? ? ? The forced obligation isn't the end point though.

Yes, the ends absolutely justify the means.

if I go to your house every day and demand money from you at gun point, then one day dont pull out the gun, are you a voluntary participant?

Has this debate been a 1 hour troll?

are you "compassionate" now?

The system you are arguing for sounds like extortion to me.

So sacrificing all those people who are unable or unwilling to accept responsibility by putting them through a "forced obligation social structure" is justified in achieving the ideal?

more along the lines of going into my house every day, demanding stuff with a gun, then eventually getting rid of the gun, then eventually not demanding in the first place.

Because it's become natural.

@>_ Yeah, for sure

Wait

Sounds horrible

has this really been a 1 hour troll and this person isn't even socialist?

that's still backed by the threat of force lol

@Beemann not if the state disappears afterward

okay so what happens if I just decide to start hoarding food?

I'm 100% serious. We need extreme violence and a radically unorthodox state if we want to change society.

does nobody enforce the marxist dreamstate?

I argue that sacrificing all of those people in the name of "compassion" is in fact not compassionate. But an Orwellian twist to the word "compassion."

@Beemann not sure why you'd do that, but generally I'm not sure why anybody would care since probably nobody else would

What's the debate about?

I think it was a troll

>you were forced to do this for years
>then we took away the person forcing you to do it
>but you're compassionate now
you're going to have to explain the missing step, because this is the underpants gnomes of politics

@>_ yeah, well I guess in my opinion sacrificing like, a few million people in a revolution is better than letting many millions of people and animals die for hundreds of years in capitalism

I would not be willing to do that

So I guess I die in your society

@Beemann after being forced to do something for years through some process, people eventually acclimatize to the "something" and do it as natural

@Cody yeah boy

so it's not compassion but learned helplessness basically

So explicitly killing competent, aspiring, incompetent memembrs of society is justified so long as "we can sustain more life."

I mean, if we want to force out human nature, then genetic cleansing is required. Killing people who don't agree to the compassion state is a good way to remove the people who would disrupt the compelled but willingly compassionate slavery

OMG @Beemann Thats genius.

@>_ I dunno, is hundreds of millions of deaths more compassionate than a few million?

@Grenade123 greed is not human nature

Is it not?

Is selfishness not human nature?

it's not

But how does capitalism kill hundreds of millions

People being unable to sustain their own life is not the same as explicitly killing people who are sustaining theirs and others around them.

self preservation until you reproduce is a biological imperative

are you willing to die for Marxism?