I thought memes were supposed to be funny… this just looks like a propaganda poster
I mean, propaganda is technically a type of meme, isn’t it?
Thank god I’m not the only one.
Removed by mod
Luigi’s hand doesn’t look anything like that. Someone fix this meme
You’re not going to overthrow fascism, white supremacy or capitalism with random acts of adventurism. If you’re not more organized than your enemy they will crush you.
I leave that to the plumber’s union.
Socialism allows for both public and private ownership, individual freedoms, and democratic decision-making, while still aiming for social equality. Communism, in contrast, tends to involve total state control and often limits personal freedoms.
Both Capitalism and Socialism have room for public and private ownership, the difference is which sector controls the state, large firms, and key industries. The Nordic Countries are dominated by Private Capital, ie it is Capitalist, while the PRC is dominated by Public Ownership, ie it is Socialist.
Communism limits the personal freedoms of the bourgeoisie. All Communism is, is a more developed and global form of Socialism, where the small firms that once were private have all grown into the public sector or collapsed.
Tell me you’ve never read anything about communism that wasn’t written by anti-communists without telling me you’ve never read anything about communism that wasn’t written by anti-communists.
Jesus what a mess of a sentence. You really tried to hamfist that one in there.
Removed by mod
The bourgies owning the means of production means a handful of evil vampires have all the power
Makes it always shit
Removed by mod
Well I will agree that your average 16 year-old is more well read then the person I replied to.
That doesn’t even make sense…
😘 be well
be better
You should go back to Reddit, you’d be happier there
Limits personal freedoms only for the owning class. If you’re not a landlord or ceo you have nothing to fear.
Removed by mod
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.
There were excess deaths, but Communist leaders weren’t mindless butchers, either. And with the introduction of Socialism came numerous benefits for the working class, like a doubling of life expectancy, tripling of literacy rates to 99.9%, free and high quality education, healthcare, and childcare, an expansion in women’s rights, a democratization of the economy, and much more.
Anarchism is a beautiful idea, and I used to be one. However, I am more convinced of Marxism, namely because we have more data that shows the success of Marxism, and because hierarchy and centralization are requirements for expansive infrastructure projects like high speed rail and for complex production, such as for smartphones.
I have an introductory Marxist-Leninist Reading List you can check out, if you’d like to learn more.
How are you going to secure your commune from external enemies without invoking authority?
Yeah I didn’t consider the nazis but they are just lackeys for the landlords and ceos so I mentally put them in there. Ofc nazis have to fear communism too.
All this things sound great, we just need humanity to not be shitty to each other.
Workers of the world unite!
Edit: not that I’m into that sort of thing… I’ve taken history classes, I’ve read about, I’ve watched documentaries, I understand that communism is not to be desired or
Communism is to be desired, though it’s understandable that you’d be opposed if your major exposure is through western education and western documentaries.
Communism is shit based on facts… not opinion.
What “facts?”
Look you dirty Marxist, I’ve looked at your bio. Pushing for the extremes you push is crazy. Why don’t you dial it back from 11. Why push past socialism. That’s the way to go if anything.
Communism is just a later stage of Socialism, ie Socialism of a more developed character, similar to how the Capitalism of today is a more developed version of what it was in the 1800s. All Communists are advocates of Socialism, because Socialism is a necessary prerequisite. There’s nothing “crazy” about that at all.
Further, “dirty Marxist?” Is this the 1950s? Yes, I am a Marxist, there are a lot of us on Lemmy, including the developers. I don’t hide being a Marxist-Leninist, I put it on my bio because I want to make it available information for those who want to know.
If you don’t mind, what country are you from? An d how old are you?
I’m going to look into the developers of lemmy… if that’s true, I won’t be staying on lemmy.
I’m a working adult, not doxxing my exact age. I live in the US Empire. Neither of those detract from the hard data and historical texts I read regularly as a part of my continued self-study.
As for the devs, yes, they are Marxists. Here is a list of essays and compiled resources from the lead developer of Lemmy. You’ll find FOSS projects in general have many Marxists and Anarchists, and few liberals.
Haha
Amazing! (commenting so there aren’t 88 comments 😤)
🫡
I’d say 1 person owning most of the money made at the company is the problem
To solve it everyone just needs to form or join a private unionized cooperative that doesn’t go on stock market for sustainable growth and so everyone at the company is making a lot of money too
Then collectively you all grow the pot that is available for all of you. Better to all be making 1,000,000 each and then grow it together to become 10,000,000-100,000,000+ for each of you
That is the root issue. Not enough of that
This doesn’t solve the systemic pressures within Capitalism, nor does it describe how to get from A to B. Your idea still depends on your one firm outcompeting other firms, which is difficult in saturated markets.
I recommend you look into Marxist theory, I have some recommendations I can make.
True but at least it’s a good step to take. More stuff will be useful as well
I’d say it would be a good step to take if I thought it was legitimately possible in the current system. If it succeded, it would be good, but such a strategy has never worked before and there’s no evidence that it will.
yeah instead of having all the money controlled by a few billionares, lets have an extremely powerful govt have that kinda power. great idea /s
It is better for the economy to be controlled by the public than by private interests, yes. You can study the democratizations of the economy made in AES states, and how the lives of the working class made the largest improvments.
It is terrible to see so many comments here celebrating communism. Communists were ruining our country (Czechia) for over 40 years and led it to economical collapse. When we tried to reform the regime in 1968, the Russians invaded to stop it. Communism doesn’t really work, and it has already been proven.
Also, I have to say the country worked in a bizzare way. The government robbed everyone of their property, so in return, people were stealing from public supplies.
So please try to study something first about communism in Eastern Europe before you start to celebrare this regime.
So please try to study something first about communism in Eastern Europe before you start to celebrare this regime.
If anyone has a sincere interests in studying this in detail its other communists, perhaps you should do more study on modern conceptions of communism (China) and the informative post made by Cowbee.
While the Soviet Economy did begin to stagnate towards the end of the Soviet Union’s lifespan, it did not collapse due to economic failure. The economic collapse happened right after the USSR was dissolved, leading to spikes in poverty, food insecurity, a loss in healthcare, and an estimated 7 million excess deaths. The reasons the USSR collapsed were more nuanced than simply saying the Soviet Model “didn’t work,” because fundamentally it did, and it worked quite well for most of its existence. Stephen Gowens’ essay Do Publicly Owned, Planned Economies Work? goes into detail on what legitimately worked quite well, and where it started to falter and eventually was dissolved from the top-down.
The reasons included the following problems:
-
Liberal reforms that gave the Bourgeoisie power over key industries (such reforms were actually a major desire of the 1968 Dubcek platform, in even greater quantity, hence why it was shut down by neighboring Warsaw Pact countries)
-
A firm dedication to planning by hand even as the economy grew more complex and computers too slow to be adapted to the planning mechanisms
-
A huge portion of resources were spent on maintaining millitary parity with the US in order to dissuade US invasion
-
80% of the combat done in World War II was on the Eastern Front, and 20 million Soviets lost their lives, with no real economic support from the West in rebuilding despite taking the largest cost of war
-
An enclosed, heavily sanctioned economy relied on internal resource gathering, closed off from the world market
Countries like the PRC have taken to heart what happened in the USSR. As an example, the PRC shifted to a more classically Marxist economy, focusing on public ownership of only the large firms and key industries, and relying on markets to develop out of private ownership. This keeps them in touch with the global economy without giving the bourgeoisie control of key industries, and thus the bourgeoisie has no power over the economy or the state.
Moreover, as a consequence of collapse, polling from Pew Researcg suggests 77% of Czechs believe they are worse off economically than under Socialism. This is generally true in various degrees across the other post-Soviet states, had the USSR not been dissolved, it would have likely continued to improve conditions at a faster rate than modern Capitalism, and the misery it has brought.
-
I call bullshit on this one
Its actually pretty smart if you think about it. Some flowers bloom at the end of their lifecycle. Nazism is at the end of capitalism’s lifecycle. But if you only hack off the visible parts of the flower, it will come back next year. So the flower is capitalism and the soviet union only managed to hack off the upper part, nazi germany, while the lower part, the capitalist empire was still there. Now 80 years later, the flower blooms again, this time as usa, and the picture suggests we rip it out at the root by destroying the whole system, instead of just hacking it off by, like, occupying washington or something.
Because at then end ,power over the people is given to the state. When you give the state the means of production and that state falls under the sway of humans with power, you get corruption and death.
Once a place has enough people, anonymity happens. We stop knowing our neighbors and leaders. We don’t see the corruption they can now hide. Communism gives an easier way to leverage that corruption and power more easily
Socialism, more specifically forms of democratic socialism ( and with today’s tech it can be one vite one person), is far more scalable and stable
We need a new constitution with more power given to the people and LESS to the state
Communism gives no more anonymity or room for corruption than Capitalism or Socialism. Further, Communism is Socialism developed to a higher stage. Socialism itself is an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect, ie has control over large firms, key industries, and the state. All Socialism is democratic, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, I don’t see why you say it’s more scaleable when Communism is a global and fully publicly owned version of Socialism, ie Socialism developed to its natural higher stages. Even further, the government is made up of the people, assuming proper measures are in place, you can’t give more power to private interests and keep it democratic.
I’m sorry history has proven you wrong. You’re glossing over so many issues in this statement, I really don’t know where to begin
I sincerely hope you have a great day. I’m not disengaging because of anything you said, I just don’t have the energy. Please. Have a great day
History has proven me correct, from the data I’ve looked over and the books I’ve read. If you specify, then we can go over what I think is relevant to the conversation, rather than me just regurgitating facts and book recommendations. I am oversimplifying, but it was a response to an oversimplification to begin with, specificity helps direct conversations.
Hope you gave a good one too, but for future reference, disengaging right after saying “you’re entirely wrong” isn’t really disengaging, I still have to respond to what I think is a directed attack. You don’t have to respond if you don’t want to, but disengaging while doing so is ceding the last word, so to speak.
Stop. I don’t have patience for bloviation and self aggrandizing I sincerely wished you a good day. I do not care at all what you think of my disengagement. That farewell was your hint that I don’t have patience for this fantasy that has been tried , failed and regurgitated.
Please honor my wishes and simply go Have a good day. If you have to get the last word, so be it. I won’t be responding
Insulting me then telling me to have a good day is childish behavior. If you don’t want to have a conversation, don’t try to exit it by trying to suggest whatever I have to say is devoid of value.
Communist parties have successfully built Socialism throughout the world, and this continues to this day. The PRC is now the largest economy on the planet when adjusting for Purchasing Power Parity, and has seen the greatest alleviation of poverty in human history. The USSR may have dissolved, but during its existence it brought a doubling of life expectancy, tripling of literacy rates to 99.9%, dramatically lowered wealth inequality while rapidly growing the economy, provided free healthcare, education, and childcare, and dramatically improved women’s rights.
No Socialist state has been a mythical wonderland, all have faced great struggles both internal and external, but we know it works because we can track metrics and gauge trajectories. Facts and history do not align with your assertions.
As cowbee said, you can’t disengage and then continue to engage. Either disengage and do not include your arguments against what the other has said, or continue to engage.
It is the symptom, not the cause. Greed is the cause and it has been around a LOT longer than Capitalism.
Removed by mod
What does this have to do with Russia
what does this have to do with this post
Last I checked the USSR didn’t do so well financially, and Russia is basically a criminal empire.
The USSR did fairly well until liberalizing part of its economy, as well as struggling to recover from the immense cost it paid to win the Eastern Front and beat the Nazis while under the oppression of the Cold War.
The Marxist-Leninist tradition is still carried forward by many states, including the PRC, which is on its way to surpass the US as world superpower.
The PRC is barely communist nowadays, and the USSR did not do well, the liberalising was a last-ditch attempt to save it.
The PRC is more classically Marxist than under the Gang of Four, when they abandoned materialist analysis and attempted to implement Communism through fiat. Large firms and key industries of the PRC are firmly in the public sector, while small firms, cooperatives, and sole proprietorships make up most of the private sector.
Marx didn’t think you could abolish private property by making it illegal, but by developing out of it. Socialism and Communism, for Marx, were about analyzing and harnessing the natural laws of economics moving towards centralization, so as to democratize it and produce in the interests of all. This wasn’t about decentralization, but centralization.
Markets themselves are not Capitalism, just like public ownership itself is not Socialist. The US is not Socialist just because it has a post-office, just like the PRC is not Capitalist just because it has some degree of private ownership. Rather, Marx believed you can’t just make private property illegal, but must develop out of it, as markets create large firms, and large firms work best with central planning:
The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i. e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.
I want you to look at the bolded word. Why did Marx say by degree? Did he think on day 1, businesses named A-C are nationalized, day 2 businesses D-E, etc etc? No. Marx believed that it is through nationalizing of the large firms that would be done immediately, and gradually as the small firms develop, they too can be folded into the public sector. The path to eliminated Private Property isn’t to make it illegal, but to develop out of it.
The essential condition for the existence, and for the sway of the bourgeois class, is the formation and augmentation of capital;[43] the condition for capital is wage-labour. Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the labourers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the labourers, due to competition, by their revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie, therefore, produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable.
This is why, in the previous paragraph, Marx described public seizure in degrees, but raising the level of the productive forces as rapidly as possible.
China does have Billionaires, but these billionaires do not control key industries, nor vast megacorps. The number of billionaires is actually shrinking in the last few years. Instead, large firms and key industries are publicly owned, and small firms are privately owned. This is Marxism.
As for the USSR, its economy worked quite well for most of its existence. I recommend reading Do Publicly Owned, Planned Economies Work? by Stephen Gowens, who goes over what went right and what went wrong in the Soviet Economy, including why it was dissolved. Further, GDP growth was positive throughout the near entirety of its existence, collapsing when it liberalized:
I recommend doing more research on Marixsm and the economies of the PRC and former USSR.
Tldr
PRC is Marxist, and the USSR’s economy was flawed, but ultimately worked rather well given its conditions. Read the comment for the justifications for both claims.
Your boos mean nothing. I’ve seen what makes you cheer.
No you haven’t, you’re too lazy to read enough to.
I didn’t downvote you, for what it’s worth. I save that for more unreasonable people.
Ah yes, get rid of extremism with different extremism. I think we’ve been there already. Spoiler: Didnt work.
What’s extremism?
Extremism is “the quality or state of being extreme” or “the advocacy of extreme measures or views”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremism
Or as i know it with these regimes both left or right: those that oppose and do not belive in our thing must be gotten rid of. I would say that is the extreme here to me. Thats what both communists and nazis did in Europe, in my country, in my city. And i want none of it to come back. Iam honestly terrified where is this world headding again.
But if you want to take a deeper look, this seems interesting if you have access:
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-83336-7_2
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-political-extremist-1857297
The portrayal of the Communists and Nazis as “twin evils” exaggerates the sins of the Communists in quantity and quality, while minimizing the sins of the Nazis in quantity and quality, in order to show them as relatively equal problems. In other words, its Nazi apologia, and historical revisionism. Read Blackshirts and Reds.
The Nazis executed the Communists, Socialists, gay people, trans people, disabled people, Jewish people, Slavic people, and many, many more. It wasn’t simple opposition, it was a racially supremacist ideology.
The Communists executed Tsarists, fascists, and terrorists to the state. They did not create a systematic industrialized murder machine like the Nazis did in order to keep up with how many people they needed to kill.
I can agree with you in some parts. They did not have any industrialized murder machine. But they mass murdered Polish by bullet, Ukrainians by starvation for example.
Communists imprisoned and/or sent to forced labor people for being gay, religious (not only jews) and yes “terrorists to the state” which in most of the time meant someone just spoke against regime. And well being a prisoner in Communist countries meant you were treated almost like jew in a nazi camp just without killing part sometimes.
All that said by my opinion communism wasnt racially supremacist ideology. It was just supremacist ideology. All they cared about was how great the state is and everything else is not.
They did not mass murder the Polish, nor did they intentionally starve Ukrainians. Both of those claims are highly inaccurate, the Nazis exterminated the Polish and the 1930s famine was unintended and tragic.
Further, your claims about the prison system are highly distorted in quantity and quality, they in no way compared to the industrial mass murder machines in Nazi Germany. Read Russian Justice.
Communism is about uplifting the working class, not worship of the state.
Ah so you’re an imperialist
I myself consider imperialists to be extremists, their global oppression is certainly very extreme
Communists just want to have the fruits of their labor not be stolen, very normal
First, a societal organization outside the Western norm has no bearing on if it will be successful or not. The “middle” has no superior intrinsic characteristics.
Second, we know Socialism works, the PRC is now becoming the de facto world power as the US falls, all while providing dramatic improvements for its people and increasing levels of satisfaction.
What, specifically, doesn’t work?
Well, first, as far as i know China is known to miss report its economical report. But even if that would not be the case.
Human rights dont work there. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/china
Human Rights are overall good in China, and improving steadily.
HRW has ties to the US government, is a revolving door, and refuses to critique US foreign policy.
Funny that you link the BBC, given their historical willingness to lie on the subject and continue to report the ludicrous 10,000 dead at Tian’anmen figure that was the sole claim of a British diplomat that fled the square before the PLA arrived, and later was confirmed to have been a fabrication. Hundreds died that day, maybe low thousands, not 10,000, yet the BBC both knows that and reports otherwise. BBC also got caught doctoring images to make China seem “depressing” that they swapped back after getting called out.
Either way, Zenz is a known liar, works for the “Victims of Communism” propaganda outlet, and was commisioned by the BBC to fight China, which he believes is the “Anti-Christ.” Moreover, he misrepresents numbers, such as 8% new IUD rates as 80% new IUD rates, to give an idea of forced steralization that doesn’t exist. As for XPF? Check out https://this-person-does-not-exist.com/en, then the glasses picture, https://www.xinjiangpolicefiles.org/wp-content/uploads/dt_imgs/20180515184435950_653121197306.jpg, pretty damning. BBC recieved these photos straight from Zenz, a known liar. We know there are camps, either way, but Zenz is a serial liar and you trust him, why?
That first chart isn’t even trying to hide that is fake. It’s depicting a perfect mirroring.
Conveniently, clicking through to the actual data returns a 404.
Pretty odd, considering it’s the official Pew Research website, but the findings are not out of consistency with similar polls on approval for the government and the continuous improvements in purchasing power for the working class.
As if intensity is what makes ideologies bad. 🙄
Keep pulling until you get hierarchy out.
Sad to say, but humans are the root of evil. Atrocities have been done in the name of all sorts of things, but it’s always humans carrying it out.
So maybe we should switch to systems that represent everyone equally, with equal and fair democratic representation, so that when evil inevitably arises it can be squashed.
