I already said Marxism-Leninism is not a “form of governance.” The fact that you repeat this claim leads me to believe that you aren’t actually reading what I’m writing.

Phikosophy, our world outlook, is already before science. The way we see the world and understand it determines how we view science and perform it. This is why vulgar materialists, as opposed to dialectical materialists, tried to prove race theory correct and thus advocate for eugenics. Science is not neutral. The world around us, the material world, does not care how we interpret it beyond how we change it. However, there is no such thing as a perfectly neutral observer, we all have preconceived biases.

Marxism-Leninism is already scientific, the scientific method is a tool employed by it already. You’re trying to remove science from the context it exists in.

You’re still treating science like it’s not a process gone through by humans. Science once posited that race science was correct in order to justify eugenics. We need to be aware of our world outlook and correct it before we begin to use science, otherwise we come to incorrect conclusions and incorrect propositions. That’s my point.

Marxism-Leninism is correct not because it is a “form of governance” (it isn’t) but because it’s a living social science grounded in scientific understanding of the world.

Science is not independent of philosophy. There’s idealist science, metaphysical science, etc, all of which are wrong. There is no such thing as science without philosophy, because science is an attempt by humans to understand the world. Humans are all philosophers, as we all have a world outlook. By rejecting study of philosophy as it relates to science, you are ignoring preconcieved biases, rather than acknowledging them and correcting the misconceptions.

This is why Marxism-Leninism is correct, and why all science must be done from a dialectical materialist standpoint.

Marxism-Leninism is already heavily based on science, and takes the stance of dialectical materialism as the basis for science and analysis. What’s wrong with scientific socialism as it already exists, in your eyes?

I’d say it’s the baseless projection of the crimes of western empire onto any possible alternative. This attitude has roots in chauvanism, the whole “if it wasn’t the Americans doing it, it would be the Chinese!” completely butchers any sense of materialist analysis surrounding why the massacres happened under the US Empire, and foregoes any reasoning why China would do the same in favor of the idea that “big country bad.”

Supportive of private property and capitalism.

You don’t have to be bourgeois to follow bourgeois ideology.

Agreed! It’s very fun!

In short, I drifted from anarchism to Marxism after joining the work force and understanding more about production, distribution, and complex manufacturing and supply chains. Certainly not towards liberalism, the opposite in fact, into the communist I am today.

Right now I’m reading Neocolonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism by Kwame Nkrumah. It’s a really good expansion of Lenin’s work on Imperialism as a stage in capitalism. Nkrumah was coup’d one year after its publishing with support from the US.

As for favorites, I really love both Piranesi and Roadside Picnic! The former is just a really fun mystery with a good deal of whimsy, the latter is excellent sci-fi.

Bots are very rare on Lemmy. Some do exist, especially ones that are clearly marked as such by account owners (for various purposes like changing twitter links to xcancel links automatically).

Under capitalism, LLMs are used purely for the benefits of the capitalist class, spying on all of the working classes and enabling immense repressions. It isn’t a tool without any and all merit, but under capitalism it will always be used against our best interests.

Not a fascist, but definitely a reactionary liberal. It took leaving the echo chamber I was born and raised in, plus moving far away and laboring in a pretty nakedly bad environment that really helped cement how capitalism truly functions at a base level.

Being far from the Overton Window does not inherently make someone bad nor wrong.

Leftism is inherently anti-fascist. If you’re calling the socialists that have successfully established state-power “fascist,” then this is monstrously incorrect.

It’s perfectly possible, it just requires the downfall of imperialism as committed by the west at mass scale, and the adoption of renewables and smarter city planning, combatting desertification, etc. as seen in countries like China.

I limit social media to certain times and places. Kills doomscrolling!

Who is included in “our entire modern civilization?” Some parts of the world are in decline, some are rising and are stronger every day.

Yes, they necessarily do.

Recognize that class struggle is real, and therefore the conquest of power by the working classes is necessary. This requires educating the working classes on political theory, history, and practice. It also requires agitating, being at the front line of struggle, and coherently leading the working classes to higher levels of political awareness in an all-sided struggle. It also requires organizing, forming a revolutionary party, a media apparatus to spread ideas, forming and improving worker and tenant unions, and more.