this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
311 points (95.3% liked)
Memes
52440 readers
648 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I am once again recommending you read theory. This is becoming a big pattern with your posts, you have doomsday predictions that are framed in the views of "good vs evil" as though those are the driving mechanisms of the problems of today. I really think trying to get a solid understanding of the way capitalism works and its contradictions will help you make better sense of the world, which can be much more comforting than relying on conspiracy theories about crypto and predictions from John the Theologian centering the idea that currency will become invalid and we will all have to run into the hills and barter to survive (as your linked post states).
Such an economy would collapse without workers, you aren't going to be hunted, capitalism rests on wage labor and needs continuous labor and circulation to keep going. What's more likely is imperialism waning as profit rates trend lower and lower and the global south seeks independence, resulting in crisis, not some even stronger oppressive capialist force that can act with any kind of coherent plan. The capitalists aren't going to run automated megafactories and hunt former workers for sport, they need workers to consume to continue the process of circulation. When circulation becomes untenable because of overproduction of goods and not enough wages to buy said goods, the system crashes. It isn't going to get stronger, it will get more desparate and violent but weaker at the same time. Fascism is a cornered, hungry animal lashing out.
Even as the capitalist world gets increasingly fascist, the way you frame the ways it will act ignore that the primary purpose of fascism is to save capitalist relations, not just to do evil for evil's sake. The way we fight fascism is fundamentally centered around organizing, not fleeing cities and trying to rely on physical currency. The mechanisms of capitalism are understandable, and as such we can move on to understand the ways it will actually decay and run into crisis, and how we can move on to socialism.
Here's an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list that you may find helpful.
Yes, the problem is that everything I've talked about could happen suddenly, for example, after wars. I don't know exactly when it will happen, but I have a bad feeling about the future, a very bad one. But I'm glad to hear your criticism; it helps much more than kind words. Thank you.
David graeber has some good stuff on the nature of money and debt, if you want something a little easier than Marx's 'capital'.
Here's Debt: The First 5000 Years by David Graeber, I believe this is what you're referencing. Capital isn't too difficult, IMO. It's long, but the first 3 chapters are the most complex, after that it's fairly smooth sailing, and Marx is actually a pretty witty writer. Just in case anyone was too scared by its reputation to read it!
It's not that its hard, but Marx–while capable of very good and engaging writing–was trying to be a respectable 19th century intellectual for that one, so it's kind of a painfully dry slog. That was the style at the time.
I'd actually say that applies more to volume 2 than it does 1. 1 has lots of literary references, metaphors, and fiery writing, while volume 2 is far more straight and academic. Lenin on the other hand was always spicy with his writing, haha.
Fuck that guy–but anyone who says he couldn't write clearly doesn't know how to read.
Can't agree with Lenin slander, he's one of the greatest heroes the working class has ever had and one of the greatest theoreticians of all time. That being said, at least we can agree that he was a hell of a writer!
I think even among ML's there are better candidates for all that. Castro's entire set, for one.
I think he absolutely meant it and was a gifted administrator(putting aside killing all the other communists for a moment), but he made the same mistake all the French revolutionaries made–centralized power too much taking it from the soviets, so it fell apart when anyone less capable of filling those extremely large shoes stepped in.
He made the classic 'great man' mistake, and didn't trust the people he meant to save, so his success began to die the moment he did. It's hard to blame him personally, but god dammit he could have done so much better with a little sacrifice in initial efficiency to help the people be a bigger part of the revolution.