and effort). The people at the bottom work the hardest, with some expectation of going up in the world; this is not guaranteed. Whatsoever. They work the hardest, and get the least. The people at the top work the least, and get the most- usually through some excuse of 'investments' and 'financial literacy', things that are unavailable to the lower classes, because of these same issues. Karl Marx went and experienced this inequality, and tried to solve it. He thought of many ways to solve it, and sadly, there was simply no way of doing it without total acceptance of every country and nation on our Earth; any outside pressure can make such a system collapse, as it requires total solidarity. Solidarity, cooperation, and plurality, are things that are not profitable. And such, they are denied in capitalism, except when convenient. There will be no redistribution of wealth; it is a universal giving of wealth. Redistribution is an incorrect word to use, and implies that some will have less, and others will have more. This perpetuates the idea of inequality and inequity. "Wealth" is a concept that Marx wanted abolished. Not because he wanted everyone to be poor; the term POOR should also be abolished. There should not be BETTER or WORSE among equals. There should not be RICH and POOR among us who are the same. There should be YOU, ME, and OUR COMMUNITY. Nothing more, nothing less. Any look at the Soviet Union will show you that none of this existed. The USSR was an oligarchic dictatorship, and not a communist nation. Communism never failed because communism has yet to be implemented successfully anywhere. Socialism exists, but socialism is not communism. Socialism is focused on aiding the poor; communism focuses on removing any need to worry about who is rich or poor, because everyone would be safe, and have everything they need. The point is to get rid of money. The CCP adding any form of money is actually anti-Marxist because it encourages this worship of finances, which was what Marx wanted to avoid; he saw how religion (what they so feared he would kill!) was already monetized and made into a commodity, he saw that education was inequitable and determined not by any right to knowledge, but access at all, and the family unit as superfluous, since we were all one anyway. He saw a future where there was not even a word for money, because everything was taken care of, and through organizing and planning, could essentially produce anything we want at any quantity through cooperation, and give it out freely, to those who need/want it. It wouldn't be "work 40 hours a week to afford ur rent and gas and then beer and give up on life", it's "work 10 hours a week based on the needs of the community- yes, community-, have everything you need, and spend your now freed up time doing things that actually matter to you and have value and meaning to your life. But who will clean the toilets? But who will do the jobs no one wants to do? The economy?! We live in an era of technology, automation, and innovation. We have car factories which do nearly all the assembly by itself, automated, with supervision. We do the same for processors, for semiconductors, for chemicals, for EVERYTHING- except the lowest class jobs, which apparently, no one wants to automate(?) for some reason. Economy? There is no economy in Marxism. This is a very hard concept to get through anyone's head, but once someone understands the intent of the phrase, it is inarguable. There is no attempt to tear down things that make you rich. There is no attempt to make things harder for the rich or easier for the poor. There IS no poor or rich in marxism. There IS NONE of that, in the "IDEAL" Marxist society. Unrealistic? Only because we have convinced ourselves it's impossible. Only because greedy people, who sit on Craigslist all day and complain about others' woes while having none of their own, refuse to understand. Your standard of living would INCREASE under a proper Marxist society. Marxism has DEMOCRACY. REAL DEMOCRACY. The only people who are not allowed to vote are those who hold onto their wealth, or private property. If one does not want to submit to the good of the entire community, then they SHOULD HAVE NO SAY IN THE COMMUNITY. They are free to keep their wealth, but do not be surprised if the majority votes you away. Perhaps if you relinquished it, and stopped abusing and hurting those you find inferior or less worthy, you would be worthy of the respect you so think you should have. Marx saw a world where everyone could be an artist, scientist, participate in politics, enrich their community; without the burden of dealing with the meaningless wage-slaving for people who were doing that by exploiting their fellow humans, instead of using ingenuity, cooperation, and solidarity to give that benefit to everyone. Like.... the USSR beat the USA to space. Does that ever really register to anyone at all? It may have only been a brief bit, but they did it before us. Can you IMAGINE the fear in congress when they realized they might be behind? Okay then! We're going to the moon in ten years! And you know how we did that? Not with capitalist anything. Through an agency funded by the government. Capitalism would have never gone to space on its own. It's not profitable. We're lucky Elon wants to, and he's doing it at a loss because he's a futurist. Now, to put this even more into perspective, imagine where the Soviet Union had started from. And where the USA was starting from, around the end of the Great War. The USA had an insane economy. So did the Soviets. There was the first red scare, because it was actually a threat to this perceived ideal of capitalism. The result of the red scare was fascism. Multiple "liberals" ended up saying that they'd prefer fascism to communism. They were, of course, economists, such as von Mises. I am quite convinced that the objections to communism are not on any real basis. I am convinced the objection is because everyone continues to include money and economics as they understand it, not realizing none of it is relevant or should be relevant in a marxist society. It all has to be rewritten. All standard thinking of money has to go away. How does this relate to today? Marx and Engels also realized that this was impossible with outside pressure from disagreeable nations. They realized that a true communist state, a true Marxist idealized utopia of sorts, would need to have no borders, and be the world round. That is why there was such a red scare, and continues to be; the final goal of communism is to see the entire world communist, and there is no other option. It either dies to the socialist bourgeoise, or all people, across all cultures, realize they can retain their individuality and identity by removing class. So, scared little person who projects their insecurities onto a strange part of Craigslist I stumbled into on accident. I'm here to find a job, and here to spread the good news of Karl Marx. Give up your sad presumption of the 'welfare' abuser. Many, many people are struggling, and the jobs being offered are insufficient. Jobs elsewhere? Ah, yes, let's just round them up... that's not fascist at all. There would be no homeless in a Marxist society, because we have more than enough space and resources to house everyone without making anyone pay a cent. But you all would have to relinquish your- remember- PRIVATE- not PERSONAL- property- in order to do that. And helping people? Why would you do that without profit? Pigs. thank you ;3 thought I'd spread a little bread in this section.