Capitalism versuses communism is a false dichotomy.
Who own McDonalds? Raytheon? Google? Blackrock?
The bourgeoisie is propertied, local, attenuated, and independent. The proletariat is propertyless, national or even international, expansive, and dependent. The bourgeoisie's power was fundamentally rooted in ownership and domination of physical space, while the proletariat is subject to whims and approval of the indivual or organizations that employ them.
The bourgeoisie no longer exists. Even physical real estate that is nominally owned requires yearly payments and government approval to develop, which is more akin to a lease. The modern managerial class, to which founders/CEOs belong, is a proletarianized elite. Larry Fink and his ilk are no less subject to this fact, as his power is derived from managerial control of assets that he fundamentally does not own; it is the collective property of the individual investors and organizations who have entrusted him with managing their capital, in other words the People.
At the start of the cold war, the post-war consensus across the first and second world was, ironically, national socialism. JFK's most famous utterance, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," is practically indistinguishable from the American fascist Lawrence Dennis' "A nation is a nation by reason of what its citizens have done for it rather than what it has done for them."
For an indepth look at these topics, check out either James Burnham's The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom, which is a realist look at political systems and the inspiration for Emmanuel Goldstein's book within a book Theory And Practice of Oligarchic Collectivism in Orwell's 1984, or the more modern version Levithan And Its Enemies by Sam Francis, which continues the tradition of elite analysis through the fall of the Soviet Union. I personally prefer Sam Francis' book, although it was published posthumously and they didn't want to give it the good editing that it really needed without Francis' input.
Levithan can get a little reptitive due the lack of editing and could have been cut in half at least, but it goes pretty quick and is absolutely worth it.
I would add that we specifically have a financial elite. That's a big issue because they have so much flexibility in their ability to maintain wealth. It's why "get woke, go broke" isn't actually working.
Capitalism versuses communism is a false dichotomy.
Correct ... Communism never existed. The USSR WAS SOCIALISM ... it EVEN HAD SOCIALISM IN IT'S FUCKING NAME ! "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"
The modern managerial class, to which founders/CEOs belong, is a proletarianized elite
that employs the FUCKING LEECHES . And a central BANK with a mandate TO GIVE MONEY TO SUPPORT THE LEECH EMPLOYERS Or whatever the government WANTS. The independent CAN JUST WITHER AWAY .
You haven't really disagreed with me, other than through pedantic liberal illusions. Everyone must purge themselves of the moral syphilis that is the liberalism within themselves. Capitalism vs socialism is no less of a false dichotomy. The foundational principles of materialist production optimization lends itself to similar and inevitable conclusion.
In order to stabilize and expand production, the managerial class will seek to dictate demand through homogenization of the consumer and product. In order to facilitate continued growth of mass and scale, the managerial class will ever attempt to expand themselves and their organization, instead of whatever purpose the organization is nominally intended to serve.
He's a socialist because he understands the power dynamics at play? Because he calls out or describes the way things are? Please.
You realize he disapproves of what he describes and is calling for change, right? The way it's looking, you're calling him a socialist because he disagrees with you about the nature of the horrid state of affairs, or worse because he understands socialism at all.
Wait... If understanding socialism makes you a socialist-- aren't you one too? GASP
He's a socialist because he understands the power dynamics at play?
The power mechanics are that the EU is defended and the EU ain't paying.
You realize he disapproves of what he describes and is calling for change, right?
=)) Doesn't seem like it to me . It looked like they want to keep not investing in defense ... while building pipelines to the enemy against which they cry they need defense against WHILE at the SAME TIME investing in USURPING and Subverting THE EASTERN ALLIES !
To me they seem like double faced pieces of shit .
I'm calling him a socialist BECAUSE ... i'm a EUROPEAN and i'm TIRED of this SOCIALIST PIECE OF SHIT UNION with IT'S CENTRAL BANK SUBSIDIZING FUCKING ZOMBIE COMPANIES that funnel money back to the people in power . I'm tired of paying into the NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS . I'm tired Of supporting an auto industry kept alive BY TARIFFS and CONSTANT REGULATION CHANGES .
I'm calling him a socialist because THE EU is a socialist UNION !
The EU has an on-going military defense that THEY AIN'T PAYING FOR ! FUCKING SLIME !
Also you are a socialist that should EAT SHIT ! Europe is a SOCIALIST UNION ... and it's DRAGGING THE US into socialism MORE AND MORE !
Capitalism versuses communism is a false dichotomy.
Who own McDonalds? Raytheon? Google? Blackrock?
The bourgeoisie is propertied, local, attenuated, and independent. The proletariat is propertyless, national or even international, expansive, and dependent. The bourgeoisie's power was fundamentally rooted in ownership and domination of physical space, while the proletariat is subject to whims and approval of the indivual or organizations that employ them.
The bourgeoisie no longer exists. Even physical real estate that is nominally owned requires yearly payments and government approval to develop, which is more akin to a lease. The modern managerial class, to which founders/CEOs belong, is a proletarianized elite. Larry Fink and his ilk are no less subject to this fact, as his power is derived from managerial control of assets that he fundamentally does not own; it is the collective property of the individual investors and organizations who have entrusted him with managing their capital, in other words the People.
At the start of the cold war, the post-war consensus across the first and second world was, ironically, national socialism. JFK's most famous utterance, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," is practically indistinguishable from the American fascist Lawrence Dennis' "A nation is a nation by reason of what its citizens have done for it rather than what it has done for them."
For an indepth look at these topics, check out either James Burnham's The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom, which is a realist look at political systems and the inspiration for Emmanuel Goldstein's book within a book Theory And Practice of Oligarchic Collectivism in Orwell's 1984, or the more modern version Levithan And Its Enemies by Sam Francis, which continues the tradition of elite analysis through the fall of the Soviet Union. I personally prefer Sam Francis' book, although it was published posthumously and they didn't want to give it the good editing that it really needed without Francis' input.
Thanks. I’ll check out those books.
Levithan can get a little reptitive due the lack of editing and could have been cut in half at least, but it goes pretty quick and is absolutely worth it.
Huh I'm gonna read that, too
I would add that we specifically have a financial elite. That's a big issue because they have so much flexibility in their ability to maintain wealth. It's why "get woke, go broke" isn't actually working.
Correct ... Communism never existed. The USSR WAS SOCIALISM ... it EVEN HAD SOCIALISM IN IT'S FUCKING NAME ! "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"
that employs the FUCKING LEECHES . And a central BANK with a mandate TO GIVE MONEY TO SUPPORT THE LEECH EMPLOYERS Or whatever the government WANTS. The independent CAN JUST WITHER AWAY .
So SOCIALISM !
You haven't really disagreed with me, other than through pedantic liberal illusions. Everyone must purge themselves of the moral syphilis that is the liberalism within themselves. Capitalism vs socialism is no less of a false dichotomy. The foundational principles of materialist production optimization lends itself to similar and inevitable conclusion.
In order to stabilize and expand production, the managerial class will seek to dictate demand through homogenization of the consumer and product. In order to facilitate continued growth of mass and scale, the managerial class will ever attempt to expand themselves and their organization, instead of whatever purpose the organization is nominally intended to serve.
You just need to eat shit ! That is all !
He's a socialist because he understands the power dynamics at play? Because he calls out or describes the way things are? Please.
You realize he disapproves of what he describes and is calling for change, right? The way it's looking, you're calling him a socialist because he disagrees with you about the nature of the horrid state of affairs, or worse because he understands socialism at all.
Wait... If understanding socialism makes you a socialist-- aren't you one too? GASP
The power mechanics are that the EU is defended and the EU ain't paying.
=)) Doesn't seem like it to me . It looked like they want to keep not investing in defense ... while building pipelines to the enemy against which they cry they need defense against WHILE at the SAME TIME investing in USURPING and Subverting THE EASTERN ALLIES !
To me they seem like double faced pieces of shit .
I'm calling him a socialist BECAUSE ... i'm a EUROPEAN and i'm TIRED of this SOCIALIST PIECE OF SHIT UNION with IT'S CENTRAL BANK SUBSIDIZING FUCKING ZOMBIE COMPANIES that funnel money back to the people in power . I'm tired of paying into the NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS . I'm tired Of supporting an auto industry kept alive BY TARIFFS and CONSTANT REGULATION CHANGES .
I'm calling him a socialist because THE EU is a socialist UNION !
TentElephant never defended the EU.
What the actual fuck are you going on about?
Sure he did. He said the EU is occupied ... THEREFORE he was implying that EU policy isn't actually their policy !
Why are you so stupid ?
You might as well say that he's a socialist because 2+2 = 4; the one doesn't follow the other.
Just because the EU is socialist, it doesn't follow that TentElephant is also-- especially considering he wants to cut off the EU.
Well ... You are just his alt account .
Fuck you. TentElephant never mentioned he want to cut off the EU !
Had a hard time reading your comment. Letters are too small. NEED MOAR CAPS.
Show us on the doll where the caps hurt you .
Show us the medicine cabinet you stole your psychotics from.
pff ... you go first !