babyhueypnewton posted:i dunno when i talk to liberals they're unequivocally anti-stalin and talk about the millions of people he killed with his pinky, but when you mention mao it's like mentioning jon brown to a pacifist or mentioning eugene debs to a democrat. they get awkward, like the horizon of their ideology is apporaching and they're about to fall off and look like a fool/racist/conservative.
then again i went to hebrew school as a kid which was like a little kibbutz lol
I guess they visually associate Stalin with Hitler. Mao had no stache.
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:lol why would a georgian be considered a person of color? first of all theyre slavs, who aren't people. second they're militant kafirs, so they're white as fuck. case closed.
georgians are not slavs boy
RETARD
elemennop posted:georgians are not slavs boy
yes they are
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:elemennop posted:georgians are not slavs boy
yes they are
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:elemennop posted:georgians are not slavs boy
yes they are
maybe in the spiritual sense, but not in the genetic-linguistic origin sense
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:so not in the sense that matters ,but in some other sense which doesnt matter
sure if by slavic you mean noble peoples, i agree, georgians are slavic
It may well be true that the working class is the only vehicle for achieving this, and that it must do so itself, as Marx and Engels also emphasized. While their arguments for this are not wholly conclusive, being largely an argument by elimination, it is certainly made plausible by the status of working people globally as the growing, concentrated, exploited force upholding the class system under capitalism. Under such conditions, it is certainly true that an emancipation of the working class would almost certainly require an abolition of the class and property relations that underpin global capitalism. But it also means that if socialism as a form of society could be achieved in some other way, then that would, to me, be equally desirable. The question is what works. Therefore, while it is certainly in most cases likely and plausible that the cause of the working class and the cause of socialism overlap, this is not an a priori necessity: it cannot be known beforehand, but must be examined in each case.
is scary. i fear our poor friend is degenerating into his bourgeois-academic marxist shell.
babyhueypnewton posted:Who mentioned that McCain article. There's some interesting stuff but this:
It may well be true that the working class is the only vehicle for achieving this, and that it must do so itself, as Marx and Engels also emphasized. While their arguments for this are not wholly conclusive, being largely an argument by elimination, it is certainly made plausible by the status of working people globally as the growing, concentrated, exploited force upholding the class system under capitalism. Under such conditions, it is certainly true that an emancipation of the working class would almost certainly require an abolition of the class and property relations that underpin global capitalism. But it also means that if socialism as a form of society could be achieved in some other way, then that would, to me, be equally desirable. The question is what works. Therefore, while it is certainly in most cases likely and plausible that the cause of the working class and the cause of socialism overlap, this is not an a priori necessity: it cannot be known beforehand, but must be examined in each case.
is scary. i fear our poor friend is degenerating into his bourgeois-academic marxist shell.
babyhueypnewton posted:i dunno when i talk to liberals they're unequivocally anti-stalin and talk about the millions of people he killed with his pinky, but when you mention mao it's like mentioning jon brown to a pacifist or mentioning eugene debs to a democrat. they get awkward, like the horizon of their ideology is apporaching and they're about to fall off and look like a fool/racist/conservative.
then again i went to hebrew school as a kid which was like a little kibbutz lol
Haha wow I thought you were an actual marxist for a while but it turns out you're just another jew.
elemennop posted:sure if by slavic you mean noble peoples, i agree, georgians are slavic
i didnt type teutonic or nordic so why would you infer i meant noble? super lol
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:elemennop posted:sure if by slavic you mean noble peoples, i agree, georgians are slavic
i didnt type teutonic or nordic so why would you infer i meant noble? super lol
You didnt type "Smears shit all over face & genital holes" so you DEFINITELY didnt mean teutonic or nordic
Keven posted:babyhueypnewton posted:i dunno when i talk to liberals they're unequivocally anti-stalin and talk about the millions of people he killed with his pinky, but when you mention mao it's like mentioning jon brown to a pacifist or mentioning eugene debs to a democrat. they get awkward, like the horizon of their ideology is apporaching and they're about to fall off and look like a fool/racist/conservative.
then again i went to hebrew school as a kid which was like a little kibbutz lolHaha wow I thought you were an actual marxist for a while but it turns out you're just another jew.
its true... though i did defend babyfinland in a thread a long time ago that you cant separate jewish identity from zionism anymore and considering yourself jewish is tantamount to racism. that's basically an exaggerated version of what i actually believe, like most of what i post.
e: I was at a wedding reception last week with my dad and we were talking to some other jews, and as soon as we metioned being jewish (this was a korean reception so we stood out a bit) he immediately started talking about gaza and israel. as if being jewish is like wearing an "I am a zionist" sign... guess it is.
Edited by babyhueypnewton ()
Crow posted:babyhueypnewton posted:Who mentioned that McCain article. There's some interesting stuff but this:
It may well be true that the working class is the only vehicle for achieving this, and that it must do so itself, as Marx and Engels also emphasized. While their arguments for this are not wholly conclusive, being largely an argument by elimination, it is certainly made plausible by the status of working people globally as the growing, concentrated, exploited force upholding the class system under capitalism. Under such conditions, it is certainly true that an emancipation of the working class would almost certainly require an abolition of the class and property relations that underpin global capitalism. But it also means that if socialism as a form of society could be achieved in some other way, then that would, to me, be equally desirable. The question is what works. Therefore, while it is certainly in most cases likely and plausible that the cause of the working class and the cause of socialism overlap, this is not an a priori necessity: it cannot be known beforehand, but must be examined in each case.
is scary. i fear our poor friend is degenerating into his bourgeois-academic marxist shell.
that post owns
babyhueypnewton posted:Keven posted:babyhueypnewton posted:i dunno when i talk to liberals they're unequivocally anti-stalin and talk about the millions of people he killed with his pinky, but when you mention mao it's like mentioning jon brown to a pacifist or mentioning eugene debs to a democrat. they get awkward, like the horizon of their ideology is apporaching and they're about to fall off and look like a fool/racist/conservative.
then again i went to hebrew school as a kid which was like a little kibbutz lolHaha wow I thought you were an actual marxist for a while but it turns out you're just another jew.
its true... though i did defend babyfinland in a thread a long time ago that you cant separate jewish identity from zionism anymore and considering yourself jewish is tantamount to racism. that's basically an exaggerated version of what i actually believe, like most of what i post.
This place is hell
mustang19 posted:babyhueypnewton posted:Keven posted:babyhueypnewton posted:i dunno when i talk to liberals they're unequivocally anti-stalin and talk about the millions of people he killed with his pinky, but when you mention mao it's like mentioning jon brown to a pacifist or mentioning eugene debs to a democrat. they get awkward, like the horizon of their ideology is apporaching and they're about to fall off and look like a fool/racist/conservative.
then again i went to hebrew school as a kid which was like a little kibbutz lolHaha wow I thought you were an actual marxist for a while but it turns out you're just another jew.
its true... though i did defend babyfinland in a thread a long time ago that you cant separate jewish identity from zionism anymore and considering yourself jewish is tantamount to racism. that's basically an exaggerated version of what i actually believe, like most of what i post.
This place is hell
Crow posted:the only judaism is anti-zionist judaism. Zionism is anti-semitism par excellence *nods head solemnly lol*
The fact that this website plus LLC and MIM is the spearhead of the modern socialist movement speaks volumes.
babyhueypnewton posted:Not one Frenchman will be secure so long as a single Jew — in France or in the world at large — can fear for his life.
Before or after 1948?
mustang19 posted:babyhueypnewton posted:Not one Frenchman will be secure so long as a single Jew — in France or in the world at large — can fear for his life.
Before or after 1948?
I believe JPS wrote that in 1945. i never actually read sartre besides this work though, just fanon and various other people summarizing him. he was a cool dude though, his googly eyes saw what most others could not.
e: also simone de beauvoir was hot. another thing i could never post on wddp
Crow posted:the only judaism is anti-zionist judaism. Zionism is anti-semitism par excellence *nods head solemnly lol*
I dunno man the Old Testament is basically 100% about Jews owning the promised land.
Crow posted:This doesn't seem correct. Mods?
sup?
babyhueypnewton posted:mustang19 posted:babyhueypnewton posted:Not one Frenchman will be secure so long as a single Jew — in France or in the world at large — can fear for his life.
Before or after 1948?
I believe JPS wrote that in 1945. i never actually read sartre besides this work though, just fanon and various other people summarizing him. he was a cool dude though, his googly eyes saw what most others could not.
e: also simone de beauvoir was hot. another thing i could never post on wddp
Me neither. You should read what he wrote about filling holes though.
mustang19 posted:Keven posted:
f you honestly post your thoughts or feelings, everyone will attack you till you die.
By the way I've been on the internet so long I can't tell seriousness from reality,
sweet, you got it, welcome to the rhizzone
babyhueypnewton posted:Who mentioned that McCain article. There's some interesting stuff but this:
It may well be true that the working class is the only vehicle for achieving this, and that it must do so itself, as Marx and Engels also emphasized. While their arguments for this are not wholly conclusive, being largely an argument by elimination, it is certainly made plausible by the status of working people globally as the growing, concentrated, exploited force upholding the class system under capitalism. Under such conditions, it is certainly true that an emancipation of the working class would almost certainly require an abolition of the class and property relations that underpin global capitalism. But it also means that if socialism as a form of society could be achieved in some other way, then that would, to me, be equally desirable. The question is what works. Therefore, while it is certainly in most cases likely and plausible that the cause of the working class and the cause of socialism overlap, this is not an a priori necessity: it cannot be known beforehand, but must be examined in each case.
is scary. i fear our poor friend is degenerating into his bourgeois-academic marxist shell.
It was interesting but it didn't really answer the "why not join the labour party" question and came across more like a defense of bourgeois leadership of working class politics
EmanuelaOrlandi posted:lol why would a georgian be considered a person of color? first of all theyre slavs, who aren't people. second they're militant kafirs, so they're white as fuck. case closed.
this is how people get killed over posts
