Every time I talk about communism to my extremely right-wing dad, he always says without fail “The high-ranking members of the communist party are elitists who live like kings in mansions and drive luxurious cars while the rest of the population live like peasants. That makes them worse than capitalists.” I call that bs, but I dont know much about the wealth differences between high-ranking party members and the rest of the populous. Is it really that wide?

Edit: I am posting a pic of a chatGPT reply. This is what ChatGPT told me. Apparently, there is a “working class petit-bourgeoisie”.

There are so many search engines out there and even chat bots to get info from. I refuse to let Google monopolize an action.

I've heard this term a couple of time but never actually looked into it, and it is such an alien concept to me right now. I apologise in advance for sounding dumb here.

I can understand slums and favelas having a harder time getting access to fresh food, but how come entire government-recognised and incorporated neighbourhoods with electricity, water and all those more complex services can't have small grocery stores for basic healthy things like rice?

I understand the party is in charge and those positions will change but in most socialist states there seems to be a permanent head ala Lenin, Stalin, Castro, the Kim's etc.

Is this what Marx meant by dictatorship of the proletariat? Is it possible to have democratic communism? I'm new to all this but I'm finding it all really interesting. Sorry if this is a common question.

I've tried finding anything relating to a supposed decline of triad activities in China (and especially Hong Kong) but nothing ever seems to come up, either it some Hollywood glorifying video on the triads, or it speaks about their past.

I just want to know their present, rather than their past.

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/432724

I'm part of a local organization in the imperial core. I like the people there and they are all very well read and have a good understanding of theory, much more than myself.

The methods used to organize seem a bit dated and I'm not quite sure why. To give an example, people are expected to contact one another to let them know about whether events are happening or not. I think this is great, when I first joined this helped make it feel more personable. It felt like there was already a development of camaraderie since there was a name and a face behind every message that I knew. This doesn't always work though, since some members don't always remember and don't remind others and there isn't a definitive list of members. It's more so word of mouth and the different people who are in someone's recent text messages.

Something like this could definitely be more well organized right? When I brought up working on some kind of spreadsheet, mailing list, or calendar they told me that they relied on sort of a network effect (they used a different terminology) where some people will let others know and then those people will let others know, etc. I struggle to see how the two methods are incompatible or mutually exclusive. If the concern is about leaking information, there are authentication methods which could be used to silo off information.

The only sort of conclusion I can come to is that there is a (rightful) distrust of technology. What I don't get is why all of it is thrown out the window. It could even be done in analog, at least some bookkeeping would be nice. Some of it might have to do with party discipline, or lack thereof. I really think it might have to do with being set in one's ways and being very willful about the need to adapt in the modern era.

Would anyone have any other ideas for how to organize in a different way? Just for brainstorming, I don't think a perfect method would be made here, it's nice to entertain some ideas though.

Polish media has a superficial take, and we know "far left" is meaningless without context.

I'd appreciate if any comrades have suggestion, material or overview about the situation there.

In every election “left-leaning” neoliberals always try to guilt-trip Marxists into voting for their candidates with the usual schpiel: “Your party doesn't have enough votes to win. You are just letting conservatives win”. What do you tell these people?