Do you think there is a way to make true Communism work, and make it actually last?

I don't.
I've been in a union once, hoping to make things move as our boss was a selfish coward paranoid. Everybody was concerned but many chose to keep their head down even though they had quite nothing to lose. The others were often fighting each other about the course of action and what they actually wanted in the end. Add to the mix our boss that deployed countermeasures to discredit what we were trying to do using the good old preatorian guard tactic: take a few guys and make them loyal by giving them more money that the others and let them take the risks and do the dirty job undermining the work of their own colleagues.
Anyway, in the end our boss was fired and replaced by an even more treacherous asshole having an even more loyal guard, more fanatical this time.
What I want to say is, people are different and what might motivate/demotivate one won't be the same than the other, let alone cultural differences. There is no "us". There will always be a couple of guys that will try to screw with the system to their own benefit, taking control of something that was meant to benefit all (hello Staline). If you want to avoid that you'll have to go full "who watches the watchmen", adding inertia to the system except if everyone gives some day-to-day energy to stay aware of all political matters. Unfortunately people tend to get lazy when times become good, creating weaker men which create harder times as assholes seize the opportunity to take control.
Again: there is no "us".

yes, it's a necessity. not because i personally want it (even though i do), but because it's a logical development of the internal contradictions of class society.

no, marx didn't write his analysis of capitalism to take it "into" capitalism. if you really read marx, you'd know that. he wrote entire works on the fact that capitalism has to be overcome by overthrowing it with force and has argued many times that reformism is not enough to achieve socialism.

no, that's utopian. you don't need the entire population, you just need *enough* to change the ownership of the means of production and to build a socialist dictatorship of the proletariat. from there, you'll work towards communism proper.

true, even though i would argue that mao did exceptionally well in keeping the contradictions between the reformist dengists and the more militant gang of four under control. he tried to synthesize their ideas, but it fell apart after his death.
so it wasn't a mistake that he didn't expel the revisionists, it was a mistake that he didn't counteract their revisionism effectively while he was alive.

that's a little bit cringe tech-utopianism. it's not a metaphysical "higher" goal that lets us progress towards the lower stage of communism (socialism) - it's the application of dialectical materialism as a scientific basis for overcoming class society as a historical stage.

140 years of failure. Millions dead. Maybe this time?

>to build a socialist dictatorship of the proletariat
>said dictatorship shall release their seized power once communism is implemented
>surely
>definitely this time
I think we've isolated the problem, chief.

No. Society at large is not capable of any stateless ideology, be it ancap or ancom. The midwits and low iq rely on the financially, politically, or socially powerful to drone them along through life, unfocused and comfortably numb. The only escape is to escape, and live remotely, as you please, with the like-minded.

>100% proof of socialism failure is its historical rate of success.
every socialist project had its successes and failures. socialism pressured the capitalist west - especially europe - to improve their living conditions. that's why we have free education, health care, tenant protection, paid maternity leave, shorter work weeks and more labour rights.
this didn't happen because capitalists conceded it out of their own volition. it was the pressure of the socialist bloc that set the narrative of what was possible. capitalists had to bend or risk revolutions in their own country.

other than that, socialist countries do still exist and continue to improve literacy rates, reduce infant mortality, increase medical standards and build public transport. there's just a lot you don't seem to know.

unions are toothless without principled communists organizing the struggle. there are proven tactics against the tendency you describe - it's not hopeless and impossible simply because you personally and the people around you failed when they tried without a scientific method.

a thousand gorillions i think

>said dictatorship shall release their seized power once communism is implemented
the dictatorship of the proletariat is a term that stands in opposition to the thing we have now: the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. it's not really a dictatorship, it's a commonly organized and centrally planned society.
the dictatorship part is meant to signal the suppression of the resurgence of capitalist forces after the revolution. obviously, these parts have to be suppressed, or they will seize power and re-implement capitalism.
as history has shown us in the ussr after stalins death, in china after maos death, in the sfr after titos death,...

two fundamental problems with communism
1. lack of motivation to work
2. corruption
both are possible to overcome easily with super ai incoming. they'll be infinitely more intelligent than us and they'll fix us. time is on communism side.

>Society at large is not capable of any stateless ideology, be it ancap or ancom.
you should read state and revolution by lenin. because actual communists (not "ancoms", that's usually baby leftist anarchists who have read no theory outside of kropotkin) understand this issue and agree to some point.
a state has to exist as long as it serves a necessary function for society - be it distribution and planning or to suppress revisionist, harmful forces.
only when the state has no more functions outside of administrative tasks will it begin to "wither away". this is a theory that will have to be proven in the future.

No, because it was never designed to be achievable; it was designed to be believable enough that it can be used as a weapon to destabilize strong economies.

then explain star trek

>Why does a TV show work
You do realize it is called fiction for a reason... right?

>1. lack of motivation to work
what? the ussr had the highest leap in productive output of all countries in history. it made the same advances the usa made over 400 years in less than 50 years. what are you talking about?
the motivation to work is inherent in human beings. we get depressed when we just sit around all day and do nothing. we want to apply ourselves, be useful and work together with other people to challenge ourselves and grow.

if you think the fear of hunger and homelessness is the best motivational factor to drive human labour, you're not only factually wrong, you're also giving a clear insight in your pessimistic, anti-humanist world-view.

>2. corruption
corruption is legalized in capitalist countries and called lobbying. at least socialist countries usually admit it's a problem and try to do something against it.
corruption is a problem in general, not just with socialism.

>both are possible to overcome easily with super ai incoming.
shut up please. get out of your fully automated luxury communism fantasy and read some actual books. you know, the ones with letters and sentences, not just funny 4-panel memes on the internet.

so you think capitalism will still be relevant when we can literally print homes, clothes, gourmet food, and have slave robots? capitalism is just feudalism in disguise. its days are numbered if you have a mind that can see into the future

Nah, it always ends in mass starvation, mass murder, oppression and slave labor under threat of you and your family being sent to gulag or executed.

There's not been a single communist country that doesn't employ these policies to some degree.

While capitalism has it's faults, I can quote shityy job today and still ne able to get a new, better paying one tomorrow, have plenty of food in my pantry / fridge, and can call politicians anything I like without worrying about the national "security " services or police arresting me.

> unions are toothless without principled communists organizing the struggle.
I wholeheartedly agree user, I'm just saying that uniting a few proletarians was very hard for us even though they shared a huge common background (same culture, same job, same social class, same direct problem..).
So uniting all proletarians? Not a chance.
On one side you have guys that have to organize themselves while earnig money to feed their family.
On the other you have much fewer guys that own all the means of production plus all police armed forces and they just have to put a little effort to undermine a collective effort made by guys that are putting all they have to maintain a modicum of organization.
You're talking about scientific method applied to a deeply human issue. Convincing people by science doesn't work, even among scientific people.

Good to read you though.

Fuck off Ivan

>tard
if you have ai running everything you can have a system that cant be corrupted. you put automated robotic type things in place to stop crime, etc.
and russia didnt advance 400 years in less than 50 years thats the dumbest shit i ever read. citation please

Attached: 1255469593542.png (227x219, 34.06K)

/thread. Communism is a utopia pipe dream that sociopaths extremists glow onto because they think they surely won't be the ones forced at gun point under threat of starvation and death to tpil.in the factories or in the fields for little or no pay.

Exactly . China had to implement capitalist systems to be viable. They still use slave labor, whole utilizing violenceand tyrannical authoritarian rule to scare their populace into compliance

it used to be fuedalism and capitalism was a pipe dream. humans will never fly either did you hear?

This faggot gets it
Yup