Cuba is about all I have lol

Technically a colour revolution, but Fidel accidentally forgot to tell the CIA that he was a communist.

Sunni ultranationalist, fundamentalist, Islamic group that are rabidly anti-communist and right wing. Designated a terrorist organization by the vast majority of the world, including Russia and the PRC.

I honestly doubt it. Something in my heart tells me that those ‘Israeli citizens’ are most likely from minority communities and therefore relegated to the dregs of Israeli society. They’re the Palestinian and arab individuals graciously granted citizenship in the larger Israeli state, and their suffering doesn’t concern the upper echelons at all.

You’re correct, the legal system is divided into civil cases and criminal cases. However civil crimes refers to crimes committed by civilian citizens of a nation, so it excludes military justice systems and international crimes. So international human trafficking is an international crime, versus standard murder is just a civil crime.

Which civil crimes are deserving of death in your eyes?

This is of course disregarding extremely heinous international crimes such as genocide, war crimes, etc.

You fell for the Fox News propaganda. They chose the most nutty mod they could find to misrepresent the subreddit. Yes in its barebones infancy the subreddit was truly “anti-work” but that was for an incredibly short amount of time and when it was sub 50k users. Realistically the majority of the subreddits history is what joad is describing.

Why does CPUSA continuously advocate for voting democrat every election? We’ve had this conversation before and I linked direct articles from CPUSA dating all the way back to Obama where they repeatedly tell their members to vote democrat.

He doesn’t care, he complete dodged your question and could care less about the work you linked. Its only useful if it reinforces his preexisting beliefs.

But how is that relevant in reference to the PSL? I would hardly call them any degree of Patsoc. Plus who cares what Patsocs advocate for to begin with?

I said nothing about concessions. Also the overthrow of the capitalist system is not the main focus of marxists. It is a primary goal, but only in service of creating a societal formation for the betterment of the working class through a DotP how you mentioned.

Without the focus on the working class, any revolutionary movement is soulless at best, and opportunists thirsting for power at worst.

Declaring a working class irrelevant and therefore fit to suffer is genuinely disgusting. Those are people too, equally as valuable as the working class of any nation. The third world is getting exploited whether a poor family of four in Missouri has healthcare or not, it’s just those profits are sequestered and hoarded by imperial entities.

Yes, focusing on concessions is a death kneel for any Marxist movement and not good, but that doesn’t mean throwing the baby out with the bath water is the way to go. How else do you plan to create popular support for a movement or galvanize your movements members if the messaging is, “Fuck you guys, we don’t care about you. We only care about overthrowing the government… wait why won’t you guys support us?!”

Is improving the living standards of the working class not the main goal of Marxists? I don’t see how wanting conditions to be better is some great sin. It’s not like you can’t both work toward revolution and uplift the working class at the same time.

Thank you for the write up! That’s given me a lot to think about!

Honestly the only confusing part for me would be Marx’s inclusion of “mechanical and intellectual” organs when referencing the industrial machine then. Computers would still be in their primordial infancy when Marx was writing capital, and I highly doubt he had ever heard of them, so it doesn’t feel like he was referencing a “programmed” machine. Even one programmed mechanically.

That was mainly the line I was referencing when talking about how Marx humanises the machine and gives it a sense of self-autonomy. As why would a cotton gin require “intellectual organs”? Of which there is technically only one in the human body, which is the brain.

Your source is two completely unsourced Twitter screenshots? And a random quote just attached to an image with no source?

Are you serious?

You would have gotten thrown out of university with this level of research integrity.

That’s not the passage I was referring to.

Marx quite explicitly refers to automatons and robots from these passages in capital. He directly humanises the machine and this is AFTER he talks about general machinery and the industrial process. So he is not talking about assembly lines and simple industrial machines.

Notice how he differentiates “automaton” from “machine”. He is implying a fully artificial worker, which through this artificial nature, completely removes all of labour value from the equation of goods production.

One can absolutely theorise about concepts that don’t exist yet.

I feel like you’re missing the point. Machines are quickly reaching the stage where they will able to troubleshoot, think and reason.

That’s what we’re discussing.

But in your example that is not a true AI able to work outside of its programming. I am discussing a true, thinking, machine.

And if you say that a machine still has to learn that information from somewhere. How is that any different from a human?

Not yet. But that’s the entire point of theorising.

Nuclear weapons, cars, jets, computers, and literally everything in the modern world was science fiction when Marx and Lenin were crafting their theories.

That’s why Marx had the foresight to loosely theorise automatons (AI). Something being science fiction should not stop us from pondering its implications.

Yes. When Christ died he traveled to hell and raises all he souls trapped there. Implying he had a plan before dying.

Can points 1, 2, and 4 not be automated? Especially as machines continue to evolve and exponentially improve?

But when Marx discusses automatons, and in the modern discussion of AI, wouldn’t a thinking machine be able to take the place of a human worker in creating value?

Surely an AI can create far far more value then was ever used to create it, especially if it learns and evolves.

You can’t exactly depreciate in an economic sense a thinking machine.