Years of Lead are so back

Yes, nothing gets me going like innocent proletarian blood spilled in bourgeois conflicts like these

Calling it right now: it’s a nothingburger as nothing ever happens

I was told that I was smart and great at school, that I’d get some cool job like working in a lab, but those are just platitudes when you’re unable to get disciplined or function consistently at your max.

And honestly, so far in my life I feel its been a blessing in disguise - while I did go for education in a specific field, graduated and failed to get a job, working simpler uneducated jobs does give a degree of freedom. You can take up odd jobs, work in a factory or in a shop if you want - whatever doesn’t require a specific degree and can switch between these jobs when you kinda feel like it going for jack-of-all-trades type of build, while if you got a well-paying specialization then it’s what you’re pushed to be stuck doing for the rest of your life.

Maybe that’s secretly my brain coming up with cope, but experiencing new things constantly for lower pay > high pay specialized work you’re doing forever.

In a sense, yeah. BG3 can be much slower, and you do still have to rely on a party, though I only played DOS1.

BG3 is pretty good for that to be honest - good character customization, there’s a learning curve to be sure so its not a power fantasy until you get past that.

Almost as if commodity production-based economies aren’t there to provide for the people but to make profits and waste resources. It’s a shocker

Gotta switch to a meta build and strategies to compensate

Same - and it’s weird to see so many leftists immediately jump to unconditional support for Hamas, who are literally a reactionary, religious fundamentalist force and who have done horrible things towards Palestinian people.

Armed resistance to Israel does not negate its evils or its reactionary internal role.

Had that exact same thing for the longest time, was essentially forced to do all-dayers if I went to sleep too late one night as from that point onward, I wouldn’t be able to fall asleep any earlier which sucked. Granted, most of the issue was caused by me having poor self control, no real sleep set-in-stone sleep schedule or anything like it (except when school or work required it).

However, I did manage to fix it by making a very simple change, and that is to wake up at the exact same time every single day and do not sleep in. No sleeping in (you can lay in for like 30 mins if you want but avoid closing your eyes or just play music to prevent falling asleep), no “not setting your alarm clock at the weekend to sleep longer”, just choose a single time to base your life on and wake up at that time every single day no matter what (in my case it’s 6 am).

Now, I don’t know your brain chemistry or whatever but for me it worked almost instantaneously.

Not an anarchist but a revolutionary Marxist, and I don’t really have any Anarchist literature to share on this topic but here’s how I understand it:

Essentially, both Anarchism and Communism operate within “production for use”, which sees things being manufactured for use and to satisfy people’s needs rather than for profit as commodities to be sold on a market, and so this necessitates economic planning - after all, how else would the community know what and how many goods they need to produce/trade for?

Anarchist economic planning is done communally via local assemblies with them also communicating their productive capacities (like what they can make and the manpower) and needs they cannot fulfill locally with other communes, creating a regional federated network of sorts. These federations would then coordinate with other federations globally which is where all the transportation networks and production chains requiring continental and planetary integration get handled.

How I imagine this would play out in reality is essentially an order based system, where factories making certain component would make X amount of goods, ship them over to their next step of assembly where they would be further developed or turned into a complex finished product and distributed to the corresponding communities.

And to address some of the comments I see here - the whole idea of “everyone producing as a hobby” or “everyone does work only when they feel like it” is absolute bs and is a surefire way to peoples needs not being met. If you’ve been told that you need to produce something like 100 tools or 100kg of grain as your quota to meet the needs, then it doesn’t matter if you feel like it or not - you gotta produce it, especially if its an essential good like food. Do not be detached from reality voluntarist utopian, read economic books like Marx or Kropotkin and whoever else Anarchists have - ground your claims in coherent doctrine.

At least his critique is clear and coherent.

If validity of theory was based on what its writers had done, then Marx would be worthless and Urban Guerilla doctrine would be invaluable.

Trade and wage labor also aren’t exclusive to capitalism.

Yes, trade isn’t exclusive to capitalism, I never claimed otherwise. However, there is a distinction between commodity exchange for exchange-value (capitalist trade) and international distribution of goods to satisfy needs (socialist distribution), whether through planned allocation or transitional forms like labor vouchers.

Wage labor is specific to capitalism, it’s a sale of labor-power as a commodity, exchanged for a wage, with surplus value being appropriated by a class/managerial apparatus. This is THE fundamental relation of capitalism, and you’d be better off reading theory than blindly quoting it.

Though I will give a concession - socialism is such a meaningless term that it means like 4 different things depending on who says it: liberals would say it’s social democracy, ML’s say its state capitalism, Marxists and Leninists say it’s socialist mode of production (post-transition period) and Posadists would say it’s when nuclear annihilation. A word doesn’t make a thing so if you consider state capitalism to be socialist - fair, all power to you. However - Marxists, Leninists, Liberals would all collectively disagree. You did drop a Lenin quote to strengthen your argument so let me do the same:

• Lenin, The Tax in Kind

No one, I think, in studying the question of the economic system of Russia, has denied its transitional character. Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order.

In the same text he also calls NEP USSR as state capitalist due to the concessions he had to make for the transition, which is explicitly made distinct from Socialism.

And I’m adamant that it’s a mischaracterization. Identifying the dominant mode of production is not a “one drop rule”, it’s literally foundational Marxist analysis - modes are defined by prevailing relations of production, not how it’s managed or ideological labels put onto them.

You’ve done a really good job misrepresenting my argument, keep it up.

That is another western chauvinist talking point.

Yeah, any critique of 3rd world communist countries is western chauvinism, therefore we should avoid looking at those countries through objective materialist perspective and uncritically support them just because they’re third-worldist - that’s something an imperialist crakkka like me should know.

That any development of industry (the primary task of countries who’ve just freed themselves from colonial rule), is a “betrayal” of socialism, because it didn’t go according to whatever the given critic laid out as sufficiently socialist enough, and that only the western critics of socialist countries have the correct plan.

I’d like you to point out where I said that industrialization is bad. The argument is literally about how the development was achieved and I concluded that it was through (state) capitalism and capitalist mode of production rather than socialism, even saying how it’s good that they managed to build up wealth. I explicitly didn’t moralize this either, this is literally how these countries materially functioned.

My critique also comes strictly from Marxism which is essentially the basis for communism regardless of culture, but sure.

China specifically can’t be called state capitalist in the slightest, considering that the CPC stands above the political system

You’re confusing political power with class relations, the key isn’t who holds political power but what social relations of production are. If a state (CPC controlled or otherwise) oversees an economy where wage labor, capital accumulation, commodity exchange persists, then it’s still state capitalism.

What no theory does to you.

Yeah, if you’re operating within Stalinist ML bubble. Just because it’s popular doesn’t mean it’s inherently “true”, and it can be healthy to read other communist sides/perspectives. Some recommendations would be Marx’s writings, Lenin, Bordiga if you want a lesser known but still respected Leninist who’s critical of ML’s/Stalinism.

No one claims magic here, and it’s true - a transitional DOTP period must happen, but it’s not a license to preserve the capitalist relations indefinitely. The fundamental relations of production that I’ve mentioned must be consciously dismantled over time as a precondition for socialism, that’s what the proletarian dictatorship is literally for. If not, then it’s only a matter of time until the state reverts to bourgeois control disguised as “socialist”.

Nationalizing capital while leaving value production intact leaves capitalism functionally preserved, read Critique of the Gotha Programme by Marx where he makes this explicit - converting private to state property without abolishing wage labor/value mediation and calling it Socialism is literally Lassallean nonsense.

Capitalist production is not magically nullified by the presence of a party member or state shareholding either: workers still sell their labor-power, surplus value is still extracted, production is for market sale or in other words, capitalist mode of production prevails at full force. Legal oversight is a managerial form, not an abolition of class relations.

Meanwhile the success in question: The 3rd world communist countries have managed to more or less industrialize and build up wealth, but under (state) capitalist system with all the bells of whistles which are markets, commodity production, wage labor, etc. In other words, they used capitalism to build up wealth.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually think they had some absolutely amazing policies for the workers like free housing and social benefits, and good on them for building themselves up. However, this has nothing to do with socialism (socialist mode of production in this case) or communism as it was achieved with, and is therefore a win for capitalism - the same system that drove colonialism and the system that had already built up wealth for ‘non-socialist’ feudal/agrarian countries in the 19-20th century.

EDIT: Damn, judging from the amount of upvotes, it genuinely feels like walking into a bar and everyone drawing a gun and pointing at you. This is probably the most antagonistic I’ve been towards ML (or MLM/Dengist/Maoist) ideology and it’s kinda disappointing how there’s no actual non-ML Marxists to be seen here.

I love how the conversation went from “all billionaires are bad eat the rich!!” to “hey this good billionaire is talking smack about a bad billionaire, time to defend them from criticism because they did good thing”

Doing nothing is praxis

If you’re torrenting and got some extra hard drive space, a good practice is to copy paste the game into another location and play for there. That way, you can modify or have the game update all you want without stopping seeding (as you need all original, unmodified files to seed), and you also have a backup in case something goes really wrong.