This channel is about the science of Marxism-Leninism. I give information and my personal thoughts on various topics dealing with Marxism-Leninism. Feel free to ask questions and voice your opinion.
Paul Cockshott has a fantastic book about the history of human labor and it's evolution called "How The World Works", he also has a great RU-vid channel. Highly recommended.
Everything in this video is just pure bullshit. You really want a nanny state to tell workers and educate them like they were fucking babies, right? LOL
The USSR failed, China failed, Cuba failed. So we got enough evidence to support that Vanguardism and Leninism just isn't effective in creating communism. And before you spew "ThE CiA CrEaTeD ThE OuTComE" Yea, and they still failed. which means leninism and maoism just doesn't work against infiltration. So we need a form of anarcho-communism, not this idealist "vanguard"
The only exploitation rightwingers perceive is high taxes. They dont see or care about the exploitation in their workplace every day. The extraction of their surplus labour. Too many people in general don't understand this.
Great work as always, comrade! It's always awesome to see you've uploaded. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say you/ your efforts are a treasure to the international communist [(anti-revisionist) ML] movement. I was recently saying as much to another comrade, heh. [I'm not trying to be an asskisser; I think that's legitimately the case.]
Why are we aiming for one country? This is class war for goodness sake. We have a world to win. Secure the fortress. Spread our agents. Grow and liberate
about the last part, am i right in saying that its not really a matter of, the capitalists' personality/wanting to make more money, but a process of natural selection of companies, where those that multiply capital more efficiently buy out the other ones so we get a mechanism that selects for the ones that are the most exploitative? kind of like the process of monopolies forming, or maybe its the same thing?
Hey I just wanna ask an off topic question since idk if ur gonna talk about this: (Also great video btw) Why were there cult of personalities in so many socialist countries? I know Stalin wasnt responsible for his but did for example eastern europe just copy him? For example Rakosi since you have a series on him (which I look forward to) The other thing is, why did eastern eu. become revisionist? For example Kadar or Kruschev? Thanks in advance comrade.
It was correct to promote Dimitrov or Rakosi as a great exceptional leader, but of course opportunists also tried to hide behind giving only empty lip-service to the leaders, or later blaming everything only on leaders. Rakosi or Dimitrov never pretended like the leader is all-powerful or more important than the masses. They didn't really have a "cult" of personality. Kadar was simply put in power by Khrushchev and Tito, two long time trotskyite-buhkarinite revisionists. Gomulka was also helped in power by them. Husak, an old titoist, was put in power by Brehznev.
@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 Thank you. But can you elaborate on how they didnt have a cult of personality I mean this might not be what the phrase means but a lot of pictures of the leaders everywhere, etc.? Also we never hear about any democracy neither in Rakosi's Hungary or Dimitrov's Bulgaria. Anything on that? Also if you feel like it what is your opinion on the ÁVH? Will you talk about them in your series? When will you continue it? Thanks. Love you and your videos FinBol.
@@lessgoo5606 There's no problem with having pictures of the party leader. I talk about Hungarian democracy in my videos, but maybe I should expand on it. The AVH will be discussed a little bit when I talk about the 1956 counter-revolution, but I don't really have a lot to say about it. Reactionaries don't like the AVH, but in my series I cited a lot of sources saying there was no terror in Hungary. I hope to continue it soon. The Rajk trial will be next.
@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 Thanks. Which video exactly on democracy? Also in which videos about no terror? Most of the terror stuff I heard about Rakosi's Hungary was either anecdotes or hungarian history books (Im hungarian) Anyway okay Im sure the Rajk trial will be interesting. Looking forward to it.
'Labour' is the proces of turning goods into commodities, so the actual value increasing operation. While 'Labour Power' is the capacity to work. It's the promise of a workers time and energy he will spend in return for a wage. So thats why Labour power is a commodity. This is important as this difference is the basis of Surplus Value. The difference between the wage (labour power) and the actual creating of new value (the proces of labouring) Smith and Ricardo never made this distinction and thats why their political economy was lacking. It was Marx who saw this important addition
@@numbersix8919 It is the average time and effort it takes to produce a certain commodity in a given time and given place. So, the idea is that if I make a T-shirt and I spend 10 hrs making it, I just can't go out and expect to sell the T-shirt for the equavelant of my 10 hrs of labour in the society I happen to live in, while the shop in my street is selling T-shirts for just a few bucks bc of organised mass-production somewhere. ie. there is a social value out there made thru social necessary labour that will contrast with any personal labour
@@numbersix8919 It is the average time and effort it takes to produce a certain commodity in a given time and given place. So, the idea is that if I make a T-shirt and I spend 10 hrs making it, I just can't go out and expect to sell the T-shirt for the equavelant of my 10 hrs of labour in the society I happen to live in, while the shop in my street is selling T-shirts for just a few bucks bc of organised mass-production somewhere. ie. there is a social value out there made thru social necessary labour that will contrast with any personal labour
Another banger from Finbol. Every employee, whether hourly or salaried, has to sign a contract with capitalists or petite capitalists. I like calling it "theft through contract", the binding legal document that gives the employer the right to do whatever the he/she wants to within legal bounds up to dismissal without reason. That is only possible under a capitalist controlled government and a capitalist controlled government will always have weak or ignored labor laws. It is hard these days to raise class consciousness considering that revisionism, which is capitalist concepts introduced into Marxist concepts, has weakened the Marxist concept of the workers collectively owning the means of production and distribution and having a workers state. We see China has exploitation of workers and profit making by the capitalists class both foreign and domestic. Even state own enterprises has exploitation of the workers. Yet, far too many ML's have fallen for the facade of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics". You speak of Sinified socialism. There is nothing of the sort in nature. There is no Russian, English, French, German, Italian socialism, as much as there is no Chinese socialism. There is only one Marxist-Leninist socialism. It is another thing, that in the building of socialism it is necessary to take into consideration the specific features of a particular country. Socialism is a science, necessarily having, like all science, certain general laws, and one just needs to ignore them and the building of socialism is destined to failure. -Joseph Stalin, From the Conversation with the Delegation of the CC CP of China in Moscow
What does it mean to "abolish the value form"? My understanding was that socialism entails a transition from production for exchange-value to production for use-value. I'm not entirely clear on what it means to abolish value entirely.
"Value-form" means things like money price. Value is not the same thing as value-form. Even if production is not regulated by law of value, i.e. if production is not carried out for the sake of profit, the products can still be expressed in terms of the value-form. For example, in the Soviet Union it was not possible to sell means of productions. However, they could still be given a theoretical price in statistics, or even in the analyses of foreign economic organizations. The Soviet Union could calculate its own budget, or the USA could try to calculate the GDP of the USSR and express it in terms of dollar amounts. That is a value-form. So the form is one thing. Value is something else. The value-form should be abolished in the sense that money and trade should be abolished eventually. The value-form gives rise to commodity fetishism. However, value (how long it takes to produce something) and an expression of value or a certain kind of value-form (for example "it takes 10 hours to make a car") will remain even in communism.
I think this is quite a good book on this topic. There is another one in Finnish which I think is even better, but I didn't choose it because its only in Finnish. This book suffers from some malenkov era mistakes in the later chapters, which I must take into account. However, I think a lot of alternate books also have their issues.
Hey comrade, i have been watching your videos and channel for the past few months since i discovered you, and i like watching your vids because you go into proper details and mention the sources too, but i just wanna ask, will you make a video on Tito, his revisionism and about the Stalin-Tito split? Some of the marxists i know (mostly from Serbia) still praise and support Tito while many of my other Marxist friends think tito of being a revisionist (i have tried looking at tito from a historic perspective but the history fhat i mostly come across about tito is from westerners who speak about how much of a strong man he was to oppose Stalin and open up to the west). Thats it comrade. Apart from that, i really love watching your videos (and found your channel because of the videos you made about the purges in the Soviet Union)
Yes, I'm working on a video on titoism & the Tito-Stalin split. I hope to release it soon, but unfortunately the series on menshevism took a lot of my time.
@@thefinnishbolshevik2404 glad to hear that comrade. It's not rush, but just the fact that I trust and prefer you for historic insights more if you know what I mean. Good luck with future videos too comrade.
@@chernoblyat.152 Haha, you don't need to wait for the video - Tito was blatantly a revisionist. It's relatively easy to demonstrate (with the requisite foundational knowledge), and there is plenty of stuff out there if you look for it. Hopefully you already understand that, but I wasn't sure from your comment. Though to be clear, I'm definitely looking forward to that video! (Or videos)
@@slipknotboy555 yeah ik that, it's just much more clear in the way how FinNol explains it. I've been a communist for the past 3 years but I've only found FinBol's channel the most educational (again, due to the fact that he gives sources for the things he says and it's just, so nice to watch yk
Hey FinnishBolshevik, i have a question. Do you know if all the cases for Beria was forged by Khrushchev? or was he really that bad? if the latter is true, why did Stalin keep Beria around a whole decade after ww2? 🤔
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary” - Karl Marx This is why.
No offense but foreigners usually have a not true opinion about Hungary. For instance 100 years passed but they still think Hungary was prison of nations , oppressing, etc while the opposite was the truth, every other countries brutally oppressed minorities except for Hungary. (They say the same about Austria too.) It would be interesting if no jws would have left after 1945 because almost everybody in media, politics is jwish even after them. Rakosi was one of them. It was not democracy but not a dictatorship either. In fact maybe Horthy saved the most jws in history, and he killed even more at the same time. Hungary was not the last ally of Germany in fact (its also propaganda, even Hungarians believe it), it was Croatia or Slovakia, with really Naczi, very brutal regimes. Hungary was between the two side,in fact Horthy was pro-Allies, but only Germany helped the country. Hungary attacked only the SU (Horthy's stupid decision which killed ca. 600k Hungarians, althought Germany didnt force Hungary to do it). Hungary wanted switch sides but failed, and the people didnt like communists. Unlike Italy or Romania which could switch sides anytime according to their interest, Hungarians focused on moral values like not betraying their allies or hating communism.
You're clearly a fascist or believe fascist myths. Horthy wasn't as keen on the holocaust as Hitler was, but he participated in it. Hungary was a fascist country under Horthy but it had a facade of parliamentarism just like Finland did. Hungary clearly oppressed the minority nationalities, they were not equal with Hungarians. Claims like "Horthyism wasn't a dictatorship, Horthy's Hungary wasn't anti-semitic, Hungary didn't oppress other nationalities" are fascist and nationalist propaganda. I'm aware Horthy wanted to switch sides when it became clear Germany was losing the war. Many other countries did the same, Finland also did that. Horthy clearly didn't care about "not betraying their allies" because he made a treaty of "eternal friendship" with Yugoslavia and betrayed it immediately, and also betrayed Germany.
I don't agree with using "state capitalism" in advanced capitalists nations considering production is already modernized. The transition from capitalism would be rather quick. Workers of these nations are organized along revisionist lines rather than Marxist Leninist lines. Revisionism uses capitalism to maintain capitalism while masquerading as being socialist. Far too many Marxist Leninist have fallen into the revisionism believing China is socialists. Despite De Deleonist anti communist stance, they understand that workers are the ones who will emancipate themselves from the capitalist class, seize control of the means of production and distribution to collectively own them through out society. They also understand the need for central planning and a labor time credit system which can be done with computer technology. However, like in this video, the capitalist political state would be adjourned immediately with nothing to fill the void. They don't realize the capitalist encirclement could topple their (SIU) Socialist Industrial Union (which never came into existence) since there would be no political state to protect it. The threat from without and within would topple the SIU in no time and the capitalist would gain control once again. I do like the SIU concept but it comes with the peaceful revolution through the ballot box which is really not possible in the US. The SIU can be possible if Marxist Leninist concepts were applied. Most trade unions in the US exist to maintain capitalism while workers think they are getting a fair shake in their contracts. Even the Libertarian socialists De Leonists understand that workers in trade unions are only placated believing in the old line, "A fair days work for a fair days wage". Most people in the US believe there is only two political parties. What they don't realize is that both parties are in service to the capitalist class.
Ootko oikeasti tosissasi? Missä ovat lähteet ja missä määrät? Kerrot vain, että kommareita pistettiin tuomiolle, muttet kerro lukemia? Et kerro, koska tiedät totuuden ketkä suurimmat massamurhaajat. Hävettää elättää sinutki tässä maassa.
Socialism is social group ownership of MOP - for marxists the social group is the proletariat - for national socialists the social group is the race/nation
That's not true. All socialists (utopians, anarchists and marxists) agree that socialism means common ownership of the means of productions. Second of all, in nazi Germany the means of productions were mostly owned by private capitalists and there was practically no collective ownership of any kind even among the "race/nation".
Onpa uskomattoman tolloja meillä suomessa asumassa. Hävettää suunnattomasti, mutta en kyllä ihmettele, että asiat kusee täällä, kun tämmöisiä kommunisteja pesii.
M. Iljin wrote a book in the 30s. In Swedish it is called "Berg och människor" which translates into "Mountains and man". I read it many years ago but remember that I thought it was "the first environmental book". I really recommend tis book.
Around the six minute mark, you would not believe the number of people in the US who think that a Marxist society would result in universal laziness of the masses. Then we also have a huge problem with revisionists who do not promote a workers state let alone the workers collectively owning the means of production and distribution. On a better note, more and more people are becoming class conscious due to social media and on line books despite the constant barrage of capitalist propaganda.
It's refreshing to hear a communist actually understand Marxist and Leninist theory not just using it as a tool to advance gender politics. The communist party USA is just that and while I'm all for people being happy the identity politics make it unapproachable to a large group of the actual workers as it's so extreme
Very interesting channel, I have a question for you. Ты знаешь русский язык? Я мог бы посоветовать пару книг на нём, потому что, просмотрев прошлые ролики, в особенности о мартовском перевороте в СССР, мною были обнаружены ошибки. Я могу часть из них перечислить ( Я не Троцкист и не поклонник Хрущёва ( Хотя это синонимы ), сразу предупреждаю ) 1) Мысль об убийстве Сталина правильная. В дневнике жены Ворошилова была описана ситуация, как Ворошилов, после известий о плохом самочувствии Сталина, в спешке собирается на работу, пока жена навзрыд плачет, будто мужа на войну провожает, что уже наталкивает на не самые хорошие мысли: что происходило в партии в это время, почему Ворошилову стало не по себе и так далее. Но здесь допущены некоторые ошибки при описании причины смерти, его места. А) Сталин умер в своей московской квартире. Это правда. Зачем же в будущем понадобилось искажать эту точку зрения? Всё просто, чтобы вести расследование по ложному следу. Именно благодаря одному изменению стали создаваться порой шизофренические теории, что Хрущёв пронёс на дачу ампулу с ядом, все эти истории с генералом Власиком и прочим, прочим, прочим. Чушь несусветная. Б) Не упомянуто в нужном контексте "Дело Врачей", хотя он имеет ключевое значение. В 48 году убивают Жданова и начинается расследование. В 52 Игнатьев ( Председатель МГБ ) выходит на след заказчика этих врачей, однако не успевает завершить начатое. Ещё хочу добавить. Врачи в СССР убивали ещё в двадцатых. Смерть Ленина не менее загадочная, чем смерть Сталина, но тогда Сталин не смог ничего найти против троцкистов. В 36 же году умирает известный писатель Горький. Началось расследование, которое длилось год. Все нити свелись к Генриху Ягоде и его подельникам-врачам. Открытые Московские процесы по ним состоялись в 38 году, где они во всём сознались. Но смерти видных политиков не прекратились! В 1940 при таких же загадочных условиях умирает жена Ленина, Крупская, которая мучалась в агонии 3 дня, потому что врачи не хотели лечить её! Это, так скажем, была проверка нового Народного Комиссара Внутренних дел, о котором пойдёт речь позже. После этого взгляд заговорщиков упал на ядро партии - Секретариат ЦК. В 45 скончался Щербаков. В 48 Жданов. Сталинское ядро утратило большинство уже после смерти Жданова, в результате чего на 19 съезде выводы ставились катастрофические: партия сверху донизу пропитана троцкистами всех мастей. Но в марте 53 умирает Сталин, Игнатьева снимают с поста МГБ, убирают из Секретарей ЦК, а ближайшего свидетеля по расследованию смерти Сталина, заместителя председателя МГБ, расстреливают. Как раз здесь и всплывает третья проблема. В) Неправильная характеристика Берии. В нынешних кругах "сталинистов" принято его возвышать до преемника Сталина, хотя эта фигура настолько мутная и настолько...подлая, что даже становится грустно. Достаточно вспомнить, что, как только Берия стал министром объёдинённого МГБ-МВД, "Дело Врачей" было прекращено. Уже это ставило на Берии крест. Но о нём я знаю ещё множество деталей. Например, именно он запустил "проверку" МГБ-МВД, в результате чего пришёл к выводу, что "Сталинская система управления допускала пытки и ложные донесения, ложные расстрелы." Чёрт возьми, да именно он зародил на государственном уровне байку о "Невинных" расстрелянных в СССР! Продолжаем. На совещании Берия предлагает назначить Маленкова, Секретаря ЦК, на пост ПредСовМина. Знаете, что это означало для Маленкова? Что его из Секретариата выгоняют.А Секретариат, как я уже говорил выше, - это ядро партии. Именно Секретариат занимался кадровой политикой партии, именно там была власть. Но Берия своим предложением выдвинуть на пост ПредСовМина Маленкова практически перечеркнул все шансы ликвидировать контрреволюцию в СССР. Ещё парочку деталей о Маленкове и Берии. Именно Маленков зачитывал доклад на 19 съезде, тобишь Сталин выдвинул МАЛЕНКОВА в преемники. И именно на 19 съезде Сталин пытался отказаться от должности ПредСовМина в пользу Молотова. Потому что смерть ПредСовМина означала радикальные изменения в партии. Ведь ПредСовМин же министерства назначал, а с его смертью министерства предлагалось переизбрать. Именно поэтому смерть Сталина играла ключевую роль в перевороте. Ещё есть пара мифов: Сталин пытался отказаться от должности Генерального Секретаря. Разбивается очень просто: Генерального Секретаря не переизбирали с 1935 года вплоть до 1953 ( Здесь выбрали Генеральным Секретарём Хрущёва ). Все связанные документы, где Сталин упоминается в должности Генерального Секретаря позже 1935 года - наглая фальшивка. А также важно упомянуть, что дело по Берии вёл именно Маленков. И именно Маленкову Берия писал письма касательно этого дела. Ликвидация Берии была важной победой сталинской команды. Сталинская команда пыталась играть на противоречиях в рядах заговорщиков: столкнули Хрущёва и Берию. В будущем столкнут Булганина, Шепилова с Хрущёвым. Но этого не хватило и в 1957 году со сталинской командой окончательно разобрались.
2( Использование ненужных источников. Я говорю про мемуары Хрущёва и Светланы Аллилуевой. А) Мемуары Хрущёва были изданы в США. Никаких подтверждений того, что именно Хрущёв диктовал эти слова нет. Причём сама комичность этих мемуаров в том, что сам Хрущёв от них открестился. Б) Светлана Аллилуева тесно сотрудничала с Хрущёвым и в будущем уехала в США, где выставляла Никиту "Близким другом" Сталина. Она просто была пропагандистом. Продала имя своего отца за огромное состояние. Это малая часть, что я запомнил из ваших видео. Хоть сам посыл видео правилен, но такие ошибки недопустимы. Вам, как финну, это простить можно спокойно, потому что эту клевету создавали российские буржуазные историки и западные пропагандисты. Поэтому вот вам мой совет: когда вы видите, что Сталина вроде бы защищают, но в то же время сознаются в некоторых страшных "оплошностях", то знайте: это не защитник Сталина, а гороховый шут, который зарабатывает свои деньги! Могу привести пример: при Сталине было расстреляно 680 тысяч человек. Наши российские историки заявляют, что это опровержение клеветы либералов на Сталина ( Потому что они говорили, что расстреляли 10 миллионов ), да и вообще, 680 тысяч - это мало, так ещё все были уголовниками. Заранее скажу, что никакого "Большого Террора" среди мирного населения не могло быть в помине. Судьба Ежова неизвестна, все документы по нему фальшивые, а следственного дела и вовсе найти не могут. Судьба Вышинского вовсе смешная: он вроде как один из зачинщиков этого террора, но остался цел и невредим. Главный приказ по "Большому Террору" под номером 00447 - наглая фальшивка. В нём Ежов командует прокурорами, хотя подписи Вышинского под приказом нет ( Положение прокуратуры было в разы выше НКВД ). Таких мифов, связанных со сталинским СССР, очень много. Разобраться даже русскоговорящему человеку во всём этом потоке информации невероятно сложно. Однако я буду рад, если смог хоть немного прояснить ситуацию касательно 1953 года.
"right-wingers, they always complain about immigration but unless they get out of the capitalist EU they can never do anything about it" exiting the EU is literally the goal of every single actually right-wing/reactionary party in western Europe lol. this video is such a relic lmao.
@@johnharrison6745The evidence is too overwhelming in the favor of communism when people are actually shown it. You have to be willfully ignorant or delusional to ignore it. Sorry, but reality has a marxist bias.
