The media portrays Castro like how Stalin is portrayed. Is this true and can I be given a socialist perspective?

My idea of freedom is something even I can't understand because I challenge it every so often.

My idea of freedom is we need to balance the power of consumers and voters and government and businesses. So I'm looking for more workers' unions representing in bills etc that affect the workers as well as the MPs because the idea of not informing workers is bonkers and observed but also goverment regulations in bussiness especially famring is bonkers as well the amount of book checking to prove what exactly but this is why I struggle with the idea of democratic socialism atm. Do tell Me if I'm wrong about this I can Take it. Just which gives more freedom or balance demoncratic or libertain socalism

Why is it that the socialist left (correctly) supports Free Palestine but seems skeptical about defending Ukraine from Russian aggression? If we are against imperialism wouldn’t we also back the Ukraine struggle? What am I missing? I’m asking as someone who is leftist / socialist in orientation and very pro Palestine.

Maybe it’s a bad question, but please be nice to me and just explain.

I am very privileged. I’m middle class, from a European country. I just started university and I don’t have a job.

I feel like I’m a bad person and a parasite all the time because of that.

Should I give out all of my money and drop out of university to just start working? Will that make me a better person?

I genuinely wanto fix the wealth inequality but I just (obviously) really like living as privileged as I am and am not keen on throwing all that away. But I know that the only way for equality is destroying middle class.

Should I somehow make my fellow middle class friends and family suffer as well?

Please explain and give me ideas of what I can do to be a better person. Thanks in advance!

Hi all,

I want to ask a question about socialism to you all because it’s something that has stayed with me a long time.

Myself and my partner ‘identify’ as socialist - I put that in quotation marks only because I don’t know the full lengths that would entail, just that both of us are extreme leftists and find that terminology the most relatable.

We have some friends who disagree with us and we often talk about politics, economics and philosophy.

When myself and my partner lived in a major capital city, we used public transport a lot. We nearly always paid and were happy to do so.

We had one regular route (to our gym) that we could get away with not paying on. There was the small chance of being found out but there was largely no barriers, etc. We ran the risk of inspectors but treated that as a minute issue which it was.

For context, myself and my partner make decent money. Looking at it from a minimum wage POV, we make amazing money, and looking in comparison to similar folks were more normal (between us, about £101k per year).

Despite this, we would frequently ‘skip’ the public transport option and ride for free. The friends I mentioned at the start, who are more right wing, said that our unwillingness to pay for public transport in this instance when it was very unlikely to be enforced shows that humans are mostly likely to be motivated by self interest.

I have argued with one such friend in the past that most crimes, etc, are created of necessity, But this was not necessity.

Both of us did this. Maybe we’re just terrible people. But I would be so grateful to receive your understanding on this.

I've heard all you motherfuckers on the left believe in 'sharing is caring' bullshit why the fuck do you think I should believe in that when people could keep to theirs elves? It's just a simple question. The left ideogies (whether Auth or not) encourage sharing property when people could leave each other the fuck alone, why would you have me believe that that is better? Just curious, and pardon my fucking french by the way I curse a lot sometimes lol

How would people getting degrees help or hinder the movement towards socialism? On one hand, I see the fallacious idea of meritocracy (a tool wielded by the bourgeoisie) as something that could hold us back, and on the other, I see potential in people ‘earning’ more money to survive more comfortably or even at all (especially in areas with high cost of living). How can this be reconciled, if possible?

Hello all, as the title says really. I am very aware of intersectionality and systemic inequality in our society, and the privillege this affords white men such as myself. Despite this privillege, I have a low paying job, which causes me guilt for two reasons. Firstly, I feel guilt for wasting the opportunities afforded to me, and secondly, I feel guilty that I am effectively stealing a job from an oppressed person who does not have my level of privillege. How do I get over this guilt? And channel it into something positive? Thank you

I am relatively new to Marxism (and leftist thought in general) and want to be able to engage with non-leftists effectively.

Other than reading/learning theory (which I am already doing), how can I better argue/discuss in favour of socialist ideas with those who either aren't engaged in politics or are opposed to socialist ideologies?

Any suggestions of books/youtubers/etc discussing this topic are very welcome.

I heard theres 2000 billionaires in the world. Is there ANY among them who actually started poor with zero help? Or they all either were already born in the upper class or had big helps from somewhere

I loved that Motorcyle Diaries is a about Che's adventurous life on the road, while also having a political factor to it as well. Can anyone recommend me more like this?

If i work longer, harder, smarter, do i get the same resources (could be anything like money, housing, food, etc) as someone who does less for fewer hours?

Let's imagine for a second the discovery of the Americas was delayed by a few hundred years and that a solidified developed union of socialist federations would be discover the New World. How would they handle it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

"Real socialism has never been tried", therefore, isn't any statement on it's effects simply a hypothesis? I'm fine with figuring out a way to test the hypothesis but it doesn't feel like the average socialist treats socialism as an idea they have that may work, may not work, & will almost certainly need tweaks before going "live". Instead, it's treated as something like a religious tenet, above questioning.

Given the unknown nature of it all, why would anyone push for the US to be the first foray into socialism? You screw up the US & you screw up the worldwide economy, screw up Liechtenstein & you just screwed up Liechtenstein.

V. S. Naipaul has argued that Western civilization is the "universal civilization" that "fits all men." At a superficial level much of Western culture has indeed permeated the rest of the world. At a more basic level, however, Western concepts differ fundamentally from those prevalent in other civilizations. Western ideas of individualism, liberalism, constitutionalism, human rights, equality, liberty, the rule of law, democracy, free markets, the separation of church and state, often have little resonance in Islamic, Confucian, Japanese, Hindu, Buddhist or Orthodox cultures. Western efforts to propagate each ideas produce instead a reaction against "human rights imperialism" and a reaffirmation of indigenous values, as can be seen in the support for religious fundamentalism by the younger generation in non-Western cultures. The very notion that there could be a "universal civilization" is a Western idea, directly at odds with the particularism of most Asian societies and their emphasis on what distinguishes one people from another. Indeed, the author of a review of 100 comparative studies of values in different societies concluded that "the values that are most important in the West are least important worldwide."

(emphasis mine)

From his essay "The Clash of Civilizations?"

Hello Comrades. I believe I've always been a Socialist at heart, but in the weeks leading up to and after this election have really begun to dive into learning as much as I can about Socialism and registered for my local chapter of the DSA. That being said, one thing I have always been left questioning when it comes to living in a Socialist society is how that society would deal with offenders of specific violent crimes such as rape and murder.

I understand that many crimes (gang violence, theft, etc) would be nonexistent if the people within the society had their root problems solved such as hunger, shelter, and general wellbeing. However, although I do believe all people are born inherently good- the issue of violent crime could still persist. How would Socialists mitigate and prevent these things from happening?

So I'm not sure if this is the best place to be asking this question but I'm not sure what other leftist sub I should go to with this. The past week has been nothing but anxiety for my wife and I after the election. My wife and I have been dealing with varying levels of depression but my wife specifically has been extremely motivated to leave the country. I've wanted to leave the country in the past for better healthcare because I'm diabetic but I also understand it's essentially a pipedream and my wife in the past hasn't really pushed super hard to leave either. Now it's like a switch was flipped and she's determined to move us to Canada or somewhere in Europe and while there's a part of me that agrees with her there's also a part of me that thinks it's too late and it's ultimately a stupid idea.

Like what does moving countries realistically look like? I am, at best, a copywriter between jobs and at worst a freelance writer while my wife is a special ed teacher. My wife could qualify as a skilled worker depending on where we decide to go so she could get a work visa and I might get one too as her spouse but then we need to navigate a competitive foreign job market as immigrants. That's on top of the fact that the whole world seems to be falling apart and we could easily get out of the frying pan and into the fryer. Leaving the country seems like an expensive, risky, and impulsive decision that could end up ruining our lives long term. That's not to mention how long it can take which leaves me feeling like we should have gotten on this a lot sooner if we were going to do it at all. But at the same time, it feels like that only thing I can think of to avoid potentially dying in a fascist takeover.

I understand that in all likelihood my wife and I are some of the least likely to be killed and really the worst is far from likely to happen but it's not not in the cards. I'm a white man, my wife passes for white, and we look like a pretty average straight couple but we're also both queer and strongly on the left. If Trump targets us it'll probably be awhile before he does but I also can't stop thinking that his administration will have access to my name, address, and who I've voted for in the past, not to mention evidence through social media to point to deeper leftist sympathies. Like, forget about the constitution, the rule of law, or any other checks and balances meant to stop someone like Trump from doing whatever they want. Let's say Trump manages to do everything laid out in Project 2025 and he goes after his political opponents and truly the worst comes to pass. What do we do?

I know a lot of other people are making plans to leave the country and good luck to them, it also seems like a lot of other people are realizing how profoundly difficult it is. If moving out of the country isn't an option do you move into bluer areas? Should we be thinking about the future and planning to move to states with leftist populations that may succeed if Trump goes too far? Do we just try to hide or blend in and hope things improve in ten years?

To clarify, my nightmare scenario is basically that Trump does everything Project 2025 says and turns the US into an isolationist theocracy. I fear that he's going to try to combat rising costs of everything by expanding the domestic manufacturing sector through increased mass incarceration. The US has already maintained essentially legalized slavery through an industry of privatized prisons. By leveraging laws to define who is and isn't illegal he can remove his "undesirables" while helping prison companies and building more domestic goods through slave labor. Obviously this practice isn't new but I worry Trump could expand this to more people the right don't like and knowing how Hitler treated the German communists I don't have particularly high hopes.

It seems everywhere I look when people speculate on what could happen once Trump is in power they try to default to something along the lines of "Oh the worst won't happen, that's just fearmongering." And I can appreciate that to some degree but I also don't want to be staring down the barrel of a gun and THEN thinking "Maybe I should have left the country." At the same time, my leftist friends who are staying seem to be going this community organizing/protest route and I just don't see how that's helpful. That's certainly a start but my idea of fighting fascism is a bit more...direct, and I don't know many leftists personally who can think past things like running underground libraries and community gardens. That's not to mention protests which like, are you stupid? Trump is absolutely the kind of president who would order the military to shoot protesters. If you go out and protest without any plan for if it turns into conflict you are going to die, I'm sorry. I just don't see the left organizing an effective resistance that could protect people being targeted because they're planning like it's still 2016. Maybe I'll be surprised but until that day comes I just don't know if I can factor leftist groups into our plan for surviving the future.

So what do my wife and I do? I would consider it a win if I could just see the next decade without being forcibly separated from her. Right now it feels like we're just waiting to die, we can't leave, we can't fight back, I shudder to think how much blending in might compromise my own personal sense of ethics. Maybe the American left will surprise us but I just fail to see anything outside of the idea that we're already dead.

As in the title. Kindly spread the word and head over to r/MayDay2028. Talk to your union leadership. Join a union (IWW will accept any worker)

Okay please don't remove this, I really need advice and don't know where else to go because (a) r/communism  doesn't allow non-communists, and (b) the rest of Reddit is not communist/socialist and will just tell me to leave this guy.

TL;DR: My communist friend hates the West so much that it spills into his social interactions and financial decisions. Is this normal for a communist/socialist, or is this because of his anxiety/depression?

----

I've known someone for a few months who's been a communist (CPUSA member) since late 2021 (a Bernie supporter until then, but his ex left him and then he got into communism). He seems like a really nice person outside of political discussions, but when anything remotely related to the West and capitalism comes up in our conversations (which is almost anything these days), he just goes full-on angry mode. He talks about his wish for the downfall of the US Empire and the West all the time. He supports Russia's war on Ukraine, believes North Korea is a great place to live in, supports China's rise and denies the Xinjiang , wants Israelis to be eliminated as a biblical punishment for Palestine, etc.

I know that ideologically, this is all standard in being communist/socialist, but I just get the vibe of so much rage in him. His YouTube recommendation list is full of anti-West videos. And he seriously lives the anti-West narrative: he dumped his US dollars on BRICS and stuff from Temu because he was so convinced that his dollars would be worthless this year due to dedollarization (spoiler alert, it did not, and now he's broke).

Is this par for the course for a communist/socialist, or is this something that can be attributed to his diagnosed depression and anxiety? Reddit posts on r/communism and r/socialism also seem to be really full of anger, but I wonder if this anti-West anger also seeps into daily life for most of them. Really appreciate your help because if this is a mental health issue, then maybe he needs to go back to therapy. Otherwise, I can accept that's just how he is given his political ideology.

I've always been christian and I've always viewed communism and socialism in a good light but the only thing I've found that I don't agree with is the view on religion because I think that if a nation is to still be itself and keep traditional values religion is needed.

On foreign policy, we can expect status quo interventionism as usual (or somehow even more hawkish), but what do you think will happen with domestic policies?

With Republicans actively trying to chip away social/worker rights, and Democrats refusing to take any meaningful actions, I think with Trump now having the presidency, supreme court, the senate, and now likely the house majority as well, I feel like everything will go in fascist hypersrive this time around.

Any thoughts on what to expect for the next 4 years?

Do you think capitalism need government or that anarcho-capitalism cannot work because government is used to assure and enforce private property so that the common public wouldn’t suddenly seize it? I think that’s why the states in the world exist and the American “revolutionary” of independence happened because they wanted a government that respected and protect the use of that private property and the commodity they use, sell and buy?

what the title says, the far right is getting more and more agitated and brazen in their attacks how do you prepare for that?

Germany’s new left party, the BSW, led by former Linke-member Sahra Wagenknecht, has been called far left by some. How does this sub view her and her new party?

As a Socialist I've never voted Republican or Democrat for obvious reasons. I've been living in Ireland the last 11 years and I know it's possibly too late but I was thinking of voting 3rd party just as a protest vote against the 2 party system. Tbh I don't know a huge amount about US politics aside from whatever happens with US politics tends to have an influence over here. The last address I lived at in the US was in Kansas, if I were to cast an overseas vote would that go as if it was a vote from Kansas. Sorry I'm fairly ignorant on the US voting system and have probably left this too late anyways but any advice is appreciated. GRMA

Not also to steal and exploit resources from the native land, but to prevent self-achieving themselves in order to beat the competition?

For instance, there’s a random nation that doesn’t have valuable resources like oil, gold, natural gas, coal, diamonds or metals… but they have plenty of means to sustain their country with their own farm tractors, ploughs, power plants, fertilizer, hospitals, schools, and the such that they become more self-sufficient and more stable and successful to their own country without the assistance of western nations, therefore instead of suffering while working for an offshore clothing company, they were able to modernize and super-industrialize their country where poverty, illiteracy, high morality, homelessness, and strife is no longer the norm.

This makes western capitalist countries jealous and nervous that these nations are self-reliant and do need dependency from them or out competing them. So they start wars, invasions, and coup detats to destabilize and maintain dominance under the west. Is that right?

I've often heard that socialism is economically leftist, but is it entirely socially leftist/progressive as well? And are all socially/culturally right-wing principles discarded in that case, or does socialism have common ground with some of them?

I was a bit curious when I looked at this, https://x.com/gemsofbabus_/status/1850773888377979246?s=46&t=8G3SktUeSMkJGN-jfIIE8g

And I found out capitalism isn’t just all about trading goods and services, just where one person owns the entire means of production including resources, place and labor. But it seems to me that these vendors aren’t practicing typical capitalism by getting and paying workers or owning a factory to themselves. Just selling at their own accord alone and bartering without hurting anybody.

But is it still capitalism? Or do you/we still do this in a socialist system?

I have a question about the order of stages moving to socialism and communism.

The other day I briefly proposed an economic model based on gift-giving rather than exchanges. My thinking is that gift-giving would provide for people who cannot work, and without exchanges the medium of exchange, money, would be redundant, leading to an economy where hoarding abstract wealth would be difficult and work would be voluntary, so that projects are only completed by willing participants who believe in them. To me, this fit the concept of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" and, generally, public decision-making about how capital is used through voluntary work. However, the model didn't necessarily entail public ownership, so I asked whether people here would consider it a form of socialism or not, and the answer I received from two posters was clearly, "No."

I doubt it would be too radical a step to move from the model I have proposed to a similar model that also includes democratic control of the workplace or other conceptions of common ownership.

Looking through some of Marx's work, one path to a world of abundance where conceptions of work is completely transformed is first through a stage of more institutional common ownership and, potentially, things like labour vouchers.

My question today is about what people believe are viable paths to socialism and communism. For example, the picture I get from Marx's writings is that common ownership needs to be deliberately implemented first, and will naturally lead to a non-monetary economy in the future. I guess I am wondering whether the reverse could function: deliberately implementing a non-monetary economy, and this leading naturally to common ownership.

Do you think that the order is necessarily common ownership > non-monetary economy, or could it be non-monetary economy > common ownership?

I am more than happy to answer any questions about the economic model I am proposing to help clarify anything.