I love the least defense of a Marxist. You don't understand Marx, 😂

Social relations of production is the determinant of the base

You're just drooling

Control of labor power and relation to production are the criteria for class as written by Marx

The conflict caused by contradictions between each echelon creates the descriptive; wealth inequality arises because the bourgeois hold control over labor power and their relation to production enables them to create disparity in their own interests while the working class seeks parity with it's goals - higher wages and benefits

In fact Marx didn't do an analysis on families, that was Engels and Engels did not come to that conclusion

Marx does not put greatest emphasis on industrialization, you'd know how much a socialist society relies on abolishing commodity production if you had read Marx

M-C-M, M-M, C-M-C

His critiques of the political economy are almost entirely against capital

And yes a Socialist society is not prescriptive to the abolition of commodity production but through developments under socialism as transition relies on C-M-C but you wouldn't know that either

I love how you did not answer this question.
_"For Engels, the result was "the world historical defeat of the female sex. The man took command in the home also; the woman was degraded and reduced to servitude; she became the slave of his lust and a mere instrument for the production of children." (Sydie, pp. 120-121). Engels notes that "within the family he is the bourgeois, and the wife represents the proletariat." (Sydie, p. 137). The husband, father and patriarch became the master with slaves, and with wife-servant (s) and children-servants. There were many different forms that this took in different societies, "but in all cases the general relationship is seen to hold that women are subject to men in and out of marriage." (Sydie, p. 97)."_
So, tell me. Was Engels blind to not know that most men, who worked as service men did not own any or much means of production or you are ignorant or dishonest?

Engels views of relativizing the hegelian master-slave dialectic to man and woman was him positing to allow the entire female sex into public industry rather than man or in the relation, the bourgeois, to dictate the economic unit

Never did he claim man owned the means of production in contradiction to everything he said

You are either cherry picking or can't read

Let me ask the question again. Is wife a proletariat to the husband? If yes, where is that husband's means of production.

I answered your question

I have answered the full issue

So, the husband does not own means of production necessarily but is still bourgeoisie?

You twist words and hide context

*In the great majority of cases today, at least in the possessing classes, the husband is obliged to earn a living and support his family, and that in itself gives him a position of supremacy, without any need for special legal titles and privileges. Within the family he is the bourgeois and the wife represents the proletariat. In the industrial world, the specific character of the economic oppression burdening the proletariat is visible in all its sharpness only when all special legal privileges of the capitalist class have been abolished and complete legal equality of both classes established. The democratic republic does not do away with the opposition of the two classes; on the contrary, it provides the clear field on which the fight can be fought out. *

Oh! So he says that the husband is the bourgeois. Thanks.

You go from wrongly positing Marxist class system to leaving out all context to the comparison

Later loser

Bye Commie. Lie to someone else:)

@Enigmatic★Chromatic you can disregard Draco as someone to delineate anything related to Marx to

Yes, Marxist circle jerk works very well. Btw, I thought you ran away to your daddy Marx.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KRdd88IOBE

@Draco here's a direct quote from Critique of the Gotha Program about what communism would look like: ```But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.```

He literally says in communism some people will be richer than others

It's *really* disengenuous to tell a Marxist what Marx thought

```I am a jew and jews are the chosen people all others are beneath us
-Karl Marx```

Actually have you read "On the Jewish Question"?

its a meme btw don't mind me had to join in

Oh

I was gonna say he *really* didn't like the Jewish culture

yeah i mean the talmud literaly says jews are the chosen people and non believers are animals

really dumb religion tbh

I'm a proponent of Marxism-Leninism Scientific Atheism

Aka "State atheism"

Being religious is not banned, but public displays of religion, religous recruitent into your religion, teaching religion in school are all banned and instead it is taught to kids how religion game into existence to serve material needs and such

Sounds like hell