https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46744459

https://www.apnews.com/102e9a844508407c96f881ca65593c50

Nigga what?

🤔

What do you think about my test results?

Why is nationalism bad?

And why do you want regulation? Lol

Nigga nationalism isnt about blowing the government

Its about loving your homeland

🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔

Youre a cuck

Its one or the other

You cant be anti globalism and nationalism

Youre fucking retarded

>anti globalist
>pro eu

Downs

Rise up

In bourgeois society, living labour is but a means to increase accumulated labour. In Communist society, accumulated labour is but a means to widen, to enrich, to promote the existence of the labourer.

In bourgeois society, therefore, the past dominates the present; in Communist society, the present dominates the past. In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality.

And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so. The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.

By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying.

But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other “brave words” of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

@Mr. X In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.

From the moment when labour can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolised, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes.

@Mr. X You must, therefore, confess that by “individual” you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the owner of private property. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.

Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

I took the compass

The problem i have with centrism is i feel like its a lost cause

Giving the state power is such a slippery slope

Are you being sarcastic?

There has to be a state, i just dont know how to do it right

Something with very little power

you take a look at minarchism?

sounds like something right up your alley

how can you deregulate that