This is America

Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#21
This video promotes multiple things on this list about the goals of communism, which doesn't surprise me. http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...-read-into-the-congressional-record-1963.html

"42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#GZOzirp7kIZICgkA.99"

"22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#GZOzirp7kIZICgkA.99"

This is exactly how I would describe this video and the reason I think it was created.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#22
That was an interesting presentation about the video. I disagree a little bit about how this was so entirely focused on race and not part of presenting the agenda. In particular the part about the riots happening in the background. I think this supports the agenda that promotes entertainment as a way of becoming increasingly ignorant to all that is happening around you. Still, some interesting points.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#23
This video promotes multiple things on this list about the goals of communism, which doesn't surprise me. http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...-read-into-the-congressional-record-1963.html
Do you actually believe this? Those "goals of communism" were actually written by an anti-communist conservative who used to be in the FBI. Why would you try to understand the goals of communism from an anti-communist instead of an actual communist? Also, why would you trust someone who was in the FBI? Government agents lie... and also, we know that our government has a historic hatred/fear of anything related to communism.

The guy who wrote those goals was named Cleon Skousen and he was a supporter of the John Birch Society. The John Birch Society is a radical extremist far right organization that has a vested interest in anti-communism and they actually opposed the civil rights movement in the 1960s. So you can see that this guy has an obvious agenda and an ideology that paints communism in a certain way. What he wrote is obviously completely biased and it's not truthful or based in fact.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#24
Do you actually believe this? Those "goals of communism" were actually written by an anti-communist conservative who used to be in the FBI. Why would you try to understand the goals of communism from an anti-communist instead of an actual communist? Also, why would you trust someone who was in the FBI? Government agents lie... and also, we know that our government has a historic hatred/fear of anything related to communism.

The guy who wrote those goals was named Cleon Skousen and he was a supporter of the John Birch Society. The John Birch Society is a radical extremist far right organization that has a vested interest in anti-communism and they actually opposed the civil rights movement in the 1960s. So you can see that this guy has an obvious agenda and an ideology that paints communism in a certain way. What he wrote is obviously completely biased and it's not truthful or based in fact.
He was a researcher who studied communism and was briefly associated with the John Birch Society and this is used to discredit his work, which is substantial and meticulously referenced from original sources from the founders of communism including Marx himself. So yes, I entirely believe this especially when you consider the prophetic nature of what he wrote becoming more and more visible every day.

Yes, I completely and entirely think there is a greater connection to the goals of communism within this video than anything else. Propaganda was used more by communists than Hitler. It is no wonder that Hollywood seems to have been taken over by communists first considering communism has been working to overcome the US for over a hundred years now. It was there was Hollywood was being established.

Like I have said more than once, I don't think you understand communism even a little tiny bit. Your version of "communism" is not what communism really is, so I will take the opinion of someone who can actually reference their opinion on communism over yours any day of the week.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#25
this is used to discredit his work
It discredits itself because it's not truthful. If you get your info on communism from an anti-communist then it's naturally going to be biased and not factual. The actual goal of communism would be a classless, moneyless, and stateless society where the workers own the means of production... because that's the definition of communism.
It is no wonder that Hollywood seems to have been taken over by communists first
How? Hollywood is the most materialist industry... all they care about is money. Nothing about hollywood is communist, it's literally a capitalist industry run by big businesses. It's completely profit driven as well. I don't see the workers owning the means of production in hollywood, so how can it be communist?
Like I have said more than once, I don't think you understand communism even a little tiny bit.
Communism is defined as a political system where the workers own the means of production and goods are produced based on needs instead of profit. It is a stateless, moneyless, and classless society. Nothing about America mirrors that in any way and the government certainly isn't working towards it. Communism isn't difficult to understand or define.

America is not communist or fulfilling any "goals of communism". We have a capitalist system where the means of production are controlled by private owners who produce goods based on profit. In America the workers don't control the means of production, they sell their labor and are employed by a company where they receive a wage. If we have wage labor then we are not a communist country.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#26
How? Hollywood is the most materialist industry... all they care about is money. Nothing about hollywood is communist, it's literally a capitalist industry run by businesses.

Communism is defined as a political system where the workers own the means of production and goods are produced based on needs instead of profit. It is a stateless, moneyless, and classless society. Nothing about America mirrors that in any way and the government certainly isn't working towards it. Communism isn't difficult to understand or define.
Everything about Hollywood is communist. Communism requires a medium of propaganda in order to perpetuate support for communism. Hollywood is a method for which Communism evangelizes because as an ideology, it requires a method of evangelism. This should be obvious to any American who develop into different groups that seem to have no unifying feature. There will never be a time when the world will collectively agree to adopt communism without force and propaganda. Communism is like a theocracy that requires all people to accept this ideology removing choice in the process. This is impossible to accomplish. Therefore, propaganda and mind control research was a reality and a requirement to implement communism as a reality. Repeat, mind control was required to implement communism.

If you would study the actual history of communism rather than the propaganda trying to sell the idea of communism like vacuum cleaners, you might realize the significant role that propaganda plays in promoting communism that is demonstrated in this video.

The government is clearly working towards this. We are pseudo-communist. At this point, we only call ourselves a democracy as a way of destroying a democratic government for good. Your definition of communism is not how communism is actually defined. Communism is a dictatorship that abolishes all hope of a democratic process within a community. It abolishes freedom of religion. It creates poverty. History proves this. Communism is a pyramid scheme plain and simple.

It is filled with empty promises. It isn't hard to understand how destructive it is. No your right, it is not hard to understand at all. It is really very easy to understand that it is a system that would enslave most of the population if it were to become a bigger part of our government process. In the same way, most of Hollywood clearly have to support a particular agenda. They are all vanilla in Hollywood. They support the same politics and clearly have very few examples of individual thought that deviate from this because they are basically a propaganda mill trying to deceptively gain support for future communism (which will not be called communism because communism has a taboo to it that will never allow it to be accepted at face value) without having people learn about communism from the actual history of the failure and the poverty and the devastation communism caused.

Still, the point is that communism requires propaganda to gain support by promoting images and narratives that seek to make people feel discontent and imagine that different system would fix the problems that exist. No, it is not hard to understand at all. However, many people don't read books anymore. They learn everything from celebrities and social media and that is a recipe for disaster.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#27
considering communism has been working to overcome the US for over a hundred years now
Where? When? The US has been consistently capitalist. What I've seen is the US actively go out of it's way to invade other countries and violate their sovereignty simply because those countries wanted to be communist. The US invades other countries, kills their leaders and tries to install an American supportive capitalist government. Seems more like capitalism has been working to try to overcome any other type of system in other countries. It's imperialism.

America is still a capitalist country, if we had a communist system then we would see the workers owning the means of production instead of private owners, but we do not see this which simply means that America is not a communist system.
Your definition of communism is not how communism is actually defined.
Yes it actually is. It is different from capitalism in a few ways. Capitalism has private ownership over the means of production while communism has worker's ownership. Capitalism has wage labor, and communism does not. Capitalism has a system of hierarchical control in the workplace while communism allows the workers to practice direct democracy in the workplace Capitalism has profit driven production while communism has needs based production.

These are pretty much the basic differences between these two systems and it is fairly simple to understand.
Communism is a dictatorship that abolishes all hope of a democratic process within a community. It abolishes freedom of religion. It creates poverty. History proves this. Communism is a pyramid scheme plain and simple.
That's not true. History proves that state capitalism, which was the system implemented by Lenin in the USSR, is a pyramid scheme. History proves that people's movements can be infiltrated and taken over by malicious groups who only wish for domination and control. But this does not mean that communism can be defined as a dictatorship.

The USSR and China do not fit the definition of communism, these countries had claimed to be working towards the goal of communism but we can see by their actions that they were not. Instead of giving the people control over the means of production (which is what communism actually is), power was centralized into a state authority. These countries were dictatorships, communist in name only. Communism is a stateless society where the people have control through direct democracy. It is a decentralized system which places the power into the hands of the people rather than the state or private owners. It's called communism because it's about communal ownership.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#28
Repeat, mind control was required to implement communism.
Communism hasn't been implemented in any country. Some countries have claimed that they were working towards the goal of communism through the creation of a dictatorship but they had ulterior motives since they actually never did anything that would implement communism. Also, it's pretty difficult to implement a stateless society by centralizing power into a state dictatorship. In fact, historically, the USSR actually murdered real communists who were building people controlled, communal societies in their country... which shows that the USSR did not truly care about communism, it only cared about maintaining power. Communism was a threat to the USSR's power because the USSR was a dictatorship, not communist.

Mind control is required to implement and maintain a dictatorship... not a communal society.
Still, the point is that communism requires propaganda to gain support by promoting images and narratives that seek to make people feel discontent and imagine that different system would fix the problems that exist.
I don't think people need propaganda to feel that way, they already do... they can see the failings of their system and they rightfully want a better one which will actually serve the people's interests instead of a ruling class.

Why would the ruling class create propaganda telling the people that they can survive without them? The ruling class needs people to be dependent on them because they are dependent on us. The US was afraid of communism because the people wanted the control. That's why they went on a crusade against it, it was a threat to their power.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#29
Did you read the list Mecca?

" Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)"
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#AtEdOIUSdp2qBYJ9.99

The US involvement in other countries will be replaced by the UN who is being promoted as the international mediator at the moment. We are in a transitional phase where the overthrow of the US will allow for communism to be required in more places than just China, but it won't be the same communism. It will have a new name so that it won't be associated with the USSR that would cause objections from even someone like yourself.

"15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States."
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#AtEdOIUSdp2qBYJ9.99

"Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights."
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#AtEdOIUSdp2qBYJ9.99

"29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists...essional-record-1963.html#AtEdOIUSdp2qBYJ9.99

Etc., etc., etc. All the ways the US is communist at this time is on that list.

LOL, that China and the USSR don't fit the true vision of communism. That is the true vision of communism to a T, but like I said, this is exactly why communism needs propaganda to continue being able to spread as an ideology. You need propaganda to present the lie that is circulating that these are not real examples of communism.

Communism is just a method of recruiting people to willingly being slaves by giving up their rights to everything including private property, which is a protection. Owning a home prevents someone from coming and telling you that you are evicted for not agreeing with an ideology. Private ownership protects us from a dictatorship, and without propaganda supporting communism, more people would realize this. Communism thrives on and REQUIRES propaganda.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#30
Did you read the list Mecca?
Yeah, I did. It has nothing to do with the political system of communism.
LOL, that China and the USSR don't fit the true vision of communism. That is the true vision of communism to a T
Since communism is defined as worker ownership over the means of production and since the USSR and China never allowed the workers to own the means of production, the USSR and China were not communist. They simply don't fit the definition.

Both the USSR and China said that they were working towards communism and not that they were actually communist. Their ideology came from Leninism which said that a state capitalist dictatorship was the best way to communism. This was a blatant lie because it was obviously just a way to centralize power into the hands of an authoritarian leader.

Lenin implemented the NEP in the USSR. The NEP was a policy of state capitalism which means that the state has control over everything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy
Here is a quote: Lenin characterized the NEP in 1922 as an economic system that would include "a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control" while socialized state enterprises were to operate on "a profit basis"

State capitalism is not communism because communism requires decentralization and worker's ownership... that's the exact opposite of state capitalism. The USSR was never a communist country, the workers did not control the means of production and it certainly wasn't decentralized or democratic.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#31
Communism is just a method of recruiting people to willingly being slaves by giving up their rights to everything including private property, which is a protection. Owning a home prevents someone from coming and telling you that you are evicted for not agreeing with an ideology. Private ownership protects us from a dictatorship, and without propaganda supporting communism, more people would realize this.
There's a difference between private property and personal property. A house is personal property, clothing or a toothbrush is personal property. Communists support personal property but are against private ownership over the means of production. When someone is talking about private property in reference to communism, they are referring to things like factories, which are owned by private owners under capitalism instead of owned by the workers who work in the factory. Communists want the means of production to be owned and democratically controlled by the people who are doing the producing.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#32
Owning a home prevents someone from coming and telling you that you are evicted for not agreeing with an ideology.
People are evicted because we have landlords who claim ownership over the land and they sell you a spot to live on, they can also force you out... this is an aspect of capitalism and private property renting in capitalism. No one really owns their home because the government has property taxes, you are basically renting your land from the government. This is because the government enforces their private property ownership over the land. They do it through the use of violence like through the police. Private property can only be maintained by the backing of violence, and the state (the government) has a monopoly on violence. You have to actually force people not to use a piece of land that you have claimed ownership of otherwise it's just a baseless claim... because no one can truly own the Earth.

In communism, houses would be personal property and no one would be able to claim ownership over a piece of land to then charge people for living on it, neither the government or a landlord would be able to. Personal land ownership would be based on use and occupation.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
2,671
Likes
5,242
#33
Yeah, I did.

Since communism is defined as worker ownership over the means of production and since the USSR and China never allowed the workers to own the means of production, the USSR and China were not communist. They simply don't fit the definition.

Both the USSR and China said that they were working towards communism and not that they were actually communist. Their ideology came from Leninism which said that a state capitalist dictatorship was the best way to communism. This was a blatant lie because it was obviously just a way to centralize power into the hands of an authoritarian leader.

Lenin implemented the NEP in the USSR.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy
The NEP was a policy of state capitalism which means that the state has control over everything. Here is a quote: Lenin characterized the NEP in 1922 as an economic system that would include "a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control" while socialized state enterprises were to operate on "a profit basis"

State capitalism is not communism because communism requires decentralization and worker's ownership... that's the exact opposite of state capitalism. The USSR was never a communist country, the workers did not control the means of production and it certainly wasn't decentralized or democratic.
Mecca, you clearly don't have any desire to actually understand how what you are describing IS real communism and is based on the principles taught by Marx about achieving communism by the use of force if required.

A dictator and revolution are expected features of every government process where communism has been implemented according to Marx himself. It was his idea that the only way to avoid a revolution by force would be if capitalists handed over their property and rights by their own choice, which wasn't likely to happen. So the Bolshevik revolution was entirely what Marx envisioned. The dictatorship of Lenin inherited by Stalin was also expected as part of societies transition to communism or the objective of enslaving the world. The proletariat is a PC term for slave. This was all supported and promoted by Marx and Engels and because it is promoted by the founders, again propaganda is required to get people to accept this nonsense.

"Marx and Engles decided that it had become their manifest duty to see that the revolution was vigorously promoted. Why prolong the suffering? The old society was doomed. In the light of the principles discovered by Marx and Engels perhaps the race could be saved a dozen generations of exploitation and injustice simply by compressing this entire phase of social evolution into a single generation of violent readjustment"

There is the description of the Bolshevik revolution.

"They felt it could be done in three steps: First, by wiping out the old order. 'there is but one way of simplifying, shortening, concentrating the death agony of the old society as well as the bloody labor of the new world's birth Revolutionary Terror (Quoted from the Neue Rehinesche Zeuitung, by J.E. Le Rossignol in From Marx to Stalin, p. 231)' (Quoted in The Naked Truth as the above quote is, and the remaining quotes are as well).

"Second, the representatives of the working class must then set up a Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Joseph Stalin described the things that must be accomplished during this period of dictatorship:

1. completely suppress the old capitalist class.
2. Create a mighty army of 'defense" to be used "for the consolidation of the ties with the proletarian of other lands, and for the development and the victory of the revolution in all countries."

Number two can clearly be seen as progressing with NATO, the US, and the IDF operating in all parts of the world as a military presence, not including the cases where communism is being attempted in other countries like Venezuela, which has resulted in quick failure. This is still a very clearly active principle by Stalin inspired by Marx's teaching on the necessity of revolution.

"3. Consolidate the unity of the masses in support of the Dictatorship."

This is likely the reason the UN opposes the state of Israel to gain the support of the nations who oppose it. The UN is the vision of a central government for the communist empire and Israel is the capital.

"4. Establish universal socialism by eliminating private property and preparing all mankind for the ultimate adoption of full Communism."

This is clearly in the process as the banks own most of the homes in the US at the present time and you would only need to officially collapse the economy for private property to be a thing of the past almost overnight. Most of our services are being centralized by the government at the present time and private ownership and the possibility to buy a home or start a business have already been replaced for the most part. So if a communist government is what you want, we are almost there.

"Third, the final step is the transition from socialism to full Communism. Socialism is characterized by state ownership of land and all means of production. Marx and Engels believed that after a while, when class consciousness has disappeared and there is no further resistance to be overcome, the state will gradually wither any and then the property will automatically belong to all mankind "in common."

And, this is your definition of communism. Your Wikiquote is propaganda itself describing the post-revolution world that Marx described and trying to promote this as the real form of communism. It is describing the pipe dream that the world could transition into at some point after the destructive plan has forced everyone to accept that the vision of Marx and Engels as the best thing for all of mankind to accept. This final step is what is used in the propaganda to promote people to support communism and is the entire reason that communists need media in order to evangelize their ideology.

So real communism requires something similar to the Bolshevik revolution, followed by a dictatorship until people forget a time where they had rights and passively accept that what they know is the best it can be, which is a somewhat accurate representation of what is actually happening in the world right now. More accurate than any other suggestion of an agenda that exists. However, because communism is just a method of recruiting people to accept slavery, the final stage does not have to carry the title of communist. It only needs people to be willing to implement the ideology of a few with force if necessary.

Back to the representation in Hollywood. These steps also describe the setting for most of the dystopian representations presented in Hollywood right now. Revolution, dictatorship, new generation that doesn't know anything of the way the world was before. It mirrors the history of communism, yet does not openly express that it is doing so and creates different names and sets these things to happen in the future because it is propaganda. People in Hollywood have a one size fits all political view because they are hired to promote propaganda like this video perpetuates.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#34
A dictator and revolution are expected features of every government process where communism has been implemented according to Marx himself.
He talked about a dictatorship of the proletariat... which means that the workers (who are the proletariat) are supposed to hold all the power over the capitalist ruling class. The proletariat are supposed to take back ownership over the means of production from the capitalists. It is a dictatorship of the proletariat because it's supposed to be controlled by the proletariat and it's a dictatorship because they are using state power against the ruling class.
The dictatorship of Lenin inherited by Stalin was also expected as part of societies transition to communism or the objective of enslaving the world.
Marx talked about a worker's dictatorship where they took over state power and used it in their favor in order to take the means of production from the capitalist class. The dictatorship is supposed to be run by the workers aka the proletariat, it is a dictatorship of the workers over the ruling class of capitalists to make them give up their control.

That's certainly not what Lenin or Stalin did. In the USSR it seemed like Lenin wanted to control it himself, the proletariat did not control the USSR, Lenin did... he just created a regular dictatorship which gave him complete control. He killed people who he saw as threats to his absolute rule. Lenin wasn't even really following Marx. Marxist Leninism isn't the same thing as just Marxism. Lenin added more authoritarian elements. And like I said, Lenin implemented state capitalism as a way to try to get to communism. I think that Lenin used the ideas of communism to take power for himself, he did not implement communism, he just became a dictator and took control over everything through his state capitalism. You have to understand the difference between what Marx wrote and the way that Lenin and others chose to interpret it... and also how Lenin added to it with his own ideas.

I don't even agree with the idea of a dictatorship of the proletariat but the dictatorship of the proletariat is not what communism is. It is supposed to be a proposed means of getting to communism and it is supposed to be controlled by the proletariat, not one authoritarian dictator. It is supposed to be a transition period between capitalism and communism. Obviously a dictatorship of the proletariat has never occurred before.

I'm not a Marxist so I don't think the idea of a dictatorship of the proletariat would even work to create any sort of communist society. Even if there was some way to stop authoritarian leaders from taking over the dictatorship of the proletariat, I still think that it is not a feasible way of creating a better society. I don't think a state or any centralized power could be used to create a decentralized communist society.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#35
Mecca, you clearly don't have any desire to actually understand how what you are describing IS real communism and is based on the principles taught by Marx about achieving communism by the use of force if required.
No it really isn't. Even in that time period, countries like the USSR and China claimed to be in the process of getting to communism, they were never actually there. What Marx described still does not fit what the USSR and China actually did (see my post above). And I have already said multiple times that I agree with you in that people like Stalin were liars trying to amass control for themselves. I think their true goals were not communism at all, I think they just wanted power and control... especially since they did nothing that would lead to the implementation of communism and they actively suppressed communism. They set up dictatorships and did anything to maintain their rule. Totalitarianism is not the same thing as communism. I don't support those authoritarian leaders. But they are not what communism is, they simply took over the movements of people that were trying to create actual communism which is decentralized and worker controlled.

The USSR was state capitalist because that was the policy that Lenin implemented and China was following Marxist Leninism so they pretty much did the same thing.
Quote from Lenin: "For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly."
Lenin's idea of socialism was state capitalism, which is basically just him controlling everything... and I think he just used the ideas of communism to take power, I think he became corrupt and wanted control for himself instead of actually caring about communism or following Marxism.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#36
The proletariat is a PC term for slave.
Yeah it means working class. It is synonymous with slave because the working class has to sell their labor to the ruling capitalist class who has complete control over the means of production. That's why, in the idea of the "dictatorship of the proletariat", the lower, working class is supposed to rise up against the ruling class and use their state against them, to remove them from power. The people themselves are supposed to be the ones running this "dictatorship". It's not supposed to be about one authoritarian leader taking control over everyone and everything.

The Marxist idea would be for the proletariat to come together and take over the state for themselves so they can use it to eliminate capitalism... so they can be free from being enslaved by the ruling class. No one has done this.

I also want to mention that Marx did not invent communism or the actual ideas of communism. He's famous for coining the term but he didn't invent the ideas. People had been living communally for thousands of years before he was even born, and other people came up with similar ideas before him. He was just a person who had the idea that a communist society would naturally come from a capitalist society. Most of his writings were about how capitalism works and about the relationship between the ruling class and the lower classes. He did not write in depth about the specifics of communism as a system. He thought that capitalism would eventually destroy itself and that a system of common ownership would follow but he never went into great detail about how that would work. People like Lenin and Mao invented their own ideas and had their own goals for what communism would look like and how it would be achieved. They basically appropriated Marx and Engels's ideas and did things in their name. Marx said that capitalism would end and communism would naturally come from that... but those authoritarian leaders attempted to speed up the process and that's not what Marx really talked about.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,026
Likes
10,034
#37
So real communism requires something similar to the Bolshevik revolution
It actually requires the opposite. Communism requires a proletarian revolution which the Bolsheviks were not. The Bolsheviks were an authoritarian bureaucratic party that only wanted power and control for themselves, the people did not have control. The Bolsheviks murdered any groups who were actually practicing a real form of communism. Like they killed the libertarian, anti-authoritarian communists in the Ukraine Free Territory. The USSR invaded and murdered real communists who were starting a successful communist society because they were a threat to the state's power... and that is only one example out of countless others. This obviously shows that the Bolsheviks were concerned with gaining and maintaining power and not with establishing any form of communism.

Instead of replacing the ruling class with another authoritarian group that becomes the new ruling class, the common people have to be the ones in control. The people themselves have to take action to create a society that is best for everyone instead of a small minority that rules over us. If one small group is allowed to take power, that group becomes totalitarian and focused on control and domination instead of what's best for everyone. A decentralized, communal, and direct democratic society can't come from statist or authoritarian means.
 





Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1,169
Likes
1,410
#38
My take, bear with me.

"Black folk" been forced to jig forever. Jiggin is what the white man would make the slaves do, with each other or for other whites. I would consider twerking to be jiggin. Dancing basically to entertain, or to "sell yourself", or to excite the opposite sex. Jiggin for the man, jiggin for each other.. jiggin.

This video, they're still jiggin. Still jiggin, no progress. The whole video, they are jiggin. Jiggin to the newest dances, fads (mannequin challenge), and at the end, still driving that old Honda. No business was started, no money was made, no progress, no enlightenment, nothing positive, nothing uplifting - just jiggin, same place they were 400 years ago. The world has passed by them, real life is happening, while they are continuing to jig.

This is America.
I actually agree with this view of the video. I just think that the next step after noticing that they're "jiggin" is to get to the WHY? Did they one day just decide to make that their culture? Or as you put it, was it forced on them because thats what "the white man would make slaves do"? If it was the latter, are their forces ensuring that this chaotic/disorderly form of culture remains with them? The problem is in other instances the same people who take note of this disorder, dont always acknowledge the forces that put these things in place. The govt was allegedly tied to cocaine trafficking with CONTRA (right around the time of the "crack era") and was allegedly defending poppy fields in Afghanistan in the early 2000's (right before the "opioid epidemic"). Its not as simple as create a business and be positive because their are forces impeding that from happening

There have been times when black people were doing those things in regards to money and progress being made while at the same time having positive, enlightening and uplifting things. When this happened they were bombed like in black wallstreet (self sufficient community) or the gov't created secret organizations to monitor and infiltrate and ultimately break up their different civil rights movements (COINTEL PRO). And to tie that into now with the internet/information age allowing black people to find what people said about them back then rather than what the society is saying right now about them, they create a "black identity extremist" tag so they can monitor again, these things from potentially happening.

So when Gambino is saying "this is America" I feel like he's saying that this is the culture that those in power(i.e America) want them to have just as much, if not more than black people are choosing to have it. . These are these are things black people, not all of them mind you, see they're up against beyond just stopping "jigging" and creating a business. That down the way their will be a hidden hand to try and impede that progress. A hidden hand that people often recognize but ignore the focus that was seemingly put on black people before turning to the "everyone" it is today.