Message from @Adoring Fan
Discord ID: 451489175880073216
by enlisted men
m 5th lmao
sure
yes
noice
but by military size including navy's and air forces
nah
@Adoring Fan No, because nobody with even an elementary-level understanding of socioeconomic relations would even think such a thing. You clearly don't know what being a "capitalist" entails. And Parvus was NEVER an official of any government. He had no governmental authority with which he could exercise in any sense. There's also substantial evidence suggesting he didn't "fund the revolution". He may have been sympathetic and contributed to it in a non-material sense, but he certainly didn't bankroll it.
he was a leading figure and spokesperson in the social democratic party
He was a theoretician with a background in political economy. He wasn't exactly a "leading figure" in the sense that he could exercise political control over anything or anyone. His "power" was minimal, and his role was largely that of an advisor.
no, it seems like nobody in the world except for (You) and people in agreement with you understand what being a capitalist entails. Because like I've said before, only your definitions are valid to you. Not anyone else's. No amount of historical truths will free you from your Marxist post modernist tunnel vision
Equating Marxism with post-modernism now? Okay, Jordan Peterson. Why don't you explain what Marxism and post-modern philosophy actually are? Bet you can't.
can anybody explain to you what Marxism is? And no, I did not equate it, I added them together to form your word masturbation
amazing red herring btw
The Marxian critique of capitalism is a modernist one, it has absolutely nothing to do with post-modern French philosophy aside from the fact that some philosophers associated with that school were influenced by Marxism to a certain extent.
again, I did not equate marxism with post modernism. I stated that you used post modernism to justify marxism
You "added them together" because you're implying that one must be a post-modernist in order to be a Marxist and vice versa.
no I did not
I stated that you specifically used one to achieve the other
hence why I said
amazing how you use post-modernism to try to prove I misrepresent post-modernism
laughable
Oh, so post-modernism is some universally sound body of thought, with absolutely no dissimilarities? It's a direct result of the modernist critique of capitalism presented by Marx and Engels?
no, I am not saying that lmao
Pretty sure you know little to nothing about either and you're just pulling more shit out of your ass in a terrible attempt to save face.
you're, without pause, misrepresenting my words
keep trying
Oh, what is there to misrepresent about "You specifically used one to achieve the other"?
Maybe you should keep studying before you come here and spout off anymore obvious bullshit as though it weren't blatantly obvious that you're far from being an expert on either subject. Does your mental midgetry know no bounds?
fight fight fight fight
Maybe you should cease misrepresenting me. Post-modernism in your use was manipulated subjectivity. I.e.
you used subjective definitions to your advantage in order to subvert objective historically accepted definitions of socialism/capitalism
thus defending marxism
Oh really? Lemme guess, it was manipulated subjectivity to the 9th power thereby necessitating the historical subversion of objective definitionality regarding the theoretical application of socialism in relation to it's linear progression from capitalism? Anymore bullshit red herrings you want to cook up? Maybe you can add even more nonsense to the next one. Gives it more flavor.
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣠⣴⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣄⢀⠠⡀
⢀⢀⢀⢀⣠⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⣤⣙⣿⣿⣾⣷⣄
⢀⢀⢀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡄
⢀⢀⠜⣿⠙⣹⡻⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄
⢀⢀⣰⣿⢠⣿⣇⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢀⢀⢀⢀
⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢀⢀⠍⠙⢿⡟⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⣴⣾⠃
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠁⠈⢀⡤⢲⣾⣗⠲⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⠻⢿⣿⣿⡿⠃
⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⢙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢀⠰⠁⢰⣾⣿⣿⡇⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠈⢿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣄⡀
⡇⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣇⢀⢀⠙⠷⣍⠛⠛⢀⢀⢀⢀⠙⠋⠉⢀⢀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢀⡟⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⠦
⠰⢀⠻⣿⣿⣿⣧⡙⠆⢀⣀⠤⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣧⢸⢻⣿⣿⠿⢿⡆⠁⠠⠠
⢀⢀⢀⠈⢿⣿⣿⣷⣖⠋⠁⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣀⣀⣄⢀⢀⢀⢀⢸⠏⣿⣿⣿⢿⣿⢸⣿⣆⢀⢻⣿⣆⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣀⡀
⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣷⡀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⡒⠉⠉⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢈⣴⣿⣿⡿⢀⡿⢀⢻⣿⣆⡈⣿⣿⠂⢀⢀⢀⢸⣿⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐⣴⠦
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠘⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐⠄⢀⢀⢀⠈⢀⣀⣴⣿⣿⣿⡿⠁⢀⣡⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣯⣄⢀⢀⢀⢸⣿⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐⣠⣾⡏
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢹⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣆⠢⣤⣄⢀⢀⣀⠠⢴⣾⣿⣿⡿⢋⠟⢡⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⡄⣿⣿⢂⠐⢀⣤⡾⡟⠁
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠸⢀⠘⠿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣹⣿⣀⣀⣀⣀⠘⠛⠋⠁⡀⣄⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢀⣿⣿⣴⣾⣿⣭⣄⢀⢀⠂⢀⡀
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈⠛⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠁⢀⢀⢀⣡⣾⣿⣿⣿⡟⣹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣦⣤⣤⡮⠷
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣤⣶⣿⡿⢛⢿⡇⠟⠰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠁⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⢇⢀⠁
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣿⣿⣿⡿⢉⣭⢭⠏⣿⡿⢸⡏⣼⣿⢴⡇⢸⣿⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⢀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢿⣿⣿⡿⠟⠁⢀⢀⠠⡀⡐
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢰⣿⣿⣿⢃⣶⣶⡏⠸⠟⣱⣿⣧⣛⣣⢾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠈⢀⢀⡼⠉⠉⠉⠁⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣾⣿⣿⠟⢻⡿⡉⣷⣬⡛⣵⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡯⢀⢀⠴⠋
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢰⠘⣰⣇⣿⣿⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠘⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡷⢺⣿⠟⣩⣭⣽⣇⠲⠶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⢐⡈⣿⣷⣶⠎⣹⡟⠟⣛⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠠⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣯⣼⣿⣷⣿⣷⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠂⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈⠼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡄
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠹⠉⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠓⣀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠄⡠⣹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠉⠛⢦
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠉⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠁⡀
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⡿⠟⠁⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠐
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠈⠙⠻⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⡟⣿⠹⣮⣿⠁⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠠
⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⠉⢀⠛⠳⢾⣷⣾⣿⣹⣿⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀⢀
@Deleted User in no way was this a red herring.
You really are a Master Chef. Jordan Ramsayson would be proud.
your word masturbation of marx's theory of the stages of history is impressive, it really is, but that's all it is at the end of the day - word masturbation
marx's theory is nonsensical, subjective bullshit. And postmodernism only enables such bullshit by denying objective truths. By denying objective truths, one can easily delve into the realm of defining socialism/communism/capitalism/power struggles in any way one desires.
Even if I were theoretical masturbator, at least I'm not pleasuring myself to simulated situations through a medium of abstraction which has absolutely no bearing on concrete reality and the material relations therein.