Message from @Perpetual Moral Imbalance
Discord ID: 457300297187065858
yes, and at no point have i made claims to state capitalism is only possible if globally
yes, and at no point have i made claims to state capitalism is only possible if globally
yes, and at no point have i made claims to state capitalism is only possible if globally
yes, and at no point have i made claims to state capitalism is only possible if globally
yes, and at no point have i made claims to state capitalism is only possible if globally
just a little
we pointed out that your argument ignores the actual point of 'historical materialism'
are you not seeing the yes
might've missed it, there's a lot going on lmao, sorry
meanwhile, i've not gotten a yes/no from karde
if the entire world is not communist, is communism achievable?
@Perpetual Moral Imbalance your missing the point, the question is irrelevant to the argument
Capitalism relies on manipulating the working class of other, generally non capitalist nations. I would argue a global capitalism would not prevail.
it doesn't **show** communism to be impossible
i'd appreciate a yes or no, and a follow-up to explain your point
if the entire world is not communist, is communism achievable?
that's a huge leap in logic
you made
and now i'm wondering how the fuck you support that leap in logic
if the entire world is not communist, is communism achievable?
as that is a straight answer
yes/no is not nuanced
a yes/no with a follow-up explaination is appreciated
if the entire world is not communist, is communism achievable?
you think the world's socioeconomic analysis can be reduced to a fucking yes or no answer?
if communism is unachievable until all the world follows the ideology, that doesn't mean it's unachievable at all
a yes/no with a follow-up explaination
if the entire world is not communist, is communism achievable?
^
i don't see the point in answering a 'yes or no' question
in fact it's often a debate fallacy
so you're openly refusing to answer my question with a straight answer
thank you for your time
because it's irrelevant
and because you're arguing in bad faith
correct, i already recieved an answer
i've seen this tactic before
we've already answered it with no
you literally are using the question
to make a huge jump in logic
i know you ahve advoc