You are not commie and your ego is massive

Why do you write in full paragraphs

If everyone who writes in full paragraphs is full of themselves and writes hot garbage then when somebody with a good idea comes along nobody will listen

>literally named garbage
>"y-your ego is massive!"

@Deleted User you can't even put up an argument

you are completely and utterly destroyed

Implying i even read a single thing of all that. Argument to what btw. This maybe "But anyway, let's get back to the thing about destroying other people's gods. Why can't people give up their identities and contextualise their struggle as being part of a universal struggle?
" in which he clearly states that he wants to destroy other ppls ideology. First he was like, "do what ever the fuck you want" meaing ou could go true a constant development, ut now he is saying that he wants to destroy these revolution in a person, because he thinks he should destroy. I really dont see how you could converse or argue with against this contradicting insanty. That btw leads to him going complete avoidance mode every time you move to a point

```You are not commie and your ego is massive```

'You're not a Communist if you don't respect idpol!'

'My idpol is special because class will never go away and biological determinism!'

```Implying i even read a single thing of all that.```

>proceeds to pick out a point and try to argue against it anyway

Nice inconsistency, big brain.

```in which he clearly states that he wants to destroy other ppls ideology.```

That ideology is not *equivalent* to the struggle that it's tied to. It's based on a misrepresentation and false conception of that struggle.

Only in our minds do we fight '*exclusively* as [insert identity here], unconditionally-so'. In reality, we fight as subjects who are having to relate to the world, which just so happens to include an entire social framework. Our relations to each other are *indirect* in class society; our consciousness of our battles is *by default* in terms of interests which we think are exclusive. Regarding this, Communism seeks to remove this false consciousness and contextualise struggles as being part of a larger, universal struggle.

```First he was like, "do what ever the fuck you want" meaing ou could go true a constant development```

We've been over this, I might as well repeat myself again:

There is no such thing as a 'constant development' even as far as reaching a perfection of 'doing whatever one pleases' is concerned, in fact!

Would that not be subject to change too, meaning that it can't even be modelled as something 'constant' in any way?

*So even as far as the abstractions which you conjured up go, you don't know what you're talking about.*

``` ut now he is saying that he wants to destroy these revolution in a person```

'Destroy a revolution in a person'? No, the point would be to use whatever 'revolutions within people' there are, whatever that means (inb4 you say 'that's not what I meant, muh nuance' - then you grant me just as much opportunity to hide behind that excuse for the sake of consistency).

It would need to be used for the sake of advancing universal causes as a platform for individual causes and group causes.

```because he thinks he should destroy```

This is a given. Any political order seeks to destroy *something*.

*Your concern is that Communists would be destroying the supposed dignity and order of Nature. To that, Communists say 'no shit Sherlock'.*

We are out to destroy gods.

We want to remove the crowns of the ghostly ideas which we shackle ourselves to; we want to destroy any excuses using which any misidentification of struggles as being exclusive struggles can be made and sustained in practical decisions.

And with that, yes, we will need to absolutely smash present modes of life. *This is a given, in human society this happens all the time, only without our conscious organisation of the processes which drive this phenomenon.*

Such a course of action is necessary in order to get to a political position where people can express themselves and become ever-more autonomous.

```I really dont see how you could converse or argue with against this contradicting insanty. That btw leads to him going complete avoidance mode every time you move to a point
```

I only 'avoid' it because I've already sorted this mess out. I did not argue that people would have an ultimate, frozen 'freedom'. The contours of 'doing what one fucking pleases' are themselves owed to the present circumstances which we find ourselves in, from what physical materials and industrial processes we have at that given time through what bodies of thought we've built all the way to what we can imagine.

In other words, even 'doing what one fucking pleases' is a *historical* thing. Our own conceptions of what's feasible, what's 'ultimately' possible and even what's imaginable are not fixed.

*You would most likely already have latched onto this and corrected me there if you were a Communist, or at least in the Marxist Communist tradition. Instead, you went straight for the 'impossibility' argument, almost like the post-Marxists do when asserting the impossibility of 'democracy' as a frozen absolute state of affairs.*

Unlike Mouffe and Laclau, though, you don't show that these absolutes are abstractions which are ultimately meaningless with regards to any political cause. You defend the *bourgeois* position: namely, that we're stuck with class, a lack of democracy and identity politics - *and that (crucially) to keep struggling against that would be 'unproductive' and in vain because it cannot satisfy this prevailing order which we are doomed to*.

**And before you say that you didn't talk about idpol: you may not have mentioned it by name, but you were busy talking about how people will always be separated into groups which can act exclusively in their own interests and nothing else, which was the point of your defence of biological determinism.**

All of this is why I say that I have infinitely more reasons to call myself a Communist than you do, and that you would be better off calling yourself a reactionary syndicalist.

trash

He is saying, "i am a communist because you arnt" (incase you didnt wanted to read all that)