> Karaiya wrote:
>> Mexico wrote:
>> To the second question yes, you are correct, I don't think I've ever denied my
>> criticism for capitalism. However, I have many criticisms about socialism. I'll
>> be honest I do have many things I agree that Karl Marx wrote economically in the
>> instances of someone right to health and well being. Yes, I do understand.
> My little commie I am not sure you fully understand.
We are talking about socialism vs. capitalism not communism. Although Marx was a "commie". I am not.
>> To the first. Your calling me a Marxist had come in lifestyle discussion about
>> homosexuality, and polyamory which is greatly irrelevant as Karl Marx wrote literature
>> about economics. He wrote very little about sexuality other than discussing the
>> need evolving the value of genders to move away from capitalism. He likely encouraged
>> public as opposed to private parenting. Similarly, to the phrase "it takes a
> What Marx proposed was not limited to class warfare based on income inequality but
> rather was the method of his theory. To boil it down you create in groups and outgroups,
> create a narrative of historical oppression to fuel victimization, and then you solidify
> the victims against the oppressors to bring about your revolution. His theory has
> been applied to culture as a whole and has been instrumental in bringing about postmodernism,
> deconstructionism, critical theory, etc. You ever see those college kids that are
> self proclaimed SJWs and proud of it chant stuff like "you have nothing to lose but
> your chains"? That is the popular slogan ripped right out of the communist manifesto.
> You ever see antifa consistently identifying as "anarcho-communists"? There is nothing
> about them that is anarchists, they are just commies that are unhappy that it is
> not a communist country. They do not want anarchy because it is a completely lawless
> society (pirating, homesteaders or wild west as examples of anarchy).
I'm well aware of what Antifa is doing more so than you.
>> I'm not upset you would call me a Marxist. I just called it a reach because the
>> context of that conversation had very little do with economics. Thats the part
>> didn't understand. Other than you feeling the need to call me a Marxist and felt
>> it was the appropriate opportunity. Which is fine being called a Marxist doesn't
>> trigger me the same way the word "bigot", "racist" "______phobe" do you.
> Those words do not trigger me because idiots throw them about without understanding
> the meaning behind them, what offends me is the stupidity of people that cheapen
> those words or purposely try to change their meanings (ex power + privilege = racism).
OOOO tell me does the "ex" stand for white? Say what you mean coward.