>The means of production are taken away from muh capitalists and handed over to the state
>The means of production are taken away from muh capitalists and distributed to be privately owned by workers
Which of these is ''''real'''' communism? What's the other?
>starve
rinse and repeat.
then sage
And now for reals.
you've got it twisted user -
>The means of production are taken away from muh capitalists and distributed to be COLLECTIVELY owned by workers
^ see the difference?
here is an economist on the issue ->
youtube.com
If that's ''''true'''' communism, I still need a name for option A and B.
to be clear -> what i described is "true" socialism, at its core. collective ownership of the means of production and democratic decision making on how to use those means, etc. essentially a worker co-op. cut the boss out.
A is State Capitalism (USSR, China, etc)
B is not a thing - 'private' ownership itself implies concentrated, individual ownership by a capitalist (who owns/rents the real estate, invests in raw materials and technologies, and extracts profit from his workers)
of course this is all abstract theory that has its roots in the mid-1800s, so if we were to talk about more contemporary forms of work we'd have to complicate things. however, this is the basis of how capitalism works, and how socialism is a response to it.
>communism is the stock market
No, REAL communism is the means of production that is handed to the state, which is a collective made up of workers.
"the state, which is a collective made up of workers"
lmao lmao lmao ok bruv
anyway who fucking cares what socialism is "real" or "true" - what matters is what kind of socialism is going to WORK and fix the problem.
this is why i am a technosocialist//left accelerationist.
>'private' ownership itself implies concentrated, individual ownership
'Concentrated' is an arbitrary addition on your part. If the capital of Company A is fully owned by the workers in the form of evenly distributed shares, then their collective may make up the company, but the company itself is still privately owned.
>left accelerationist
So you want to become a 3rd world country
>i am a technosocialist
this approaches semantics but, once the productive capacities of the operation are no longer being used to facilitate wage labor and pursue a profit on the basis of that wage labor, it is no longer privately owned. (based on the standard marxist understanding, obviously. neoclassical economics surely has a different take).
here is a quote from marx, pulled from this pretty interesting reddit thread.
reddit.com
>Thus through estranged labour man... creates the domination of the person who does not produce over production and over the product... The relationship of the worker to labour creates the relation to it of the capitalist... Private property is thus the product, the result, the necessary consequence, of alienated labour.
>Which of these is ''''real'''' communism?
Kill millions of working class people, ride around in eleven Rolls Royces while you tell other that if they don't work, they don't eat.
>Given the enslavement of technoscience to capitalist objectives (especially since the late 1970s) we surely do not yet know what a modern technosocial body can do. Who amongst us fully recognizes what untapped potentials await in the technology which has already been developed? Our wager is that the true transformative potentials of much of our technological and scientific research remain unexploited, filled with presently redundant features (or pre-adaptations) that, following a shift beyond the short-sighted capitalist socius, can become decisive. We want to accelerate the process of technological evolution. But what we are arguing for is not techno-utopianism. Never believe that technology will be sufficient to save us. Necessary, yes, but never sufficient without socio-political action. Technology and the social are intimately bound up with one another, and changes in either potentiate and reinforce changes in the other. Whereas the techno-utopians argue for acceleration on the basis that it will automatically overcome social conflict, our position is that technology should be accelerated precisely because it is needed in order to win social conflicts.
Communism is authoritarian utopianism. They have few concrete beliefs other than advancing state power.
y'all just threadshitting or not reading the thread or both?
>steal, murder, starve, oppress
But of course it is just the radical but necessary step to reach the utopia of Real Communism doing it globally.
lmao the discourse here has really gone downhill but wtf do i know.
The first one is socialism
the second one communism
Both are equally retarded
Holy shit I remember the old Habo and Gaia raids from back in the day. And when they stole longcat and we DDoS'ed their entire ISP for like a week straight.
Anons am I getting old?
What's inherently bad about companies being owned by workers?
What fucking production?
Everything is made in China.
Whatever communism they have is what you will get you fucking pos.
i'm actually friends w the girl from that pic on instagram rn lol
ya we old bb it ok
>the means of production are owned by no one, and can be used by anyone
this is real communism
youtube.com
>The idea that “the means of production belong to the working people” was translated to mean that the workers own the particular factory they work in. This is an extreme vulgarization. Such an interpretation would mean that the particular activity to which the wage struggle condemned someone in capitalist society is the activity to which they will be condemned when the society is transformed. What if someone who works in the auto plant wants to paint, farm, fly or do research rather than assembly line car production? A revolution would mean that workers, at that moment, would go all over the society, and it is doubtful that many of them would return to the particular car factory that capitalism had condemned them to work in.
youtube.com
The first one is what you commies always do when you come to power. So that's communism.
The second one is either theft or a buyout, depending on force used.
>Be middle-class communist
>Revolution happens
>Get shot
Rinse and repeat