Yes, and it clearly ignores human nature-
We need a clear incentive past "for the love of the collective"
And honestly the colossal death toll is enough reason to say absolutely not

>>18512924
There is no human nature beyond the most fundamental, animalistic drives to eat and fuck. Anything beyond that is culturally determined. We, for instance, live in a culture that incentivizes greed and psychopathy.

>>18512484
>Marx viewed individualism and human rights as bourgeoisie
>Why would I support an ideology that wants to treat me like cattle?
Nobody wants to treat you like cattle. Individualism is a bourgeoise illusion created by our alienation from labor. Yes, each of us is a unique individual with our own whims. However, the idea that any individual "pulls themselves up by their boot straps" or otherwise does not need others is silly nonsense. A thousand other people contributed to you making this post just now: the people who taught you English, who raised you, who work at the power plant that provides for your device, who built your home, who grew your food, et cetera. Uncountable hours of labor went in to your shitpost.

And human rights are likewise bourgeois because they do not exist in any real sense. No God on high is going to smite someone for trying to kill you or steal your shit or suppress your speech. These so-called rights are not natural nor were they given to us out of the sheer benevolence of the bourgeois state. No, they were fought for. Men and women died to win these "rights." They died to form unions. They died for the weekend and the 40 hour week. Every "right" is a concession workers have pried from the cold, dead hands of the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeoisie will pry them back at the earliest opportunity. We have seen this process playout just over the course of the last fifty years.

>>18512952
Furthermore, systemic change cannot be wrought by individuals. People tend to think of history as a progression of great men enacting their will upon the world, but who would Genghis Khan have been without the support of his tribe? Who would Bonnepart be without his army? Changes to society can only be made through collective action.

>>18512484
Marx was also right about the base and the superstructure.
It just seems undeniable at this point that the biggest challenges we face are fundamentally systemic. Marxists are the only ones really having that conversation.
Not to excuse the retarded things they've done through history, but most of those aren't fundamental to Marxism whereas moving beyond capitalism is.

Capitalism doesn't exist. It never existed.

>>18512944
There are innate emotional necessities humans strive for beyond eating and sex

Any psychologist will agree on this
We require things like dignity, purpose, meaning, love etc

>>18512952
>Nobody wants to treat you like cattle
every leader of a marxist-lenninist government would

>A thousand other people contributed to you making this post just now:
the fact that we use resources shouldn't be motivation to remove individual human rights just because they may potentially not be beneficial to the collective

Communist regimes have destroyed basic human rights because they felt the collective was the superior entity
Well, when the individuals suffer, so will the collective
When you treat individual like shit, the collective suffers
Which is why every communist shithole either collapsed or converted to market economies

Thinking that human rights shouldn't be desired because they are abstract is retarded
Human rights bring the basic needs and dignity to human beings which adds to the quality of life, which leads to a better, healthier nation

If you genuinely think a regime removing things like freedom of expression or freedom of movement just because rights are an abstract concept then you are truly fucked beyond repair
Just because it's a manmade concept doesn't mean there isn't any value or use to it
Should we abolish all law because it is manmade concepts?

>>18512959
Leaders only prove the collective is a flawed concept because communities have elected or otherwise prompted up leaders who went on to do horrible things
Khan and Bonnepart themselves even, committed horrible acts that divestated thousands of people

>>18512975
>but most of those aren't fundamental to Marxism whereas moving beyond capitalism is.
Most communist regimes never achieved socialism as Marx wrote

All the industries were state own and the worker's controlled little to nothing
The resources were not distributed as was written as a necessity for a socialist economy

Socialism, as Marx has written, has not been achieved

>>18512484
>when it doesn't even view me as a individual
Why is that so important to you?

>>18513013
Being viewed as an individual means you are free to express your needs, desires, interests etc

In a collective based society you're lumped together with everyone else
Your needs and interests can be tossed out to support the "greater" cause of the collective

Your thinking, your concerns are ignored if they go against the group think of the collective

>>18512959
>People tend to think of history as a progression of great men enacting their will upon the world, but who would Genghis Khan have been without the support of his tribe? Who would Bonnepart be without his army?
Imma be real with you, do you genuinely think the Mongols and French would have done those things on their own without the leadership of Napoleon or Genghis Khan? Do you genuinely think that any other man would have commanded those armies the exact same way Napoleon and Genghis Khan did?

>>18512484
Marx was a puppet for Weishaupt, literal Freemason horseshit

Race is more of a class than class is. You have much more in common with a rich businessman who's the same race as you than you do with an immigrant who's not your race and who just happens to earn a wage just like you.

>>18512484
>Explain why I should support Marxism when it doesn't even view me as a individual
"Supporting" any abstract ideology is foolish. Also there's no such thing as Marxism, really, it's something people made up. Make up your own mind and think for yourself.

>>18512944
Yeah art and literature don't exist. Moron.

>>18512484
You should support the class interests of your class, the proletariat, in its struggle against the bourgeoisie, because it's the only way for ordinary people to get a better life
this applies whether proles are under Marxist leadership or not, but scientific socialism has proven the most effective form so far, there's a reason proles are so often under Marxist leadership

>>18512484
>Explain why I should support Marxism when it doesn't even view me as a individual
Why?
This isn't /pol/.
We're here to discuss the past, not the present

>>18512484
Individualism will make you catch a cold.
Embrace the warmth of collectivism.

>>18513160
I remember trying to convince moot to make this board and the reason he didn't back then was "It'll become another pol"

>>18512484
>Marx was right about Capitalism but nothing else
he wasn't. the only people who say stuff like this are retarded redditors and tiktok babies that have never read a single history or politics related book ever in their lives.
>>18512952
tranny larp, probably underage.

File: trans_marx1.png (243 KB, 1004x642)

243 KB PNG

>>18512975
perma-online trannies from leftypol suffer in the exact same way as 12 year old factory workers in victorian england 170 years ago

>>18513158
>You should support the class interests of your class, the proletariat
The working class are often retarded and have no idea what they're trying to argue about
The working class in US wants to nuke the shit out of Iran, the working class in China wants to nuke the shit out of India etc

>because it's the only way for ordinary people to get a better life
This is a fucking lie
The quality of life in communist regimes has been shit

Bump