ree

that is levels

!levels

Go check **Politicord Simulator**'s leaderboard here https://mee6.xyz/leaderboard/450389123081961472. <:WINK6:403540173566115840>

!levels

Go check **Politicord Simulator**'s leaderboard here https://mee6.xyz/leaderboard/450389123081961472. <:WINK6:403540173566115840>

they do, but only because of the insane amount of conscription

rip my anus amirite gaymen?

again

by what standard

largest

I

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

"No amount of historical truths will free you from your Marxist post modernist tunnel vision"

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"?