And they’re saying he killed himself
So US troops went in and just shot women and children
Vaush gonna turn fascist in before the end of the 2024 elections
Just a prediction
We getting closer
what happen?
He said we should sanction Russia into oblivion
Typical Vaush standpoint
Arcade Goon and Scratchin Mamba you guys made some great points but I'm feeling hella lazy atm.
I took a break but I'm back on my s*** tbh every billionaire should be shot in the street
I took a break but I'm back on my s*** tbh every billionaire should be shot in the street
In case of an investigation by any federal entity or similar, I do not have any involvement with this group or with the people in it, I do not know how I am here, probably added by a third party, I do not support any actions by members of this group.
En caso de una investigación por parte de alguna entidad federativa o similar, no tengo ningún involucramiento con este grupo ni con las personas en él, no sé cómo estoy aquí, probablemente agregado por un tercero, no apoyo ninguna acción de los miembros de este grupo.
Dans le cas d'une enquête par une entité fédérale ou similaire, je n'ai aucune implication avec ce groupe ou avec ses personnes, je ne sais pas comment je suis ici, probablement ajouté par un tiers, je ne soutiens aucune action des membres de ce groupe .
No caso de investigação de uma entidade federal ou similar, não tenho nada a ver com este grupo ou seu povo, não sei como estou aqui, talvez acrescentado por terceiros, não apóio nenhuma ação dos membros deste grupo.
Im Falle einer Untersuchung durch einen Bund oder eine ähnliche Einrichtung habe ich nichts mit dieser Gruppe oder ihren Leuten zu tun. Ich weiß nicht, wie ich hier bin, vielleicht von Dritten hinzugefügt. Ich unterstütze keine Maßnahmen der Mitglieder dieser Gruppe.
Federal veya benzeri bir kurum tarafından soruşturma yapılması durumunda, bu grupla veya onun insanlarıyla hiçbir ilgim yok. Burada nasıl olduğumu bilmiyorum, belki üçüncü bir şahıs tarafından eklenmiştir. Bu grubun üyeleri tarafından yapılan herhangi bir işlemi desteklemiyorum.
В случае расследования, проводимого федеральной или подобной организацией, я не имею отношения к этой группе или ее людям, не знаю, как я здесь, возможно, добавлен третьей стороной, я не поддерживаю никаких действий участников этой группы.
如果是由联邦或类似实体进行的调查,则我与该小组或其中的人员没有任何关系,我不知道自己在哪里,可能是由第三方加进来的,我不支持该小组的成员采取任何行动。
연방 또는 유사한 기관의 조사의 경우, 나는이 그룹이나 그 사람들과 아무 관련이 없습니다. 내가 여기 어떻게 왔는지 모르겠어요. 아마 제 3 자에 의해 추가되었을 것입니다. 이 그룹의 구성원이 취한 조치를지지하지 않습니다.
連邦または同様の機関による調査の場合、私はこのグループまたはその人々とは何の関係もありません。私がここにいる方法がわかりません。おそらくサードパーティによって追加されたものです。私は、このグループのメンバーがとった行動を支持しません。
في حال إجراء تحقيق من قبل جهة فيدرالية أو ما شابهها ، فلا علاقة لي بهذه المجموعة أو مع الأشخاص الموجودين فيها ، ولا أعرف كيف أنا هنا ، وربما أضافه طرف ثالث ، لا أؤيد أي إجراء من قبل أعضاء هذه المجموعة .
I took a break but I'm back on my s*** tbh every billionaire should be shot in the street
Alhamdulillah
Arcade Goon and Scratchin Mamba you guys made some great points but I'm feeling hella lazy atm.
It's ok fam we all family here
Arcade Goon and Scratchin Mamba you guys made some great points but I'm feeling hella lazy atm.
I feel you
Cultural Marxists won this slaps
drake feature on the way
the fact that some of these are actually from pro-china outlets is even funnier tbh
One more thing, if centralization away from the people and persistence of hierarchy are so good for socialism and the proletariat, what prevents more sabotage and capitalist "counter-revolutionaries", especially since Capitalism desires both, inherently.
I'd argue pro-state socialists act more as "counter-revolutionaries" because it implies socialism is inherently weak at combatting capitalism and that it needs to mimic the power structures of the previous bourgeoise to keep the proles at bay and to keep them "protected from threats"
If the state is allowed to rule, it will continue to want to rule, thus it will turn everything that goes against it, even revolutionary proletarian demands for abolishment, as existential threats to the state, thus it shall always reign. It's the lie every state runs on, to keep perpetuating itself. The state only desires domination and accumulation of power.
You see the Cubans didn't rly believe in socialism because they centralized power and don't allow CIA funded political parties
You see the Cubans didn't rly believe in socialism because they centralized power and don't allow CIA funded political parties
idk enough about Cuba to have an opinion on it. I do think there’s truth in that setting up a state in the manner you ML’s want, is bound to perpetuate itself and never dissolve. I don’t see how we could expect a path to communism this way.
idk enough about Cuba to have an opinion on it. I do think there’s truth in that setting up a state in the manner you ML’s want, is bound to perpetuate itself and never dissolve. I don’t see how we could expect a path to communism this way.
but advocating for a "social democratic" path built on the carcass of the deeply rotten capitalist institutions will surely lead to socialism, because the ruling class loves to give away all its wealth resources and power.
you are disavowing third world countries attempts to build socialism slowly because you postulate that the communist countries are "bound to perpetuate itself and never dissolve", without any evidence. obviously nobody has achieved a communist utopia yet, but there are people actively working to do so while anybody not currently doing so has no authority to be critiquing the efforts of those who are.
didnt mean to come off harsh here ik you are on your path to understanding this, its just that this talking point bothers me a lot.
but advocating for a "social democratic" path built on the carcass of the deeply rotten capitalist institutions will surely lead to socialism, because the ruling class loves to give away all its wealth resources and power.
you are disavowing third world countries attempts to build socialism slowly because you postulate that the communist countries are "bound to perpetuate itself and never dissolve", without any evidence. obviously nobody has achieved a communist utopia yet, but there are people actively working to do so while anybody not currently doing so has no authority to be critiquing the efforts of those who are.
didnt mean to come off harsh here ik you are on your path to understanding this, its just that this talking point bothers me a lot.
I’m gonna advocate for whatever places the means of production into the hands of workers. I can’t really say the ML projects throughout history have achieved that. I don't have a problem “disavowing” these attempts at building socialism because I can’t really consider them as such. Atleast, not attempts at building a socialism that I recognize.
I don’t see why we’re so quick to discredit different path’s towards socialism.
I’m gonna advocate for whatever places the means of production into the hands of workers. I can’t really say the ML projects throughout history have achieved that. I don't have a problem “disavowing” these attempts at building socialism because I can’t really consider them as such. Atleast, not attempts at building a socialism that I recognize.
I don’t see why we’re so quick to discredit different path’s towards socialism.
to be very direct about it this path is the logical formulation of the experience of a century and a half of socialist experiments. it's often repeated but not without reason: if there were any radically successful "anarchist" projects, we would be able to point to such an obvious success and model our efforts behind it.
I am actually extremely supportive of viable alternative paths to socialism. I am not supportive of this false dichotomy between "anarchist" paths and "ML" paths. the two paths walk the same course and tbh i only find very minor, nitpicky ideological differences in what needs to be done following both paths. The reason we follow this trail, is because we can look down the path and see the tangible material benefits it provides. There are definite critiques of past movements and formulations of ML synthesis that I hold as any serious non-ideologue should, and these are expansions of thought within the framework of the hard, hard earned successes of past revolutionaries, who held the same exact values as you and me.
If you see failures in past movements, you can use that insight to implement a better approach to the current material conditions to help produce a socialist movement that improves upon the design. ideologically opposing "ML"ism because you ideologically agree with "anarchism" is completely detrimental to everybody and undermines everything you could possibly stand for as a socialist.
All I can offer to you, as you can't read the well-formulated and heavily-scrutinized works of revolutionaries more successful and well-read than either of us, is to try to overcome what comes across as chauvinistic othering of ML projects in order to assume an ideologically superior position, and instead embrace the failures of past socialist projects and choose to use the diversity in your thought to support and improve upon the work of those who came before you.