in any system the leader of that system by definition cannot be an ordinary man

Reminds me of Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem

The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that the system cannot demonstrate its own consistency.

A logical system (e.g. standard mathematics) cannot prove its own axioms. Therefore not all problems are solvable using standard mathematics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men_(1957_film)

Inspiring as hell

I love 90s utopian design

Hell yeah

Forbidden sour patch

Rachel Maddow is mild compared to the average Finnish news outlet

I see Putin’s face every single day on newsstands in groceries and cafes. He’s basically the Trump of Finland

That phase is called idealism and comes from a lack of any sort of analysis. It is an entirely contrived, utopian solution “to which reality will have to adjust itself.”

There is no ideal Marxist form of democracy other than the form which suits the conditions at hand.

Silently adding a new person every time this is reposted until someone notices

Biden has not known his whereabouts for twenty years

Our intrepid publications

Their nefarious propaganda

It was funny the first time I went to Stockholm and thought people were being silly with the Kermit voices. But it’s actually a regular vowel sound in that language and they allegedly struggle to hear his it’s different

Is there any evidence of DPRK soldiers in Ukraine?

I know what you mean. I also don’t like when people hand-wave about “material conditions” as if they will automagically produce a revolution when they fall below some arbitrary threshold. Marxist theory centers action and human agency as necessary elements alongside material conditions.

I think you misunderstand me a little bit… I’m not saying you should do nothing until someone deems conditions bad enough. For one thing, conditions aren’t uniform across space or class lines, so there isn’t a single answer for “what are conditions right now” like how the weather depends on many factors.

You can and should do something now. My point is only that there are effective and ineffective actions. It is much better to seek out likely allies and work with them, than to distract and frustrate yourself debating people who either aren’t ready, or will never be convinced.

The US is in debt at the federal level, but it still represents one of the largest markets because of how much spending power is held by the middle class, relative to other nations. It’s on the decline but it still isn’t at the point where China can just shrug off the US.

I want to believe, but, why would they make this game in English?

Proud Intelligent Super Strong

Communism is fundamentally about human dignity. We are so used to negating capitalism that we can forget that communism is also a definite, positive conception of the future.

Needing an organ transplant is a vulnerable, scary, and undignified position to find yourself. I don’t care who needs my liver when I’m gone. They are 99.999% not responsible for capitalism even if they are a random Trump supporter, and their suffering will not bring about communism. As a human being I am happy to reduce unnecessary suffering.

Comrades should embody the humanity that they want to see in the world, and let go of petty angers that do not substantially advance the cause.

Hexbear is the opiate of the masses doodoo shit of pigs asses

Edit: just realized this isn’t bad posting, so just read it very seriously instead of deeply unseriously

The point of organizing is to change open minds. If someone stops to listen to a speech about Palestine, they might not agree right away, but the idea is planted and that person has access to resources if they are interested to research it later.

A debate, for all its pretense of dialectical refinement of ideas, is a rare place to find open minded people. People don’t debate about things which they are uncertain; all it does is mix up ego and defensiveness and actually harden the participants against a change of mind.

I am an optimistic person and I agree with you that many people will change their minds given enough time. But socialists can’t be infinitely patient, there will be good people on the wrong side of history whose individual political learning timeline didn’t line up with the timeline of revolution.

Practically speaking, revolution can’t take the electoralist approach of campaigning to persuade people to switch sides. If the material conditions exist for socialism, then people will seek out the organization. But this only happens after people are convinced of their own accord. They won’t be browbeat into it and we can’t expect to browbeat people into a revolution — they wouldn’t be loyal anyway