Yeah, I guess asking you to stop putting the words in my mouth is too much, so here we go.
When you say the USSR sucks, you are saying that you prefer the alternative for its time, the US.
Nope, I'm saying that USSR sucks, and just that.
East Palestine [...]
One more "but capitalists"; completely not the point; next. Although, one moment: I don't blame them for the accident, shit happens; I blame them for not disclosing it in time so that those who they were "protecting" could take preventive measures (like taking some normal iodine greatly reduces the consequences of exposure to the radioactive iodine-131 due to thyroid not trying to process that crap).
Refer to reddit.com/r/socialism/wiki/class
That's cool, yet that's not the only way to divide the society into classes. For example, when state exists, one can assign each member of the society a number from 0 to 1 (or 100, whatever you like) representing their power over others. Then we draw the line at, say, 0.4, and assign the ones above an "oppressor" class, while the ones below become "oppressed".
Or we can go a simpler root and ask ourselves if Stalin or those close to him still belong to proletariat. Sure, technically they don't "own" private property, nor do they directly exploit those below on the food chain, yet the conditions of living and the scope of obtainable goods are vastly different. And, frankly speaking, I doubt all that ppl can one day (or gradually) just give up the accumulated power. Instead, they'll find another problem to solve, than another, and another.
Alternatively, we say "fuck the state", and abolish both private property and any verticals of power. Mb just explaining to ppl the gist of what direction to move in (e.g. friendship is magic, unicorns are cool, you should cooperate with each other and not become slaves, etc).
So, that's basically why putting
you are functionally saying here is "let the bourgeoisie use all of their wealth to maintain their power"
goes the same direction as accusations of protecting capitalists
That's cool, yet that's not the only way to divide the society into classes.
We're not liberals. The liberal definition of class is ill-defined, wishy washy and dogshit, completely impossible to use scientifically.
For example, when state exists, one can assign each member of the society a number from 0 to 1 (or 100, whatever you like) representing their power over others. Then we draw the line at, say, 0.4, and assign the ones above an "oppressor" class, while the ones below become "oppressed".
That's fucking stupid. It's even less defined than the liberal definitions of class. Wtf is the definition of "power" and "oppression" in your completely fantasy made up version of class nobody except you use?
Or we can go a simpler root and ask ourselves if Stalin or those close to him still belong to proletariat. Sure, technically they don't "own" private property, nor do they directly exploit those below on the food chain, yet the conditions of living and the scope of obtainable goods are vastly different.
And? Oh god forbid that the leaders of the fucking country, democratically elected through a bottom-up system have literally any extra things. You're acting like having a car because you're an important figure that needs to get places quickly or a drink of whisky makes someone a different class is fucking absurd.
Show
And, frankly speaking, I doubt all that ppl can one day (or gradually) just give up the accumulated power.
Good job that's not what fucking happens then? Please for the love of god actually READ marxist theory instead of passively learning it through comments and this level of debate pervert shit. It's infuriating because it's so god damn obvious you don't actually know anything.
People do not say magically one day "I want to abolish the state today, let's do that now". For fuck's sake. It is a process of redistribution of resources as and when the conditions that caused the creation of those resources are changed for them to no longer exist.
Alternatively, we say "fuck the state", and abolish both private property and any verticals of power. Mb just explaining to ppl the gist of what direction to move in (e.g. friendship is magic, unicorns are cool, you should cooperate with each other and not become slaves, etc).
How's that working out for you? Is that gonna happen before or after climate change kills several hundred million people? What's your plan for when the fascism ramps up because hundreds of millions of climate refugees destabilising capitalist societies are going to be a serious problem? Ask the fascists nicely to stop repressing the refugees and let them in? Pretty please! Jesus christ. This is what lack of materialism does to MF. Assuming you even do magically achieve revolution with this fantasy of asking people to do it spontaneously (lol) how's your magical newly abolished plot of land without a state gonna stop the fascists next door to your country from moving in? Asking them nicely?
Look, we're about to retread already debated ground here so instead of go back and forth on this I'm gonna ask you to read Marx's Conspectus on Statism and Anarchy, it is Marx in his own words going through several of the arguments you're about to make. He quotes Bakunin's words then responds in line, like a forum thread, fun! It's a good replacement for going over that shit here and tbh I can't be arsed doing over a 250 year old debate that was settled at the First and Second International. It's basic stuff.
Yeah, I guess asking you to stop putting the words in my mouth is too much, so here we go.
Nope, I'm saying that USSR sucks, and just that.
One more "but capitalists"; completely not the point; next. Although, one moment: I don't blame them for the accident, shit happens; I blame them for not disclosing it in time so that those who they were "protecting" could take preventive measures (like taking some normal iodine greatly reduces the consequences of exposure to the radioactive iodine-131 due to thyroid not trying to process that crap).
That's cool, yet that's not the only way to divide the society into classes. For example, when state exists, one can assign each member of the society a number from 0 to 1 (or 100, whatever you like) representing their power over others. Then we draw the line at, say, 0.4, and assign the ones above an "oppressor" class, while the ones below become "oppressed".
Or we can go a simpler root and ask ourselves if Stalin or those close to him still belong to proletariat. Sure, technically they don't "own" private property, nor do they directly exploit those below on the food chain, yet the conditions of living and the scope of obtainable goods are vastly different. And, frankly speaking, I doubt all that ppl can one day (or gradually) just give up the accumulated power. Instead, they'll find another problem to solve, than another, and another.
Alternatively, we say "fuck the state", and abolish both private property and any verticals of power. Mb just explaining to ppl the gist of what direction to move in (e.g. friendship is magic, unicorns are cool, you should cooperate with each other and not become slaves, etc).
So, that's basically why putting
goes the same direction as accusations of protecting capitalists
Compared to what?
That's the point.
Bad does not exist without a baseline.
We're not liberals. The liberal definition of class is ill-defined, wishy washy and dogshit, completely impossible to use scientifically.
That's fucking stupid. It's even less defined than the liberal definitions of class. Wtf is the definition of "power" and "oppression" in your completely fantasy made up version of class nobody except you use?
And? Oh god forbid that the leaders of the fucking country, democratically elected through a bottom-up system have literally any extra things. You're acting like having a car because you're an important figure that needs to get places quickly or a drink of whisky makes someone a different class is fucking absurd.
Good job that's not what fucking happens then? Please for the love of god actually READ marxist theory instead of passively learning it through comments and this level of debate pervert shit. It's infuriating because it's so god damn obvious you don't actually know anything.
People do not say magically one day "I want to abolish the state today, let's do that now". For fuck's sake. It is a process of redistribution of resources as and when the conditions that caused the creation of those resources are changed for them to no longer exist.
How's that working out for you? Is that gonna happen before or after climate change kills several hundred million people? What's your plan for when the fascism ramps up because hundreds of millions of climate refugees destabilising capitalist societies are going to be a serious problem? Ask the fascists nicely to stop repressing the refugees and let them in? Pretty please! Jesus christ. This is what lack of materialism does to MF. Assuming you even do magically achieve revolution with this fantasy of asking people to do it spontaneously (lol) how's your magical newly abolished plot of land without a state gonna stop the fascists next door to your country from moving in? Asking them nicely?
Look, we're about to retread already debated ground here so instead of go back and forth on this I'm gonna ask you to read Marx's Conspectus on Statism and Anarchy, it is Marx in his own words going through several of the arguments you're about to make. He quotes Bakunin's words then responds in line, like a forum thread, fun! It's a good replacement for going over that shit here and tbh I can't be arsed doing over a 250 year old debate that was settled at the First and Second International. It's basic stuff.