Read Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Read Wretched of the Earth. Read The Revolution Betrayed. Read Kronstadt 1921.

Enjoy your Blanqism and Bonapartism

“When education is not liberating it is the dream of the oppressed to become the oppressor”

Well history shows, that guillotining your ruling class, such as happened in France, leads to centuries of rational peace and prosperity. The French successfully ended all wars, and liberalism ushered in an instant and uninterrupted 250 year peace. Since they designed their guillotines not to cut the heads of any undeserving peasants who were caught in the political maelstrom, and enlightened the peasants so that every citizen was a productive and conscientious member of society, every French person and all of their descendants has become a productive civic philosopher. No despot ever managed to come to power in France ever again, and certainly not within 10-15 years.

Having successfully merged society with the Hegelian world spirit of human freedom, the rest of Europe gave up all colonies, freed the people, and helped them achieve a level of national and self actualization in line with the French wave of historic human transformation. No despot ever managed to come to power in Europe again.

Now, the world’s children know no fear or hunger, only freedom and reason; and its all thanks to the fact that the French did such a good job chopping the heads off of exactly the right people.

Its the most expensive installment in the franchise, also its the most expensive film in the franchise.

inevitable only in hindsight

I’m not so sure. I’m still friends with a guy who told me emphatically “you dont understand what we did, we destroyed the global economy” and then explained the whole subprime mortgage scam to me, back in like 2007. Lots of downstream businesses, new home builders, paint and drywall companies, building materials stores, started folding several months before the official crash as well. I wasn’t nearly as aware of things then, I was a grown adult but not yet 30 and with little formal education, but there were definitely huge flashing signs. Only the media, based 100% on the words of the banks and insurance companies, thought that a crash was undetectable.

I’m not sure quite what it would look like yet, but I’m willing to bet if you look where these data centers are being built, when the cash runs out to keep the whole scam afloat, these big companies will stop paying their bills. The smaller companies providing services and supplies will run out of money before the huge mega corpos start showing signs, so that is one of the metrics I’m watching closely. I just happen to live in the shadow of these data centers so I’ll be pretty close to it, that is if I’m right.

Y’all mind if I just uncancel myself like our lord and savior Jesus Christmas?

I love how this whole premise never gets questioned. By anyone. None of the super smartest people in the movie were like, “no that won’t work.” The premise just gets accepted as true, but it would be bad.

“I’m going to eliminate half of all life in the universe” hey thanos did you know that scarcity in modern society isn’t driven by population at all, and is in fact an artificial condition imposed on the lower classes by the ruling class that hoards those resources?

No its just like, “well killing people is wrong but it would probably work, people might be sad though.” No Disney, fuck you. Don’t let people believe this shit. Thanks for your endless support for cultural fascism, ya fucks

Nice

A wiggler? Did you learn that on the first day at sophistry class at fallacy school? Is that a technical term or are you completely, totally, irredeemably full of your own farts

Ah a rationalist. That’s what I love about rationalism, any relationship to reality is severely rationed

Irish and Islamic Arab scholars were widely sought during medieval era because their countries contained the last surviving copies of the entire roman classical canon and before, locked up in monasteries with monks and scribes copying them by hand, in all different languages, since the fall of Rome and the spread of the catholic and islamic religion into those areas.

In the dark ages, they were the only people with any access to information about the past, they spoke and could read and write many languages. Advanced mathematics were developed in Iraq in the 9th century, or even earlier in the vedas, and made their way to Europe in the 12th century. Fibonacci made a name for himself in Italy through these discoveries, which had a thriving intellectual culture in various regions for the larger part of the feudal era.

So no I dont think its a recent idea. The ruling class in every era has always needed the educated to interpret the world. The formation of an educated middle class is fairly recent, but as the middle class gets squeezed harder, look how the first thing to go is quality public education.

A sharp, curious and questioning mind is route to whatever passes for freedom in any age. Whether or not that opportunity is available to everyone is a sure indicator of a whether a society is more free, or more repressive.

Do you believe private property is a fundamental human right? If yes, Do you believe that people who own or run businesses should be able to pay a living wage?

Do you have a theory of political change? What is it?

Are you familiar with theories of imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism? Are you pro-reparations?

Do you believe economic degrowth is necessary to avoid climate change?

Are you opposed to the genocide in Palestine? Do you support a one or two state solution?

Are you a British Green or an American Green?

I worry that by asking these questions directly it might affect any answers but these are “further left” than your stances.

Based on what you shared I’d say you’re a “progressive liberal”, which is a right-leaning moderate position. But that’s where a lot of revolutionary leftists, including myself, started out.

What really matters to me when relating to progressive liberals is: If you’re willing to educate yourself, and getting involved in a political party like you’re doing could help.
if your positions are based on a real spiritual progressivism, or if someone acts fundamentally reformist/opportunist.

The powers that are driving this are actually planning 20, 30 years ahead. Market solutions is a cover for class war. Trump is cashing checks written by Bush, Obama, etc.,

The “line go up” meme is prevalent because the attitude is a flimsy cover for deeper relations and actual class conspiracy

“Machines were the weapon used to quell the revolt of specialized labor” – Karl Marx

Its literally 8 people that own half the worlds wealth

If you eliminate enough jobs and increase unemployment, wages go down across the board. But then you also do away with high wages for highly technical roles

I bought my son a cheap little computer, basically a windows version of a Chromebook. When windows needed an update there wasn’t enough memory to perform it, and the computer would no longer connect to WiFi. I thought this was very dumb so I figured out how to remove windows and install Mint. Was impressed by how well it worked.

When I needed a new computer I bought a $150 thinkpad and installed Fedora. Been a fedora main ever since

Become a class traitor, that might buy you a few days, maybe more if you’re really good at it

lack of human interest

When has that ever stopped anybody? Just spin up a million or so ai fans programmed to love it

I don’t understand your second sentence.

I don’t have any problem with the term “left wing of the ruling class”. What it refers to, is the section that does give in to working class demands. So you say there is no left wing of the ruling class there is only <my definition of the left wing of the ruling class.> I think you’re being pedantic. Please correct me, but however you define things my argument is the same.

You’re coming off as some kind of leftist, so wrt my statement being a contradiction: material conditions under class rule are inherently contradictory. Class rule is contradictory, the belief that any part of nature supercedes another is contradictory, that one man is better than another or more deserving of the fruits of labor, is contradictory. Socialized production but privatized profits is the fundamental contradiction of capitalism, but the contradition drives it, not destroys it. How capitalism functions vs how it appears to function, is a contradiction.

Pointing out contradictions in others arguments in an attempt to invalidate them is literally bourgeois rationalism. It is a form of idealism, and I have zero time for it. Social contradiction exists. If you wanna argue that this society is rational, then if you consider yourself a leftist, that is a contradiction that alienates you from the real movement.

At the time of the new deal, a large enough section of the ruling class actually believed in a kind, humanitarian capitalism. This is because it was in their best interests to believe in it, and for a while it actually produced many rational reforms. But the contradictions of capitalist class rule, rolled back those reforms as the threat of immanent destruction disappeared and the endless search for profit continued. A good example of these beliefs is the interview [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1934/07/23.htm](Marxism vs. Liberalism.) I don’t like Stalin one bit but it is a funny interview and demonstrates what I’m talking about. This belief led to the social movements that embodied it. Of course it is a contradiction. Its contradictions everywhere, all the way down. Where there is contradiction, there is struggle, and where there is struggle, we begin our analysis and center our practical work.

Reformism is when the right and moderates of the workers movement join with the “left” of the bourgeoisie. Both the moderates of the workers movement and the left of the bourgeoisie are wrongheaded and idealist, but that doesn’t mean those movements don’t exist. Those movements appear over and over throughout history, and develop because of actual conditions and class interests.

I think you define things statically and by their “essential traits” rather than by the relationships that they have with their local conditions. I am vehemently opposed to this way of thinking, this essentialist, categorical objectivity. I will not give ground here.

So, if you’d like to continue to debate me, you will have to demonstrate more understanding than you have here. Debate like this isnt practical, but i would like clarification on the second sentence which I legit don’t understand.

It is functioning as it was intended to function. A thing is what it does