Yo Voice in this server is dead

rip

O7

Yet another claim that you will fail to substantiate. Marx didn't think in such strict binary terms. He wrote about more than the bourgeoisie and proletariat. He knew very well that those weren't the only players in class society.

Inshallah

Marx accused Proudhon of wanting to rise above the bourgeoisie, for instance. I've so far substantiated everything. You merely refuse to accept reality. You deny the statements made by an actual party member of the CPUSA on the influence of Jews in the party, because it does not fit your narrative. It is documented very well. I gave you the exact page of the book that provides the evidence. You, by denying my evidence, attempt to claim that I have shown no evidence. That is illogical.

@Adoring Fan You're actually the one negating your own claims by failing to back them up with evidence. An unsubstantiated claim is of no worth whatsoever. And you're also straw-manning once again by claiming that I consider Marx's definition to be the only "valid" definition of socialism. I've never claimed that. It's not an argument I'm making, much less the crux of one.

you have, in practice, shown that you only accept Marx's socialism as valid socialism

This shit is pointless af lmao. I don't even follow because I typically only study the popular positions held in society, as they are ofc more relevant

How have I shown that? Are you EVER going to justify your claims with evidence?

But every statement yall make is like "I substantiate, you don't"

for instance, here you denied what is ultimately Chartian Socialism as being not real socialism

https://i.imgur.com/Ud9w8LF.png

Chartism falls under the confines of what you wrote

yet was, and still is, for all intents and purposes, considered socialism

@🦅 𝓔𝓪𝓰𝓵𝓮 𝓔𝔂𝓮 🦅 additionally this. Nobody in contemporary politics aside from Marxists consider Marx's definition of socialism as that which the old jew did

I don't trust your link, and I never claimed chartism wasn't a form of socialism. I would consider it utopian, but socialism nonetheless.

lmao

Honestly how are you guys still arguing

stamina

"It's over fruity pebbles, I have the moral high ground."

@Adoring Fan >old Jew
Nice pot-shot at one of the greatest minds to ever live. And your ignorant ass obviously hasn't read much of anything by Marx. If you did, you would know that he wrote very little about socialism. His theory is primarily descriptive, and entails a critique of the capitalist mode of production, not the ins-and-outs of what a communist society would look like or a definitive gameplan as to how one would reach such a society.

here you also asserted that socialism is the transition stage between communism and capitalism

https://i.imgur.com/lnIdDTw.png

shifting goal posts

literal sperging because i called your little ideologue a kike

lmao

and you say you hit a nerve with me?

ecks dee

It's obvious that I'm referring to the socialism which I am a proponent of. I didn't think I had to specify given the obvious fact that I am a socialist of the Marxian variety. The only shifter of goalposts here is you.

if you're too scared to click on my scary link proving you identify with exactly Marx's socialism, then I'm done, I need to go back to studying.

Once again you have displayed your masterly ability to not understand context.

you did not say "Marxist Socialism"

you did not say "what I believed to be socialism"

you said "socialism"

I don't have to specify because everyone can see what kind of socialist I am.

you need 2 b talking about my very specific brand of socialism for it to count

yes you do

when there are those who do not believe in any theory of socialism except for marx

if I call myself a socialist

i need to clarify i refer to national socialism