this facts every leftist website has to be the most hideous s*** you’ve ever used

They designed marxists.org in the 90s

They have to manually program every text that gets added

They have too many texts now so they don't wanna switch to a new design because it would take too much effort

F***in Trots...

we gotta radicalize some web designers fr…

buying up marxist sounding web domains is their praxis for permanent revolution

Have you read their author page? They keep dissing some people in their intros

nah i havent been on the site much outside of some of their archives

marxists.org/archive/index-mobiles.htm#bolsheviks

Look which author is missing

its killing me how they wrote Trotsky's bio as if he's the messiah

crazy they kept Bukharin as well if they gonna remove Stalin

militarynewbie.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/TM-21-210-Improvised-Munitions-Handbook-1969-Department-of-the-Army.pdf

Found this in a link generator

I’m not clicking that link officer!

unless this is the depth of your political a***ysis of the RvW/Dobbs court decision i don't want to hear it

Damn even horoscope hoes dont want Pluto

it's actually from a schizo subreddit about gnostic conspiracies

"There is no behaviour or line of conduct that can define itself to be, as such, revolutionary. As soon as it is established as a mere stylisation of conflictuality, and therefore becomes a "work of art" every behaviour, every line of conduct is to be placed in order of the incident as its particular accident." (Giorgio Cesarano)

(Interesting also vis-à-vis Dionys Mascolo's considerations, in his essay on the term "left", on the revolutionary as distinguishing itself from the left - this being the true distinction -, while left/right still fit in a bourgeois discourse. But then, any selfproclaimed revolutionary is accused by the leftist of precisely not being revolutionary enough, while the former accuses the latter of not being left enough. But does anything remain? Failure like the historical avantgardes...)

The new situationality is marked by the rise of the 'reactionary' right, a right that has positioned itself as the main force of opposition (and this is a crucial point) to the left's 'hegemonic' power. This opposition is not the expression of a different tradition (the old right) but of the same tradition that exists within the left (the new right). In the same way, there exists no tradition of the 'new left', but rather an extension of the old left that is based on 'anti-hegemony'. There is no tradition of the new right apart from the continued existence of the old right. This opposition is not the expression of two different 'traditions', but of the same tradition.

word on the street is modern capitalism is what it is due to monopolization. lets outlaw the ability to create monopoly

But then the monopolists will pay off the lawmakers

it's already illegal the government just doesn't care

How can we outlaw monopoly

already is apparently ^ @krishna_bound

an excellent point to where the problem lies :(

How can we enforce such interests

Anti-cartel laws, anti-trust laws et cetera exist in every capitalist country.