Message from @Xiancha_Encari
Discord ID: 621654894365114378
ðŸ˜
cause the authoritarians would shut you down
I'm still new to this whole political thingy
*I miss the good ol days*
Like pretty sure I only got into it like roughly a year ago
@Xiancha_Encari i have something for your friends.
@Xiancha_Encari i only got into it when trump got elected.
just because it has the word "fallacy" at then end, doesn't mean it's a legit fallacy
I'm still confused on who's actually doing the ""good"" thing
Just because you point something out doesnt mean youre relevant
Suck my dick
Literally from the Communist Manifesto:
2. Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism
A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.
To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.
We may cite Proudhon’s Philosophie de la Misère as an example of this form.
The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom. They desire the existing state of society, minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements. They wish for a bourgeoisie without a proletariat. The bourgeoisie naturally conceives the world in which it is supreme to be the best; and bourgeois Socialism develops this comfortable conception into various more or less complete systems. In requiring the proletariat to carry out such a system, and thereby to march straightway into the social New Jerusalem, it but requires in reality, that the proletariat should remain within the bounds of existing society, but should cast away all its hateful ideas concerning the bourgeoisie.
A second, and more practical, but less systematic, form of this Socialism sought to depreciate every revolutionary movement in the eyes of the working class by showing that no mere political reform, but only a change in the material conditions of existence, in economical relations, could be of any advantage to them. By changes in the material conditions of existence, this form of Socialism, however, by no means understands abolition of the bourgeois relations of production, an abolition that can be affected only by a revolution, but administrative reforms, based on the continued existence of these relations; reforms, therefore, that in no respect affect the relations between capital and labour, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government.
Bourgeois Socialism attains adequate expression when, and only when, it becomes a mere figure of speech.
Free trade: for the benefit of the working class. Protective duties: for the benefit of the working class. Prison Reform: for the benefit of the working class. This is the last word and the only seriously meant word of bourgeois socialism.
It is summed up in the phrase: the bourgeois is a bourgeois — for the benefit of the working class.
lol
Even Marx hates modern day "socialists"
@Naveronasis pretty much china right now.
seriously read that
I kinda discovered sargon and a few others through my mate online and that's how I got into politics 😂 but before that I kinda watched the young Turks 😠forgive me for I have sinned
I just like how marx shits on what people think of as socialism today
lol yeah
A lot of pp at my uni get in a hissy fit if you don't believe socialism or communism is going to work
he wanted everyone to be a laborer, and that the only position for "management" would lay with the state to enforce the idea that everything is chosen by consensus of the larborers.
not sure how laborers collaborate to invent the microprocessor... must be all that free socialist education.
it did work
it killed communist
with their own failed ideology
Marx also thought communism was enevitable since the free market was unstable and self destructive and would have self ended before the end of the century... well over 150 years later and hes still wrong.
It just gets too confusing at times with all these different uh... factions? Are they factions?
Parties?
Communism is cultural appropriation
At its worst
If there were ever one thing to be poorly executed cultural appropriation
it's like christians
they don't read their bible
Also he said that communism is necessitated by free markets, and free markets were necessitated by mercantileism, and that mercantileism is necessetated by feudalism. With each replacing the last and each only able to lead to the next, and in his opinion philosophy was the same way so no one was allowed to argue with him since communism was the newest philosophy.
lol
Or western buddhists that dont understand buddhism