400 Bad Request: rate_limit_error.
1
0
submitted 3 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

Hey.

I put in the code, but it doesn't bring it up.

Can someone help fetch it for me?

2
0
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by SovietReporter@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml
3
0
4
0
5
0
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

"It wasn’t Communists who attempted an insurrection, it was the corporate-backed fascists!"

lol at the PatSocs in the comments defending it as a proletarian revolution and not a ultra-right putsch.

6
0
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

Just helping someone out.

7
0
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

The only thing I can think of is Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord and Marshall McLuhan's work on media.

Oh, and this work by Christian Fuchs.

Problem being:

I think Fuchs is a Marxist-Humanist and I'm not sure what to think of Marxist humanism.

But I could be wrong.

Maybe I should ignore that aspect of their work.

Thoughts?

Got any book recommendations at all?

I'm looking for:

Media studies

Cultural theory

Communications

Internet

Social media

Management and organization

Community-building

Trends

Technology

etc.

^ These are the topics I'm looking into.

And, hopefully, from a Marxist-Leninist or Marxist standpoint (or at least leftist).

Got anything? Maybe advice?

8
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

I know the people that made it. One is for those new to the CPUSA and the other is for those new to the Marxism-Leninism.

Cheers!

Check it out:

Copy-pasta

CPUSA Reading List - 2022

https://cryptpad.fr/pad/#/2/pad/view/VJlD0b3eh4gMJovaypGkuW4m3Au-aksj+6oNDi50UFI/embed/

Communism Reading Guide

https://cryptpad.fr/pad/#/2/pad/view/eAFqVc1JC8v8T5AEEWSPQ9YD4FR8tK6E97XEy+v78KQ/embed/

9
1

I don't see this often so how does Marxist materialism see supply and demand?

10
1
11
1
12
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4012640

Excerpt from the first part of the article (you can read the rest through the link up top):


Undocumented Migrants crossing into the United States disturb U.S. politics. Cuban migrants, part of the mix, hard-pressed like the others, but privileged, are provocative in their own way.

For many years and even now displaced Cubans are portrayed as victims of a brutal dictatorship and as recipients of “rescue” by freedom-loving Americans. Cubans who have special skills are often lured out of the country with promises of “the good life” in the U.S. and with the intent of hurting Cuba as it loses people with skills needed at home.

Changing U.S. regulations and new migration patterns highlight the anomaly of special U.S. dispensation for migrating Cubans.

U.S. district judge Drew Tipton on March 8 ruled that migrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Haiti may enter the United States via humanitarian parole. The plaintiffs had been 21 Republican-governed states that had unsuccessfully claimed that immigrants enabled by humanitarian parole required services they could not pay for.

Under humanitarian parole, a program the Biden administration announced on January 6, 2023, migrants entering from those four countries are assured of legal residence for two years – renewable at that point – and a work permit.

Humanitarian parole is limited to 30,000 immigrants arriving every month from the four countries. Migrants need sponsors in the United States.

Instituted under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, the program allowed entry into the United States of refugees from the former Soviet Union, Afghanistan, Ukraine, and other countries. This time, 138,000 Haitians, 86,000 Venezuelans, 58,000 Nicaraguans, and 74,000 Cubans – a total of 357,000 migrants –entered via humanitarian parole as of February 2024.

The would-be migrants from the four countries travel by air to ports of entry inside the United States, pass quickly through immigration screening, and proceed to new homes. Before leaving their home country or a third country, they had found sponsors, presented documentation to U.S. immigration officials, and been approved– all via the Internet.

An analyst claims that “Combined with the other parole process at the U.S.-Mexican border …, parole has transformed most migration from [the four] countries from mostly illegal to mostly legal in less than a year.” And, “This policy has transformed migration to the United States. By July 2023, parole had already redirected about 316,000 people away from long, perilous treks through Mexico.”

The Biden administration adopted the parole system in part because of difficulties associated with repatriating migrants from the four countries. They stemmed from a U.S. lack of full diplomatic relations and repatriation agreements with those countries. Normal relations with Mexico and the northern Central American countries allow for more convenient U.S. handling of refugees from those countries.

Humanitarian parole came into effect after the administration’s repeal of Title 42, its role having been to exclude migrants because of health risks. Many migrants saw an opening and attempted a border crossing. But many of those from the four countries opted for humanitarian parole.

13
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

Here are mine (I think it's the best order but I may be biased ;)):

What about yours?

14
1

Zetkin, a political strategist, calculated that organizing for IWWD was a crucial step in building an anti-capitalist movement. She aimed to foster cooperation among women in labor unions, women’s organizations and socialist parties so they would fight jointly. This would raise class and socialist consciousness and push the class struggle forward. In her estimation, the most political women workers would be won over to opposing capitalism — the source of women’s oppression — and would embrace a socialist perspective.

An internationalist, Zetkin deduced that a yearly, coordinated multicountry protest on the same day for the same demands would empower women’s struggles and also break down national chauvinism, strengthening ties between women in different countries and building anti-war sentiment.

One year later, Zetkin’s strategy took hold. More than one million people, mostly women, poured into the streets of four European countries on March 19, 1911, to demand jobs and an end to gender discrimination. Russian revolutionary Alexandra Kollontai said that the first “Working Women’s Day was one seething sea of women, certainly the first show of militancy [in Europe] by working women.”

[…]

Today, we fight the ultraright’s racist attacks on oppressed communities and the teaching of their true history, the life-threatening assaults on migrants at the border, dangerous federal and state attacks on reproductive freedom, especially on low-income and oppressed women — from abortion bans to restrictions on contraception and assisted reproduction. We oppose all attacks on voting rights, affirmative action, worker organizing and call for ending discrimination against LGBTQ2S+ people[.]

15
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

Also, does anyone have the link (described here) to where we study Das Kapital on the GenZedong server on Matrix/Element?

I'm having trouble finding it.

Thanks!

16
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

From an excerpt of the article:

This article is part of the People’s World 100th Anniversary Series.

Lucy Parsons—a radical leader in her own right—is often overshadowed in the annals of labor history by her husband, Albert Parsons, one of the May Day martyrs murdered by the state in 1887 after the demonstrations at Haymarket Square the year prior.

When Parsons died in 1942—on International Women’s Day—she was mourned by her comrades in the Communist Party USA, which she had joined three years prior. Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a prominent leader in the CPUSA, was one of Parsons’ close friends. She wrote the article remembrance below, which appeared in the Daily Worker on March 11, 1942.

Parsons and Flynn had been associates and sisters in the struggle for decades by that point. The two had been involved in 1912 in founding the Syndicalist League and later worked side-by-side in the International Labor Defense, a mass organization created by the CPUSA to defend native and foreign-born workers from persecution.

Parsons was actively involved in the Sacco & Vanzetti Defense Campaign, the Angelo Herndon Defense Campaign, and the fight to save the Scottsboro Nine.

Having earlier been an anarchist like her husband Albert, she gravitated toward the CPUSA in the 1920s and ’30s. She once wrote: “Anarchism has not produced any organized ability in the present generation, only a few little loose struggling groups, scattered over this vast country…. I went to work for the International Labor Defense because I wanted to do a little something to help defend the victims of capitalism who got into trouble, and not always be talking, talking, talking.”

To learn more about the life of Lucy Parsons, read “Lucy Parsons, American revolutionary,” by Norman Markowitz, available on CPUSA.org.

17
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

The author of this article wrote a book against people owning homes.

Literally owning homes.

Anyway, "YourCommieDad" takes the guy down a peg.

P. S.: To be clear, this video is a rebuttal to an article from a website called Real Clear Markets.

Like I said in the last one:

Like

Share

Subscribe

Comment

etc.

to help with the algorithm.

Thanks!

18
1
submitted 7 months ago by Makan@lemmygrad.ml to c/communism@lemmygrad.ml

Link: https://www.liberationnews.org/transitional-council-scheme-is-a-u-s-plot-to-subvert-haitis-independence/

Please:

Like

Share

Subscribe

Comment

Etc.

to help with the algorithm for this person; I'm trying to help 'em out.

19
1

It's like China is just that one country (aside from the Khmer Rouge) that every ML (aside from Dengists like us) agrees to hate on.

Fellow Traveler and leftypol uploaded videos criticizing them, the Shining Path hung up literal dogs to protest them, Maoists go all insane saying that it's some red fash social-imperialist nation because (insert nato propaganda here). And Hoxhaists claim that China was never socialist and that the only socialist nation ever was USSR before Khrushchev and almighty holy Albania.

What is it that makes China so controversial even among MLs? I get that it's not perfect and every AES state has their Ls, but jesus.

20
1
21
1

are you ready to program for the revolution, camarada?

22
1

We already know that socialism is going strong in China, Korea, and Cuba. But we (or at least I) don't hear that much about Vietnam and Laos.

How is it going over there? What is their trajectory towards becoming developed? How much progress have they made so far? Is the socialist ideology going strong there? Where can I keep up to date on these countries?

23
1

Title says it all. I'm in a country that has public health care, and in many aspects it is very good. Only downside is wait time. There's also less and less funding every year, less and less quality, the whole process to destroy and later privatize what is a natural monopoly (such as water, electricity, etc) and a basic necessity for human life and dignity, and so on.

With that said, is it wrong for me to benefit from what is essentially a better service (because of factors mentioned above, not because private = "better") because it is a capitalist enterprise? Same debate could arise from private energy companies, private transport providers, etc.

24
1

Wikipedia says they are both libertarian and communist so obviously theres a lot of disinformation about them.

25
1

On another level, the South of the planet and the global East can no longer stand the racist and neo-colonial supremacism of this “global North-West,” of which the European Union is the European pillar, and is confronting the EU-NATO bloc which, allied with open [neofascists] swarming in Kiev and the Baltic states, is the main enemy of all peoples, including the peoples of Europe and North America.

This is not to idealize Vladimir Putin’s counter-revolutionary régime, nor to deny the class contradictions that exist in People’s China, but simply to remember the “revolutionary defeatism” advocated by Lenin in 1914 and summed up by his German comrade Karl Liebknecht in the brilliant phrase: “The main enemy is in your own country.”

For it is our conviction that capitalism has become so reactionary that, in our time, what we call “exterminism” has become the supreme stage of capitalism-imperialism-hegemonism, with its globalized procession of destruction of social gains, political reaction and fascistization, obscurantism and the return of the worst religious fundamentalisms, as well as the destruction of national sovereignties.

But this is only one side of the question, and dialectically we must see that this situation enables and also demands more than ever the unity of proletarians of all countries; it demands the unity of the fight for democracy, for the sovereignty of peoples, for their free cooperation freed from blind and destructive competition.

We must fight for the proletariat, worldwide and country by country, to become the heart and ardent focus of a revolution uniting all those who want humanity to go on and life to triumph over death and the absurdity brought about by capitalist exploitation and [neo]imperial oppression.

view more: next ›