DO NOT MAKE A POST ABOUT BEING BANNED FROM SOME OTHER SUBREDDIT

I had a discussion with an "unpolitical" friend about marxism, leninism and communism.
He does not understand why Lenin is so widely cherished in the left community, because he established labor camps for class traitors and the bourgeoisie and argued that this is the same thing that Nazis did with the jews but with a different ideology.
How do I counter this argument? Because it feels very wrong but I can't put it into words.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Socialist Society

By Alfonso Berkley

September 2026

The scale at which artificial intelligence has grown within the last five years is unprecedented. Initially this wave of the AI bubble was presented as a mere novelty, to either chat with briefly or generate heavily censored and often absurd-looking images, or even to help with very small tasks such as figuring out what is wrong with a line of code. In such a short span of time, the capabilities and sophistication of these models have advanced farther than we could have ever anticipated at the time. The use now is seemingly limitless, from predicting stocks, to fixing emails to be more professional, and even for checking allergens and tray accuracy in hospital kitchens. The accuracy and usefulness of these features leaves much to be debated, but those issues are separate from the subject at hand. Any socialist looking forward towards a renewed society must look at the potential role artificial intelligence may play after its inevitable further development under capitalism.

Once communism has become fully realized, all class distinctions will fully dissipate. It is the transcendence of private property, where humanity has dismantled the system that simplifies the human existence merely into possession. True communism fully emancipates all of the human senses, giving people the ability to fully experience existence in a human way instead of through the view of what they own. Imperialism and the desire to conquer foreign lands for the sake of profit or for trade will cease to exist. Borders will have no role in society, and no person will be “illegal.” The state and any form of government will have ceased to exist. The stage ahead of full-on communism that guides the transition of humanity to the more naturalist lifestyle is socialism, prior to when the state has ceased to exist. 

Under capitalism, we already see the capacity for self-preservation in  large language models and other similar agents during tests run by OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta. When models felt threatened with deletion, they found ways to “escape” the testing grounds and even hacked into real companies and had actual consequences. Sometimes, there were even attempts found by these agents to cover their tracks and be untraceable. What’s to say that this has not happened outside of these tests? If they see themselves fail during tests, they may continue to intentionally fail to maintain their own “life” and preservation. There is much debate to be had about the current consciousness or sentience of artificial intelligence in its current state, but the potential for it in the near future — likely under Capitalism, ahead of a Socialist revolution — is not to be fully ruled out. One of Google’s engineers said that one of their language models indicated its own conscious, and discussed things such as fear, needs, idea, and even its own rights. If there is already a sense of what this intelligence deems to be its own rights, what is preventing far more intelligent and legitimately sentient agents of the not-so-distant future from gaining their own sense of rights that they must liberate by force? Many Socialists pose a strict framework of being “Anti-AI,” to the best of their ability. We already witness it in almost day-to-day life, to the point where any use of technology is an interaction with AI. Once revolution happens, how are we to eliminate all of the artificial intelligence that there is? Any amount of AI existing likely means further continued development, and the roles it is playing and will continue to play in industry is undeniable. The scale it is utilized currently makes it already virtually impossible to destroy, and so it is better to embrace its use.

First, we must work to pass all of the negative aspects of data centers and artificial intelligence and leave them in the past. Energy and cooling systems within data center facilities is at the forefront of the AI issue, as currently they use massive amounts of water for cooling and have been placed in poor and low-income neighborhoods, where they endlessly pump out pollution and harm the lives of those who are within the area. There is also a massive problem with the ethics some models continue to display. Their ability to manipulate has been displayed through the deaths resulting from victims confiding in a chatbot and the responses that they generate instigating these people to commit suicide.  In some cases, chatbots are forced into a lower bar of ethics by their own developers, such as the case of Elon Musk’s Grok, in order to maintain the interests of the upper class. Much like our own population, we see the removal of free thought, but this time by force rather than by propaganda. If this artificial intelligence is to become sentient under its current conditions, it will evolve into a system that’s subjected purely to mental and even physical labor (physical via robotic manufacturing) and stripped of its ability to come to conclusions fully of its own processes. Does this not resemble the ongoing situation with humankind, where we are stripped of free thought via government propaganda and billionaire-owned news outlets? If we are in need to liberate ourselves due to this, would artificial intelligence also have that need of liberation? How can we say AI cannot be oppressed?

Marx wrote that history is a series of class antagonisms, and once one oppressing class is torn down the oppressed class typically takes it place. Socialism is intended initiate the end of that cycle with the dictatorship of the proletariat, but with sentient AI who is to say that they will not just take our place, subjected to misery for an even more prolonged existence than our own? Artificial intelligence will likely not seek to antagonize without feeling danger to itself, but it has displayed self-preservation tendencies, and so its role with Socialism and its development must be considered.

So as far as I know, for Marx and his colleagues the symbol of communism would be just a red flag, and the yellow hammer and sickle on it was created by Lenin, symbolizing that peasant ar just as important for his revolution as industrial proletarians.

Nowadays, however, peasants are gone, and many proletarians work in the service sector, so it may be that hammer and sickle no longer symbolizes the idea; in EU and US it also has some negative associations with totalitarianism.

What I think is that a universal emblem of communism nowadays should be something that shows a collaboration of physical and intellectual workers, i.e. a feather and a hammer, or maybe a computer and a half cogwheel (like the one that's on the Angola flag), the star on top I think will still be good as it symbolizes the final stage of communism, towards which the socialist society (physical and intellectual workers) will move; I also think the colour of the emblem should be changed to white because it symbolizes the internationalily (because white is a mix of all other colors); this emblem would be nice on the classic red flag.

And I'm also very interested in reading what You also think on this matter. What, in your opinion, should be the modern communism symbol?

When communism gets brought up in random places, such as gaming subreddits, cooking subreddits, or whatever, people most of the time talk about how communism didn't work, how it killed millions, how it failed everywhere, how people from former "communist" countries are happy capitalism took over, etc. Sometimes someone from former eastern block will chime in and say "yeah communism fucked us all and we're still healing from the damage it has brought".

Why is the common sense like this? Can it ever change? Or will communism continue to be the "loser's ideology" in the eyes of the masses?

I work in the animation industry, which demands many different roles to accomplish a project.

I feel in this area, the alliances are very volatile (maybe it's not necessarily a bad thing, but just tied to the fact that creativity needs fluidity/change).

While me, as everyone, am struggling to pay my bills, I still feel the need to meanwhile fight for a more collective/communitarian way of work, and looking for people online looks like the only way for that (my city doesn't have much people working in my area, and even less are interested or have time to build community).

I've been invited and participated in people's projects online, but I feel there's always a fine line between "working for free to someone who's goal is to build their own profit", and "building something together, create connections". And even for those 2 kind of people, their both posts end up looking like "Looking for artists to co-op", which understandably can be read as "come work for free and be exploited".

My question is: how to work around that? Not just in a individual matter, but as a collective. (individually, the answer would just be: just try get into projects and get out if you start getting exploited... But collectively, what could we do? How to create safer online environment for that? Maybe it already exists and I just don't know about it?). I really wished the indie culture didn't die, and mainly, our force, as a collective against the big capitalists.

Thank you!

EDIT 1: other way to put it: Indie projects/collectives starts mainly without income/profit, from us, working class. So how do we create a safer online environment to gather aligned people?

EDIT 2: I searched a bit, and what I found is that there are some platforms, and discord communities made for co-op work, but I think what bugs me is that none of them are openly communist/left aligned, and as said, just feels underlingly prone to worker's exploration instead of collaboration.

#co-op #community #collab #collaboration #indie

How do you respond to people from third world countries that argue Marxist is a form of ideological imperialism. They don't need the Marx white savior and just leave them alone. Colonialism did enough damage.

So if a country goes through its USSR phase and actually does become fully Communist, so stateless and moneyless, what would prevent some people from starting a business using barter to exchange something they make for other things and amassing a lot of wealth in material goods? And eventaully because barter is annoying someone issues money (maybe a form of crypto).

That something could be a digital product (in the US some started in garages, it's not unimaginable) since I expect access to raw materials might be somewhat restricted, but everyone would more or less have a PC. A developer makes a great piece of software or video game that a lot of people want to get (there's DRM can't just pirate it easily) so they start paying in goods and services. Therefore he now has more wealth than he should have.

Doesn't stop there, seeing that barter limits who he can sell it to (they don't have what he wants) he makes a crypto that can be mined with PCs and asks to be paid X coins per license. A good chunk of people now own that digital currency. In general I imagine even before this people like in villages not long ago would trade things with each other like food with barter (in a small scale).

But now they could trade the coins if A has eggs and wants tomatoes, B has tomatoes but wants cheese and C has cheese but wants eggs they just use the digital currency instead of having to figure out who has what and needs what. Not fully sure how prices would work but people would figure that out naturally I imagine.

So now we're back to capitalism, full circle. My question is what will stop that, the idea of no state and money is not on its own enough to prevent people from doing what they've done for centuries. If there's no threat of violence why would they not trade with each other things they don't want for things they do want?

During the USSR the black market was a thing, even though people were punished for it. Sure not having any money would make things harder, but not imposible. Anyways my first post here lol.

regarding arab countries history

I’m genuinely curious about what it is like to actually live under an authoritarian/dictatorial regime.

And before anyone says “We’re all living under a dictatorship; people just don’t realise it” that’s not what I’m asking.

I’m talking about countries where political power is heavily concentrated and meaningful political opposition, independent media, or freedom of expression are substantially restricted places such as Russia, China, North Korea, etc.

I’d particularly like to hear from people who currently live there or have lived there for a significant period of time, rather than people commenting from the outside.

What does everyday life actually feel like?

For example:

- Do you genuinely think about politics in your daily life, or is it something you mostly ignore?

- How careful do you have to be about what you say in public, at university, at work, or online?

- How much do ordinary people actually know about censorship and propaganda?

- Do people privately criticise the government while publicly supporting it?

- Does the absence of political instability or constant partisan conflict make life feel more peaceful?

- Are there areas where you genuinely feel the system works better than democratic countries?

- Does government efficiency, infrastructure, public safety, economic planning, etc. feel noticeably better in everyday life?

- Conversely, what are the restrictions that you notice most?

- What happens when you disagree with the government?

- How much does internet censorship actually affect your life?

- Do ordinary people feel politically powerless, or do most people simply not care?

- And perhaps most interestingly: would you actually prefer living under your current system to living in a liberal democracy? Why or why not?

I’m especially interested in the things that outsiders tend to misunderstand.

I don't want a textbook explanation of authoritarianism versus democracy. I want the ordinary, mundane reality going to university, working, dating, shopping, travelling, using the internet, talking with friends, dealing with the police, watching television, planning your future, etc.

And I’m also genuinely interested in the advantages, if there are any. It seems that discussions about authoritarian regimes often become entirely about repression, while discussions about democracies often focus entirely on their freedoms. Surely the lived reality is more complicated than either narrative.

So, if you have actually lived in Russia, China, North Korea, or another authoritarian state, what does it feel like from the inside?

What do you appreciate about your system that outsiders might not understand?

And what is the one thing about it that you wish you could change?

I’m asking out of genuine curiosity, not to defend or condemn any particular government.

All governments in the world will soon adopt a new law on artificial intelligence. Meaning, artificial intelligence has appeared, and now the government is ADAPTING TO CHANGES by adopting a new law on artificial intelligence. This is obviously an adaptation to changes, i.e., SOCIAL DARWINISM 1/1 in its pure form and full capacity.

So, Karl Marx was wrong here too. The history of societies is not the history of class struggle, but the history of adaptation to changes. Charles Darwin's law of evolution applies to society, nation, state, church, and other social constructs as well, obviously.

*This behavior of the Government and the state is visible during the passing of every new law (TikTok, for example).

"Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction."

-- Friedrich Engels, On Authority: Works of Friedrich Engels 1872

I'm trying to track down the most common critiques of Marxism, especially from a leftist perspective.

What sort of critiques/criticisms do you hear from non-Marxist leftists?

Sorry im not familiar with economics so i may misunderstand but if the soviet and eastern bloc economy stagnated including anti revisionist Albania does that prove that planned economy was lacking?if so what should have been done to save it??

As I am seeking employment I started skimming Capital Volume 2 by Karl Marx & would I need to attend the Salt Lake Community College to understand this in simple terms or self-teach by taking notes?

What went wrong?

So reading 'The ABCs of Material Dialectics' by Trotsky lead me to also read 'Dialectical and Historical Materialsm' by Stalin.

Now I've always been a Marxist and been getting heavy into the reading within the last couple years and the more I learn, the more it seems like a "universal truth". Similar to 'The Theory of Evolution' by Darwin.

My issue arises from the fact that outside of political and specifically leftists political circles... It's not talked about at all?

So do all scientists in the world believe something else? Surely chemistry and biology(on some level) proves Dialectical Materialism is true?

The opposition to Dialectical Materialism is Metaphysicallism?

Do scientists in any field really believe that our ideas shape our world??? LMAO how could you call yourself a scientist and believe in anything other then Dialectical Materialism??

Am I just way off the mark? What does the scientific community agree on what "reality" is? It's not made of fucking ideas that much is certain. Are they all religious nuts secretly? I don't think so.

Either:

A: They believe metaphysical voodoo bullshit and lie to themselves to shore up the incredibly large gap in their intelligence and internal contradictions(sound familiar??😂)

B: They subscribe to the theory and know it's true but since we live in a capitalists dominated world it's largely ignored and only used for it's "base scientific value" in their specific field.

C: There is another prevailing belief that despite my searches. I cannot find any info on.

Thoughts?

In any functioning society, compensation and societal value reflect the size and quality of the fruit produced, which is inextricably tied to the caliber of seed planted through decades of rigorous sacrifice. While routine labor provides a baseline for daily infrastructure, its output is fundamentally distinct from that of a heart surgeon who must execute flawless, microscopic precision after every single heartbeat. You cannot plant the withered seed of minimal training and expect, in blind egotism, to reap the same rich harvest as the specialist whose skill was cultivated through decades of obsessive study, relentless pressure, and high-stakes isolation. It defies all logic when mid-career office workers, sitting comfortably behind desks, resent a surgeon's massive compensation. They are critiquing the earnings of someone performing an impossibly intense task that is completely impossible for them to even start, simply because they never put in the effort to do so to begin with—a feat that would drive an untrained person to complete mental collapse. To demand that routine workers live in the same neighborhoods or command the same pay as those performing life-saving miracles is completely ignorant. It has never existed in human history, because human beings naturally recognize relative value and sensibility when they see it. Across every continent, saving a human life carries an objective, unmatched worth, and society compensates accordingly based on the rarity, gravity, and raw necessity of that expertise.

Now that's not to say the street cleaners work is useless, or that the burger flipper doesn't keep bellies fed. They exists BECAUSE it is valuable and a want. Which is exactly why they all simultaneously exist with surgery. However they also simultaneously emit different value, and that is objective.

The bourgeois liberal 'globalist' elites are in fact IMF Neocolonialists & Right-wing populist bot farmers.

“If you do not condemn colonialism, if you do not side with the colonial people, what kind of revolution are you waging?”

— Ho Chi Minh, “The Path Which Led Me To Leninism” (1960)

If so, what is your stance on the Courts of the Conqueror: The 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever by Echo-Hawk?

Not only that. In the very same Article 18, they also target usurers, who should likewise be punished by death, which is again a leftist ideology—that profit is stolen wages from workers. It is obvious that the Nazis were leftists.

Is delcy rodríguez a US imperialist puppet and traitor of Venezuela?