I am now convinced that capitalism is evil

[zlemflolia]

5 hours ago, very honest said:

the marxist wing will doom the democrat party in the US, only to eventually realize that capitalism is fine and we just need social programs, sane tax rates, and outlawing dark money in politics

 

nobody likes communism. marxism scares people from half the world. 

 

not sure if this is an info op or not. 

 

don't participate in the fight for better government! climb into a rabbit hole about revolution!

>marxist wing of the democratic party

I'll believe it when I see it.  Care to name some?

obligatory

 

[zlemflolia]

"capitalism is fine let's just be good little wage workers everything is ok" spoken like a privileged first worlder living off the backs of third world laborers and third world resources. this isn't just about our countries.

Edited September 9, 2021 by ilqx hermolia xpli

[may be rude]

9 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

5 hours ago, very honest said:

the marxist wing will doom the democrat party in the US, only to eventually realize that capitalism is fine and we just need social programs, sane tax rates, and outlawing dark money in politics

 

nobody likes communism. marxism scares people from half the world. 

 

not sure if this is an info op or not. 

 

don't participate in the fight for better government! climb into a rabbit hole about revolution!

>marxist wing of the democratic party

I'll believe it when I see it.  Care to name some?

obligatory

 

i'm thinking of those damaging democrat representation by talking about socialism all the time. bernie made it big and bernie bro AOC carried the bad-slogan torche.

 

there's literally no reason to label one's self socialist. none. it just makes voters think of communism. you can be the same person and fight for the same things and just not use that bad slogan.

[zlemflolia]

1 minute ago, very honest said:

 

i'm thinking of those damaging democrat representation by talking about socialism all the time. bernie made it big and bernie bro AOC carried the bad-slogan torche.

 

there's literally no reason to label one's self socialist. none. it just makes voters think of communism. you can be the same person and fight for the same things and just not use that bad slogan.

>let's just bow down to decades of CIA brainwashing that makes people scared of the very word they need to free themselves from their own oppression

talk about a bitch mentality.  not a fan of orwell but that's pretty orwellian, where you want to avoid saying a word because the people are so scared of it and don't even know what it means lmfao.  and you just promote that instead of opposing it.

Edited September 9, 2021 by ilqx hermolia xpli

[may be rude]

21 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

>let's just bow down to decades of CIA brainwashing that makes people scared of the very word they need to free themselves from their own oppression

talk about a bitch mentality.  not a fan of orwell but that's pretty orwellian, where you want to avoid saying a word because the people are so scared of it and don't even know what it means lmfao.  and you just promote that instead of opposing it.

 

that's some junk, bro. you deserve for somene to tell you that. it's a nice story but it's not what people find when they dig into the truth.

Edited September 9, 2021 by very honest

[zlemflolia]

2 minutes ago, very honest said:

 

that's some junk, bro. you deserve for somene to tell you that. it's a nice story but it's not what people find when they dig into the truth.

this is an american mentality

[may be rude]

17 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

this is an american mentality

you're the user formerly named cyanobacteria (and a bunch of other names), no? don't you claim to be american? i remember drilling you about it, and you avoided answering the question, as you were posting here in an effort to stoke unrest during the beginning of george floyd protests. 

edit: yes, it is zeffolia. here is the thread where he was trying to use george floyd protests to stoke his marxist revolution. trump was also trying to foment the unrest by actively antagonizing, threatening, and ordering brutality against protestors. this makes more sense in light of trump's ultimate, multi-pronged attempt to carry out a self-coup in america. just like trump seeming to deliberately spread COVID makes more sense after seeing clearly that he was in fact intending to attempt a self-coup. civil unrest would set the stage and provide cover for drastic actions. and it is easier for fascism to rise amid depression and strife.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by very honest

[zlemflolia]

16 minutes ago, very honest said:

you're the user formerly named cyanobacteria (and a bunch of other names), no? don't you claim to be american? i remember drilling you about it, and you avoided answering the question, as you were posting here in an effort to stoke unrest during the beginning of george floyd protests. 

edit: yes, it is zeffolia. here is the thread where he was trying to use george floyd protests to stoke his marxist revolution. trump was also trying to foment the unrest by actively antagonizing, threatening, and ordering brutality against protestors. this makes more sense in light of trump's ultimate, multi-pronged attempt to carry out a self-coup in america. just like trump seeming to deliberately spread COVID makes more sense after seeing clearly that he was in fact intending to attempt a self-coup. civil unrest would set the stage and provide cover for drastic actions.

 

 

I am american but I don't share your pro-america anti-socialist sentiments.  i am a communist.

Edited September 9, 2021 by ilqx hermolia xpli

[may be rude]

5 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

I am american but I don't share your pro-america anti-socialist sentiments.  i am a communist.

yeah well i really don't understand how you can think that you can help anything in that way. the more people we have touting marxism in america, the more the fascist right will win seats in congress.

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by very honest

[zlemflolia]

1 minute ago, very honest said:

yeah well i really don't understand how you can think that you can help anything in that way. the more people we have touting marxism in america, the more the fascist right will win seats in congress.

once again this is a scared dog victim mentality.  let's not promote power for the workers because the reaction against it will be strong.  let's just sit around, continue doing wage labor with all the real decisions being made by the owning class, and give up any hope of class conscious political will

and by the way there is basically zero marxism in american politics so I don't know where you're getting these ideas.  there's at best social democrats who call themselves socialists, which in other countries would be very normal social democrats.  only in america is "healthcare" and "education" so radical it gets labelled marxist

[may be rude]

5 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

once again this is a scared dog victim mentality.  let's not promote power for the workers because the reaction against it will be strong.  let's just sit around, continue doing wage labor with all the real decisions being made by the owning class, and give up any hope of class conscious political will

bro the democtrats stand for workers. they push the higher minimum wage bills

 

american government is a system of self-government. you want to throw out a system of self-government, rather than use it. it's not even that hard to get into politics. it's not even that hard to go around town persuading people and mobilizing turn-out. this is the avenue. it's precisely backwards to reject the entire system, rather than participating.

 

and you push revolution! what?? dude i'm good on domestic terrorism. let's not have any more. stop pushing that shit. 

Edited September 9, 2021 by very honest

[zlemflolia]

dEmOcRaTs StAnD fOr ThE WoRkErS

[may be rude]

2 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

dEmOcRaTs StAnD fOr ThE WoRkErS

taking your appeal to ridicule fallacy as concession and retreat

[zlemflolia]

38 minutes ago, very honest said:

taking your appeal to ridicule fallacy as concession and retreat

[may be rude]

5 minutes ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

 

dems came up a few votes short to pass the current minimum wage bill. if only they had more seats............................................................................................................................................................

[zlemflolia]

16 minutes ago, very honest said:

 

dems came up a few votes short to pass the current minimum wage bill. if only they had more seats............................................................................................................................................................

so in other words, if only the political group supposedly meant to represent workers wasn't completely powerless because we live in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.  interesting.  they represent us?  clearly they don't.  they pretend to.  they aren't doing whatever is necessary to do what we need and they are failing.  they can't even pass minimum wage pinned to inflation, a basic social democratic policy.  let alone help us achieve communism.

[may be rude]

1 minute ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

so in other words, if only the political group supposedly meant to represent workers wasn't completely powerless because we live in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.  interesting.  they represent us?  clearly they don't.  they pretend to.  they aren't doing whatever is necessary to do what we need and they are failing.  they can't even pass minimum wage pinned to inflation, a basic social democratic policy.  let alone help us achieve communism.

 

your logic is magnetically bad, which just perpetually makes me wonder about your motivations and mental wellness. 

dems try and come close to passing minimum wages hikes, which you want, and your response is to disparage them and push revolution. be advised your political takes are bad.

 

[zlemflolia]

34 minutes ago, very honest said:

 

your logic is magnetically bad, which just perpetually makes me wonder about your motivations and mental wellness. 

dems try and come close to passing minimum wages hikes, which you want, and your response is to disparage them and push revolution. be advised your political takes are bad.

 

all they ever do is try and come close.  they are controlled opposition and they will never, even if they got a majority, pass what is required.  they pushed biden and attacked bernie constantly, and even bernie is just a social democrat.  biden, who would veto a medicare for all bill if it went on his desk, in his own words.  no, minimum wage increases are not enough for me, and even if democrats did actually achieve their stated supposed goals, I would still not support them.  my political takes are bad? interesting how you support a political movement which has persistently failed for decades on end and yet you think your takes are good?

where's your little social democratic reformist minimum wage increase, notably not even a big enough increase to keep up with inflation? oh, it failed.  democrats don't do shit lmfao

[drillkicker]

21 hours ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

That was my response to the article, which was a discussion of accelerationism, neoliberalism, capitalism, and fascism.  I didn't really describe what I think should happen except for a bit at the end.  I don't know what should happen, and nobody knows what will happen.  Apart from that the contradictions inherent to capitalism will continue to spasm and cause combinations of proletarian unrest and class consciousness in regions where they are being sufficiently educated by communists and sufficiently not redirected in their frustrations towards social democratic liberalism in much of the west for example

There is no such thing as "some transition into a dictatorial communist ecosystem" there is only such a thing as vanguard parties capable and willing, or not so, of taking control of the state and making that become the case.  It's also worth me pointing out potential implications of the phrasing "transition into a dictatorial communist ecosystem" implying "dictatorial" being a state which the hypothetical transition is bringing into being

On the contrary, dictatorial is the present state.  And yet, dictatorships of the proletariat tend to have happened historically in regions not yet deeply developed by capitalism and gripped by a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.  The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie seems very resilient once put into place and allowed to maintain itself for long periods of time, and applies fascism when needed to maintain its existence.  The article says this:

With regards to the second question, it is clear the Nazi fascism of the interwar period is the critical pivot point of German history without which understanding any examination of neoliberalism must be incomplete. Marxists, however, have an aversion to any serious examination of fascism — it is a mystery shrouded in a cloud of incoherent narrative that goes something like this:

There was this really bad guy, who, backed by, variously, capitalists or peasants or declassed elements or ‘politically backward’ workers, did a bunch of bad stuff to a lot of people. But the free world kicked his ass. Making the world safe for democracy and quadrennial election cycles.

(This recounting of Marxist inter-war world history is brought to you by The Annenberg Foundation and by the wonderful people of the Oil and Natural Gas industry. And by contributions from my followers like you. Thank you)

Pretty disingenuous claim made by the author, since even a dipshit like myself can describe a more coherent conception of fascism from a Marxist perspective, as some combination of forceful bourgeois destruction of the vanguard of class opposition and its surrounding consciousness within the proletariat, genocide reminiscent of that which happened in the Americas being applied to regions more highly developed and more close to us in time and space, and deepening of the absolute dictatorship of the bourgeoisie with aesthetics of revolutionary and populist messaging, etc. 

Ok I wasn't sure if you had intentionally repeated Jehu's point about labor theory or if it was just a coincidence.

It seems your idea of transition into communism is a very structured, top down approach that involves rigorous "education" of the workers (realistically, the youngest, pre-Oedipal generations) and the crystallization of a state with an impenetrable security system against capitalistic transformations.  This security system is upheld by ongoing education, and the result is a hyper-Oedipal, repressive power structure that will ultimately become infested with diagrammatic intensities that obsolesce the signifying system of the communist dogma.  Is that correct?

13 hours ago, brian trageskin said:

the term "molecular revolution" is so fucking dumb though. i just find it super cringy when a person in one field of study uses a term from a different field as a metaphor for a concept, as part of their theory, when the original term refers to a tangible, measurable thing. i'm probably guilty of having done so in the past, so this isn't me proclaiming my superiority. hell, i've said so much bullshit in my life and continue to do so on this very forum, although i try to learn from my mistakes. so this isn't necessarily criticism towards you, it's not like that term is your invention. and guattari's concept might be valid, that's not the issue here. 

anyway, what's an oedipal semiological structure? i get a sense that we're getting full into bullshit territory with this.

The word "molecular" isn't used as a reference to chemistry, it's a term of convenience used to describe an assemblage acting as a singular unified entity as opposed to a loosely connected rhizome, for which the word "molar" is used.

Why do you disagree with the notion of oedipal semiologies?  Do you not believe that repressive systems can become embedded into the language and cultural expression of a society?

[zlemflolia]

11 minutes ago, drillkicker said:

Ok I wasn't sure if you had intentionally repeated Jehu's point about labor theory or if it was just a coincidence.

It seems your idea of transition into communism is a very structured, top down approach that involves rigorous "education" of the workers (realistically, the youngest, pre-Oedipal generations) and the crystallization of a state with an impenetrable security system against capitalistic transformations.  This security system is upheld by ongoing education, and the result is a hyper-Oedipal, repressive power structure that will ultimately become infested with diagrammatic intensities that obsolesce the signifying system of the communist dogma.  Is that correct?

i think you're taking too much of a psychological view of the concept of education.  and no, I support a bottom up radically democratic system, and the creation of a state capable of oppressing the bourgeoisie yet sufficiently controlled and consisting of the proletariat to the point where it is capable of withering away as the bourgeois threat subsides, socialism is achieved, then communism is achieved, and the proletariat consciousness is raised in a self maintaining way to maintain this status for themselves, know why, and know how.  this is all complicated by the existence of external capitalist powers wishing to destroy any proletarian state and thus requires militarism and grassroots political organizations to withstand any invasions, like in vietnam or cuba

I see the withering away of the state as rather the expansion of the state until it is all encompassing and completely decentralized throughout the entire population.  this requires heavy education to teach the people how to be the state and how to coordinate the entire economic system without the need for a bourgeoisie or a state external to themselves.  it is technically complex, and a big burden and responsibility.  but the proletariat will rise to this challenge, just as the bourgeoisie rose to their challenge in overturning feudalism

Edited September 9, 2021 by ilqx hermolia xpli

[brian trageskin]

8 minutes ago, drillkicker said:

The word "molecular" isn't used as a reference to chemistry, it's a term of convenience used to describe an assemblage acting as a singular unified entity as opposed to a loosely connected rhizome, for which the word "molar" is used.

i just looked up the definition in the dictionary, i wasn't aware that the word molecular could be used in a different context from chemistry and physics. i still think it's a fucking dumb idea to use it in a figurative sense but who am i to decide of the meaning of words... lol at "molar" btw. 

28 minutes ago, drillkicker said:

Why do you disagree with the notion of oedipal semiologies?  Do you not believe that repressive systems can become embedded into the language and cultural expression of a society?

what is oedipal semiology exactly? is it a concept? who came up with it?  what does oedipal mean in that context? 

[brian trageskin]

yeah, i too hate it when the impenetrable security system against capitalistic transformations of a state is upheld by ongoing education, and a hyper-Oedipal, repressive power structure that will ultimately become infested with diagrammatic intensities that obsolesce the signifying system of the communist dogma, emerges as a result.

[may be rude]

2 hours ago, ilqx hermolia xpli said:

all they ever do is try and come close.  they are controlled opposition

right here you reveal a concerning departure from reality.

 

go easy zeffo and stop trashing the ones fighting for you

[toaoaoad]

11 hours ago, brian trageskin said:

i do have a big penis though. i should have gone into porn.

 

8 hours ago, diatoms said:

                                                                           set up a page on onlyfans

                                                                      there's still time to make a splash in this world

 

Please give music theory tutorials while you stroke it. I'll subscribe

 

[zlemflolia]

32 minutes ago, very honest said:

right here you reveal a concerning departure from reality.

 

go easy zeffo and stop trashing the ones fighting for you

"democrats are fighting for you"

>democrats proceed to demonize only prominent presidential candidate who wants basic things like universal healthcare and education, instead backing pedophile ghouls who actively oppose those things

they aren't fighting for me in particular.  I want communism, they sure aren't fighting for that.  they are "fighting" to maintain capitalism with minimal inconvenience to the bourgeoisie, to the point where they won't even give us healthcare

I have to refrain from speaking more at this point because it would merely be a rant on the mentality of particular individuals who settle with such pathetic policies such as those put forward by the democrats, as well as the lack of respect for their own humanity and the humanity of others, to the point of entering voluntary slavery to the capitalist system which exploits them

absolutely pathetic