>>1086Damn, I guess you called me out on my dishonesty and misrepresentation of your arguments, huh. You got me good I suppose, I will just break it down line by line this time to avoid any further confusion.
>You whine about living a socialist state, yet when I asked you about your experience you dodge with some retarded shit about muh phones and innovationI live in a Neoliberal state which used to be Socialist before it finally could not sustain itself. Overall I feel like life has improved for me in some ways after opening up to market reforms. I am a working class man, I do not own any property or means of production or exploit someone else's labor for my own benefit. Many of my personal acquaintances will attest the same to me. I think it also went the opposite for many working class citizens, that is something I am willing to admit here as well. Am I wrong for feeling this way and stating reality for how I feel it is? Am I a counter revolutionary just for admitting this?
>You then literally go on to shill neoliberal ideology with neoliberal propaganda. Whatever helps me. Socialism will arrive when it's needed.
>I then ask you about failed capitalist states and how you see this as preferable to functioning socialist states, even the ones considered "bad to live in" by the media. Functioning Socialist states are better than failed Capitalist states, functioning Capitalist states are better than failed Socialist states. Fine by me.
>You instead start talking about Chyna and about how you couldn't consume shit if it were a socialist state, "what is the point of socialism if I can't consume". I like to consume and make my life more comfortable. I recall the first time my friend bought a phone, he saw one from his mutual friends and was absolutely surprised in awe with the technological gap between different parts the world, and the great functionality it provided. He was fixated towards it for a good while. He actually saved and spent a good sum of money to buy it. In doing so, he was cut short for the rest of the month and had to borrow money from me to fulfill his basic needs. Some people do like to value consumption and indulging in goods that might not seem rational for them for the time being. It is in their interests and wishes to act accordingly.
If you never had access to the internet, I wonder if you would even know about all this, much less have a slight perspective on politics other than the scarce few resources your state provides you with. You might not even like Socialism if you feel like it is actually hampering you, so the opinion you have now is shaped by your current scenario, but you're saying that does not matter. As if people living in Socialist states all over the world agree that they like the system, because it is objectively in the right for their interests. This is the state of current and previous Socialist states that decided to cut themselves off to preserve Socialism, and it ultimately backfired on them.
>Then you straw man me for no reason as being ultra rich and comfy, despite the fact I have already told you I don't live in a first world country. Pure ad hominem. I did?
I don't care if First Worlders are rich and comfy, as long as they are a worker. It is the exploitative nature that concerns me, personally at least.
>Then you accuse me of thinking the great purged were good, based on no evidence. You then claim I moralize this. But then you show your retarded smug cunty enlightened liberalism and say you "just see this as a tool for people furthering their goals". I accused you? Stalinis- I mean, Marxist-Leninists do argue that removing counter-revolutionary forces is desirable. The same way that National Socialists purge degeneracy. Both are done to further their own ends, and I get where they are coming from. They (keyword here) do like to look at it as a fight between good and bad. Maybe I went too far with my assumption there, but then again, if you weren't a moralist this wouldn't have made you say this.
>How insanely stupid do you have to be, how fucking smug and arrogant do you have to be to think that it is a unique and grand perspective that people kill people to further their own egoistic goals.<When I look at censorship, killings and propaganda, to me it is just another tool for people further their goals, be it Fascists, Liberals, Communists, etc.
I never wrote egoistic there. Violence is the way people carry out their will, it is a powerful tool.
>Do you seriously believe people support these killings for some other reason you dumb fucking cunt. They want to form the world according to their beliefs and worldviews. Fascists, Communists, Anarchists, Liberals, Monarchists, et al. People may feel like their theoretical framework backs up their sentiment. To bring about this idea they act on it, usually using violence to change the status quo.
>By the way, this doesn't have anything to do with what I asked. You complelty dodged the question. I asked if capitalist state sanctioned annual massacres were fine just because they aren't communist. Because you insist that resisting these state sanctioned massacres is illegitimate for some retarded neolib ideology you call post leftism. You just done did a Moralism here. It's hard to imagine you just denying a Moralist code a few lines back.
I don't know the context here, but if that is true by the way, it's good for the capitalist, and bad for the workers. Both have to fend for themselves here, so it depends from whose perspective we look at this from. For me personally, as a worker, I would resist them out of my own interest.
>Shut the fuck up, dishonest lib. You were the first that were crying that you (allegedly) lived in a poor post soviet state with no cellphones or other nice things to consume. I like cellphones and I like to consume.
>You were the one who discredited people resisting their current state of living because you think they are too privileged. I don't discredit them, they can do whatever the hell they want with themselves, go on interplanetary trips for all I care. My issue is when they pick moralist reasons to impose their will on others, with which they have no relationship themselves. Many workers in my state like the reforms, many others do not, THEIR will matters here because they are the direct sufferers of the consequences of their actions, not some opinions of people halfway across the globe or dead philosophers jerking each other off.
>The rest of your post masturbating about the revolution is irrelevant. And so is the patronizing shit about africans with no food or shelter. Is it?
>What neolib textbook this you copy this piece of shit from?Many such cases I know of personally, but I guess that is irrelevant here. If you move to the US will you voluntarily stay poor to maintain the revolutionary, oppressed spirit?
>Imagine being a moralist post leftists. "The might is right." Just because you think you aren't a moral fag doesn't mean you are the biggest one of them all. Pure projection, a classic pathology of right wingers such as yourself.Uhh?
I do recall stating some other empirical stuff in my previous post, but I guess that is neolib-revisionist-CIA-anti ML-counter revolutionary propaganda so we don't discuss that here. Fine by me. I'm sorry for assuming so much about you, I will go improve my reading comprehension thanks to being able to have access to the internet, for now.