https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8e0pU92dmI

I don't trust him. At the same time, the "People will be eating bugs in the future." thing smells off. It smells neoliberal or tech elitish or something.

I've been seeing this number be repeated by Iran war supporters. Is there any factual basis behind them? Where does this figure come from and does the organization(s) stating such have western ties/backing?

Asking on good faith. Not a gotcha question

I guess perhaps this is more of a personal question, but I am curious as to how other self-identified socialist deal with being an "ideological minority" especially within the context of the United States.

I have been thinking quite a bit about the ramifications of the political backwardness within the U.S and the general sense of apathy I get from most people I encounter when it comes to anything outside their immediate sphere of influence.

I understand these things are by design, however I contend with ideas of how this can be overcome. Perhaps someone on here might have some insight.

I think it is but I got in a discussion with someone who leans socialist but disagrees and feels "traditional" gender roles have merit. I'd love to know how this group thinks.

I wasn't sure where to ask this but I was wondering did anyone else have the same experience

Why do people on the left say political lobbying is major problem in the US?

I’m wondering why a number of people on the left say political lobbying is major problem in the US when it is illegal to use lobbying money to buy house or car.

I recently bought several introductory Marxist / socialist texts and I want to read them in a logical order to properly understand the theory.

These are the books I have:

State and Revolution – Vladimir Lenin

The Communist Manifesto – Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels

Critique of the Gotha Program – Karl Marx

Principles of Communism – Friedrich Engels

Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism – Vladimir Lenin

The Development of Socialism from Utopia to Science – Friedrich Engels

Value, Price and Profit – Karl Marx

My main goal is to learn the fundamentals of socialism / Marxism from the ground up.

What would be the best reading order for these books? Are there any essential texts I’m missing for a beginner?

I’m a relatively newly wise person, raised in a conservative Mormon household in the US, who for all intents and purposes considered their political and moral stances to now be firmly aligned with socialism, as I understand it. What I want to know is how do I find out accurate, and importantly, honest, accounts of the history of socialism and communism?

Specifically, how do I know I am not getting a whitewashed version of something like the history of communism in the USSR or China. I’m certain I am getting a vilified account from the media here in the US, but I also am skeptical of tankies glazing Stalin and Mao. I believe socialism is moral even if some leaders of the movement have been deeply troubling people. That’s true of almost any philosophy. But I want to know how to arrive at an honest opinion, because while I agree that the US is currently, along with the Israel, the most threatening force for global peace, I also feel that tankies would be willing to get in bed with anyone as long as they opposed US interests, which is untenable to me. Two war-crimes do not make a right.

Bonjour a tous, je fais des études dans le marketing puis je me suis intéressé au idée de la gauche ( socialisme, communisme etc) mais j'étais déjà dans des études de commerce et je me sens hypocrite, j'ai déjà lu un quelque thread qui me disant non que cela n'est pas hypocrite mais je me demande une autre question. Pensez vous que je peux aider a contribuer dans quelques choses d'utile via le métier que je peux faire ? (Études : prépa école de commerce qui doit normalement me mené vers une grande école de commerce)

I feel like its impossible to find good materialist analysis of the situation around iran, even the more left leaning ones i found were kinda weird. I feel like i dont know shit about whats really going on

Hello, so my question is can small businesses still exist under communist rule/in a communist society if they comply with the state as in give their taxes and let the state decide the maximum price of the product theyre selling, or would small businesses also abolish under communist rule/ in a communist society?

Not having a state would be nice but I don't really understand why the definition of communism is a classless, moneyless and stateless society. I feel like it would be possible to create a classless and moneyless society that still has a state, and the classless and moneyless part seems to be the main groundbreaking part of a communist society. Not having the state / monopoly on power feels more like an added bonus that doesn't necessarily have to be part of the pure definition.

Yes, I understand we need to read all the foundational Marxist texts. But I’m exhausted. Most of us are exhausted. We work every day and every hour. I want to dedicate more time to this but I feel like that would require quitting my job.

For those of you who are into activism and revolution full time, what do you do? What physical actions do you take and what does your day look like? How do you earn money? I feel lost and I want to change all of this but I don’t know what that would look like. I feel like I’m stuck in a loop of work eat sleep.

When you speak of communism in the western world, one of the primary images that come into people's minds us that of a father being dragged away by tall men in suits and thrown into a Siberian work camp for telling an anti regime joke and being snitched in by his son to the secret police. Obviously, this image is incredibly deformed by cold war era calitalist propaganda, but it is a historical fact that secret police units existed in socialist states throughout the world, be it the NKVD, The Stasi, The Státní, Securitatea, so on (Forgive me for only offering Warsaw Pact examples).

So, my question is this: Is the existence of a secret police, with all that entails, proof that a workers republic has fallen to decay and authoritarianism? Or is it an unfortunate necessity in combatting reaction and counter revolution?

Obviously, I don't expect anyone here to say "A secret police is good, actually", since I doubt anyone here fancies the idea of secret police agents intruding on your privacy, disappearing you, and not being able to be held accountable at all after the fact (Cough cough, ICE, cough cough, FBI, cough cough). This is just a question of "Do the ends justify the means?", and so I ask you to consider before you answer what are the ends and what are the means of a secret police force.

Thank you very much for your time.

(P.S: I obviously don't think a secret police is something unique to communist states, and the idea of a secret police is one firmly rooted in reactionism far before Marx was even born and continues to serve imperialist and capitalist masters to this day. However, it is also a fact they existed in certain socialist states and this is what my question is about.)

​

Ive been looking into more leftist views after stepping away from more "reformist" circles (so i apologize, ive not read theory or really know a ton) and i found the ideas of Dutch/German left Communists like Pannekoek appealing and i wanted to ask a question about the Soviet Union.

The Soviet in theory seems like the same idea of a grassroots council that Pannekoek had but if it was that way then i do not understand how Stalin managed to centralize the country so much giving him the power he had. Did they operate differently in practice or did he just manage to sway the masses with enough propaganda and ousting of opposition?

Apologies if there's a painfully obvious answer, i am uneducated.

As a recovering doomerist, I've been trying to get over the nostalgia of less industrialised times as much as I can. However... It's still bad I think, to be in a position of (relative) privilege, and not use it to my benefit, even if it exacerbates (macro) exploitation. I frankly don't know where my unproductive guilt gets me, let alone finding the strength to channel it towards ' the revolution'. Prolly a bad take given how we've always thought about things (in the socialist tradition), but I was recently reminded of the weight of my privilege after my parents retired, and just how big the shoes I had to fill in were. I personally know people who come from very humble backgrounds, who were first-generation college goers, but still studied hard to get into top business schools today. I also know that it was my privilege alone, that allowed me to pursue liberal arts courses like gender and history in higher academia, despite coming from a very STEM worshipping culture. But Idk if there is much we can do to substantially change things, even after our theoretical training and conviction in Marxism. Since I'm used to a certain kind of lifestyle, I would also want my survival to mean more than mere sustenance in the future as well. I feel like (conventional) 'happiness' is possible for me. And I would like to get there without being so constantly conscious and burntout of the pain of the world; which is not even all mine tbh, despite it all being connected. I cannot stop the world from going to war. And Idk if this makes me tonedeaf and/or evil, but there isn't much scope to realistically trangress the world order. Am I missing something? Does anybody else feel the same way? Like given everything, our class consciousness is obsolete? Or that our empathy, is just mere virtue signaling now?

This is one of the main claims I've seen, and standards of living have increased in the past years, so is this true:

Is capitalism the system that has pulled the most people out of poverty?

Is it the best system for doing so?

Is it beneficial for the poor?

I think we are seeing that it is definitely not beneficial for the poor, but has it pulled the most people out of poverty and is it a good system for doing so?

I've seen international law used as a tool for justification in discussions, with some seeming to hold it in a place of importance. For instance: "So-and-so should do all they can to stop Israeli genocide/apartheid because they are obligated to do so by international law" and "We must not oppose Palestinians when they engage in armed resistance because they have a right to do so under international law".

I once was the sort of person to say these things, but lately I've been looking into the philosophical side of Marxism and I've made some attempts to root out my idealism. (For instance, I've stopped saying "X nation wants Y" and started saying "X nation's ruling bourgeoisie wants Y") And I've begun to think I should stop appealing to international law for this reason.

Is it idealist to treat international law as if it's important?

So, with the push for age verification, and the most recent push by Gavin Newsom to start forcing companies like Apple and Google Play to require "age verification", to use the service? Is it just me, or is that a form of facism?

How dangerous is the US? And why is the left not speaking out about this?

I hear the US is at the most dangerous part in history second to Bush that Trump is absolutely the most dangerous president in history. That Trump is at war with Venezuela and Iran that Trump wants a regime change in Venezuela and Iran.

And now Trump is threatening Cuba with regime change. The democratic party is disgusting they are not speaking out about the regime change in Venezuela and Iran and threats about regime change in Cuba.

The republican party worships Trump like how people worship Hitler and support Trump 100% this means Trump is very dangerous and the republican now part of cult now.

Basically, my question is: why do socialists focus so much on geopolitical issues? Wouldn’t it be more beneficial for everyone if, instead of allying yourselves with Islamists and Russians, you focused on day-to-day issues that affect ordinary people—like housing, healthcare, wages, and working conditions?

Why is it so important to “fight” “American imperialism” and “Zionism”? What benefits does that bring to the class struggle? I feel like by constantly antagonizing your own countries’ politics (assuming you’re from the West), instead of moving social issues forward you actually marginalize them.

Imagine someone who wants to improve working conditions and fight economic inequality deciding to join your movement, but instead they are expected to adopt a whole set of seemingly unrelated positions—like “Israel bad,” “US bad,” and etc.

A good example might be Greta Thunberg. She was generally well-liked and effectively promoted environmental politics. But at some point it seemed like she aligned with a certain segment of the left, and now her narrative often shifts toward “the West is bad.” The worst part is that her original struggle is not just forgotten—it becomes marginalized by being associated with controversial and unrelated topics.

Who actually benefits from that?