Mikhail and Hodj's Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
You're literally so stupid you think an argument about the proper approach to taxonomy is has to do with intentions vs. results. I literally don't know what to say. What can men do against such reckless stupidity?
Click to expand...
Look at all that mad.

Again, they want to be held accountable solely to their intentions, and never their actions, or results.

The only accountability for results is when you're dead, and you've left 10 million dead in your wake, then they get to pretend they never knew you.

Communists, truly the scummiest bunch of low life, spineless weasels on the planet. And they demand we trust them as they ruin society with their failed experiments over and over again, how dare we hold them accountable. We're SO STUPID, we could never comprehend the GREATNESS of their BRILLIANCE!
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Who are you to say your interpretation of Communism is the only and correct one?
Click to expand...
I would love to have a debate about what the proper interpretation of socialism is. All I've gotten in response are a bunch of appeals to authority (and labels). I've given when I think a reasonable guideline based on my understanding of the fundamental claims of socialism. Like I was really hoping someone might troll Dumar into having that discussion with me because you guys aren't interested in ANY line of thought that doesn't end up with "socialism always leads to Pol Pot."
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,093
172,304
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
I would love to have a debate about what the proper interpretation of socialism is. All I've gotten in response are a bunch of appeals to authority (and labels). I've given when I think a reasonable guideline based on my understanding of the fundamental claims of socialism. Like I was really hoping someone might troll Dumar into having that discussion with me because you guys aren't interested in ANY line of thought that doesn't end up with "socialism always leads to Pol Pot."
Click to expand...
That's true. It also leads to Mao, Kim Jong Un and Stalin.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Like I said before I can see communism becoming how human society finally becomes but only after some major technological breakthroughs, essentially a new means of energy and the singularity.

Mik ignored that and said Cataloni and UFT were awesome places.
Click to expand...
1. The singularity is just a new age cult of bullshit.
2. I didn't say they were (lulz) "awesome places." I said that they were examples of an (actual) socialist society being implement and, I would argue, that for the time they were allowed to exist by the military powers surrounding them, they did quite well economically.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
I would love to have a debate about what the proper interpretation of socialism is. All I've gotten in response are a bunch of appeals to authority (and labels). I've given when I think a reasonable guideline based on my understanding of the fundamental claims of socialism. Like I was really hoping someone might troll Dumar into having that discussion with me because you guys aren't interested in ANY line of thought that doesn't end up with "socialism always leads to Pol Pot."
Click to expand...
Then Marx is the only true one by that statement since every idea is taken and changed even slightly to better suit the needs of those using it.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
1. The singularity is just a new age cult of bullshit.
Click to expand...
Yes new age cult bullshit based on measurable science, not some quasi-socioeconomic philosophy dreamed up by someone that from the looks of it wasn't capable of maintaining proper hygiene.

Many men who created and inspired much of the technology you use daily would like a word with you.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Then Marx is the only true one by that statement since every idea is taken and changed even slightly to better suit the needs of those using it.
Click to expand...
Its like Christianity. The only true Christian died on the Cross. The only true Marxist died probably on the toilet in fashion similar to Elvis, but instead of being full of shit because of too much pill popping, he was just full of shit in general.

Anyway, metaphor or analogy time. Whatever.

Guy builds a school, it collapses, kills a school full of children on the bottom floor. Guy goes to the judge asks her to be lenient, all he was doing was trying to build a school, after all.

US flies a drone into Pakistan, blows up a house full of kids, US government goes to the world community tells them "Look, guys, all we're trying to do is defend freedom here. Sometimes there will be collateral damage, you know how it is."

The funniest part about this is that MIkhail and Dumar, as die hard critics of capitalist society, are the FIRST ONES to employ this type of logic towards our modern society. But they can't apply to their own.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
1. The singularity is just a new age cult of bullshit.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

Derp

One and done: Single-atom transistor is end of Moore may be beginning of quantum computing

Its happening pal. Get ready to become irrelevant as we all transcend space and time. Well, all the capitalists.

Marxists won't want to get involved with all those "manufactured experiences" I'm sure.

Hey, someone has to be the new Homo Neanderthalensis, right?

Might as well be the commies and tree huggers.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
hodj_sl said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

Derp

One and done: Single-atom transistor is end of Moore may be beginning of quantum computing

Its happening pal. Get ready to become irrelevant as we all transcend space and time. Well, all the capitalists.

Marxists won't want to get involved with all those "manufactured experiences" I'm sure.

Hey, someone has to be the new Homo Neanderthalensis, right?

Might as well be the commies and tree huggers.
Click to expand...
Let us not forget neo-feminists
 
D

Dumar_sl

shitlord
3,712
4
ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
Dumar do you think a communist society, the utopia that Marx describes is possible currently?
Click to expand...
tl;dr answer is no. On the very small scale, yes. The French communes of the 20th century come to mind. We, as in the world and society as a whole, aren't ready for it. There are things you have to fix first before you can even hope to transition to Marx's idea of communism. The concept of money as an abstraction of value has to be done away with first, as an example. Because that concept carries with it psychological and social consequences (i.e., such as describing an individual as 'worth a million dollars')

Araysar_sl said:
Dumar, do you think that MB is a poser who isnt hardcore enough?
Click to expand...
How can I hate on a fellow ....comrade?

hodj_sl said:
Also what the fuck does emanicipation of labor at its heart MEAN, and why does it MATTER when most LABOR is going to be replaced by ROBOTS long long long before Marx's vision (or Marx's NOT VISION according to Mikhail) comes true?
Click to expand...
This shows the cursory understanding, which is what I've said countless times. No offense to you personally because I have enjoyed our back and forths occasionally when you went away from the accusations of zealotry, but not knowing this is like failing Marx 101. Freedom of the individual and his labor vis a vis a capitalist looking to exploit it is the core, the entire foundation of everything that Marx wrote about. That is *why* the idea of communism even exists.
 
ZyyzYzzy

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Dumar_sl said:
tl;dr answer is no. On the very small scale, yes. The French communes of the 20th century come to mind. We, as in the world and society as a whole, aren't ready for it. There are things you have to fix first before you can even hope to transition to Marx's idea of communism. The concept of money as an abstraction of value has to be done away with first, as an example. Because that concept carries with it psychological and social consequences (i.e., such as describing an individual as 'worth a million dollars')
Click to expand...
Thank you for being honest.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
hodj_sl said:
What? No it wasn't.
Click to expand...
lol

uh huh

hodj_sl said:
Yeah no.
Click to expand...
Yeah, yeah, dipshit. Every criticism you mentions is like the most superficial bullshit ever. You have no grasp of what you're talking about.

hodj_sl said:
No, its about applying a standard metric that isn't so ideologically slender
Click to expand...
How is "the absence of capital relations is a necessary condition of socialism" ideologically sleder. Try to defend that shit you fucking moron. I dare you.

hodj_sl said:
Literally everything I've applied has been what would be considered a standard metric in any other scenario. Was the person prolifically known in their field? Yes. Did they lead a large movement that labeled itself in a certain way? Yes. Did that person claim they were X? Yes.
Click to expand...
So basically for you taxonomy is claims and labels. Nothing to do with the actual content of their thought. Well great, but that's how a fucking idiot approaches that problem. The problems with that sort of approach are, frankly, too innumerable to list. But really, I don't think you even believe that bullshit. I think you just know that's what you have to say in order to reach the conclusion you started with. You will literally say anything, no matter how fucking stupid it is.

hodj_sl said:
You're the one coming up with absurd metrics that literally no one but Dumar agrees should be applied
Click to expand...
So I know you didn't actually read it, but Dumar's quote about Marx is essentially just a restating of my standard. Personally, I don't identify with Marx, but you seem to think he represents some kind of cannonical figure. Why are you suddenly simply content to ignore what Marx actually thinks as a guide to what socialism means?
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
This shows the cursory understanding, which is what I've said countless times. No offense to you personally because I have enjoyed our back and forths occasionally when you went away from the accusations of zealotry, but not knowing this is like failing Marx 101.
Click to expand...
I know what it means, I was being FACETIOUS to illustrate that its an ABSURD NOTION that it is no longer a relevant concept from which to attempt to organize society.

Labor is going to be a non existant factor long before it becomes a relevant factor in a major future communist revolution of the proletariat versus the wealthy.

The point is simply that you're arguing 18th century bullshit politics in the 21st fucking century bro. Your entire paradigm is outdated. Has been since the 1960s.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
hodj_sl said:
But of course, if Capitalists are starving people, sending them to gulags, slaughtering them in the street, letting them starve to death in the homes during the North American winter, wellthen its clearly all Capitalism's fault
Click to expand...
Gulags, no. Slaughtering on the streets, no. Letting them starve to death, yes. You've conflated things that can clearly be traced to necessary conditions of capitalism with things that have nothing to do with the idea. You know how you tell the difference? I'll give you a clue. It doesn't have anything to do with labels. It has to do with a rational approach to taxonomy.

hodj_sl said:
Also what the fuck does emanicipation of labor at its heart MEAN
Click to expand...
lol

Jesus...
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,093
172,304
hodj_sl said:
I know what it means, I was being FACETIOUS to illustrate that its an ABSURD NOTION that it is no longer a relevant concept from which to attempt to organize society.

Labor is going to be a non existant factor long before it becomes a relevant factor in a major future communist revolution of the proletariat versus the wealthy.

The point is simply that you're arguing 18th century bullshit politics in the 21st fucking century bro. Your entire paradigm is outdated. Has been since the 1960s.
Click to expand...

Update your paradigm, bakunin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.