What awaits us? Philosophical reflections...

 
The darkness in which we now live gives us, ignoramuses, even from the perspective of the "poverty of modern philosophy," every right to speak of a bright future for us, even if that future is, for example, a transitional, "imperfect" socialism followed by a still-unexplored, untested, and yet so captivatingly imaginable, communism.

If we live in the darkness of capitalism, then it's natural to call any escape from this darkness light!

But this is a meaningless remark; it can, in principle, be safely omitted...

**

Furthermore, I would hesitate to classify existing monopolies—for me, corporations—in this particular form, their particular form, as full-fledged members of the socialist economic system, although there is a reasonable, classical kernel of truth in this, but why am I so stubborn?

 But by the time we even reach the beginnings of socialism with these monopolies, these corporations will have destroyed the entire world in a competitive struggle for profit and dominance. For war is their bread and butter, they can't live without it. Even the peace-loving Musk won't be able to stop the open maw of bloodthirsty corporations, that is, the already fully formed financial capital (which is nothing more than the fusion of production and banking capital, and then its complete penetration into state structures; this is already the stage of imperialism, a clear example being the United States).

Furthermore, from the perspective of the logical global victory of communism on the planet, one can agree with this consequence in principle, but how do our modern philosophers practically envision this?

Let's try to decipher these leaps and bounds—what follows?

How will private property be abolished?

Which forces will take a direct and active part in this, and how will they accomplish it?

 This can't happen automatically, as I've always imagined, simply through the right calls, slogans, and banners.

Or is it a long, drawn-out process, invisible to the eye, like a quietly creeping evolution rather than a sudden, fleeting revolution?

I still hold the more radical view that the peoples of the world will rise up if their exploitation (poverty, hunger, cold) becomes unbearable, or if a world war (a sea of ;;blood) forces humanity to take to the streets and create its own revolution in each country. Naturally, a strong party, preferably of the radical left, will lead the masses to lead the new state system.

 Yes, I don't argue; on paper and in scientific discoveries, the movement of society is already determined by the laws of social development. You can't argue with science. But in practice, there are many subjective obstacles, that is, the ordinary human factor. There's no escaping this. The example of the USSR clearly demonstrates this: bureaucratic subjectivism broke the Soviet republic in half.

But, in any case, we have no choice but to wait for history to shift in the direction of social progress... for, according to the classics, there is no other way. Either capital will bury itself, or before that, it will bury the entire living world. Again, the power of the human mind has reached such a dismal level that it can completely wipe out biological life... and this power, as sad as it is to realize, is in the hands of inhuman capital, which has turned some of us into its obedient slaves, namely, oligarchs and bankers who carry out the will of capital—that is, profit at any cost, even to the smallest degree of crime!