Karl Marx_sl said:
Well I'm not the one appealing to Marx as the cannonical socialist. Really if anyone deserves that honor (and really no one does) I think it easily goes to Bakunin.
lol
Yeah. Uh. Huh. I was using a rhetorical device that went right past your fucking head.
So superficial you've spent an entire evening trying to insulate and innoculate your entire ideology against it through denialism and revisionism.
Because there is no such thing as an absence of capital relations. There is no such thing as a society where exchange values aren't denoted through currencies, and there is no such thing as a society in which someone, somewhere, can't accrue a tiny bit more than someone else. Or a lot more. Fucking markets are OUTRIGHT BANNED in fucking North Korea. By LAW. You can have you, and 3 generations of your ENTIRE FAMILY locked away in a gulag for engaging in TRADE, and yet people do it. And make BANK running the gauntlet between No Ko and China to smuggle goods, foods, etc. in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_(general)
Derp.
So now Mao's writings, teachings, entire political philosophy, operating framework, etc. are excluded from his content of thought because, well, because Mikhail said so.
No, the way an idiot approaches a problem is telling themselves that taxonomy doesn't have to do with classification, and that entire treatises thousands of pages long don't count as content of thought of major socialist authors because the idiot said so.
More like, they don't exist, that's why you can't name them.
Coming from the guy who has spent an entire night telling us to IGNORE MAOS OWN WORDS over Mikhail's OPINIONS and DESIRES its pretty goddamn laughable the levels of projection you exude.
See Dumar? Mikhail doesn't think Marx defines Marxism. He's not a "canonical figure" in socialist theory.
More projection I see. You've argued the entire night to ignore Marx. You literally can't stop contradicting yourself.
Aww poor wittle Bakunin, so ignored by the main stream Communists
No retard, try to keep up. I was talking about your proposed socialist criticisms of capitalism. Jesus you're thick.
Ok. That's not what capital relations are. If you don't know what the terms I'm using mean, you should ask rather than wasting hours of my time.
Right. You can classify things by what they're called (which is pretty circular and not really informative) or you can classify things by certain necessary features. One way is retarded and the other is correct. Figure it out.
They're excluded from the realm of socialism because they violate necessary constraints. We can talk about whether I've correctly identified those constraints, but you don't even seem to be familiar with the basic terminology.
Taxonomy DOES have to do with classification, specifically RATIONAL classification that's based on features (and not labels).
Yeah you're right, how could I possibly point issues like, for example, indoctrination or ignorance. Nope. You're right. There's absolutely no problem with just appealing to popular usage of a label and calling it a day. Holy fuck you're dumb.
No retard. I've been telling you to ignore mao's own labels and to apply a rational standard to see if those labels actually make sense. A rational standard ISN'T what did they call themselves. That's fucking retarded.
Ok. Now you're just being an idiot on purpose. You're just flat out trolling. Good bye, dipshit.
And you've been saying that you can't do that. But then you just did. But you're just trolling so the source of that inconsistency is obvious.
Disagree. Star Wars is a lot like communism. CHICKEN AND EGG ARABRO.
Because satisfaction with your job is exclusive to Marxist dogma. Because people today don't work because they enjoy working. I mean literally no one goes to college and gets an education because they desire to have a career. That never happens, right?
I fully understand that Marx proposed that under proper Communist distribution, every worker would be happy and would choose to engage in activities they enjoy simply for the sake of doing so. That isn't realistic, division of labor and specialization developed for a reason in human society, and when you're doing something you love, people don't perceive it as work anyway. Its an argument without a point. People will not undertake labor like working in a fucking factory for 8 hours sweating to make fucking plastic dildos for export to the West of their own free will, ever.
Literally all he has left is trying to pretend he's lost other people and insult their intelligence. Its pathetic.
Notice how Dumar and Mikhail constantly try to claim authority on defining every term, and they always exclusively attempt to define the terminology on extremely thin grounds which allow them to pretend absolutely no criticism is valid?
Certain necessary features like holding a Revolution of the Proletariat, nationalizing industries and turning them over to the proletariat, writing entire treatises on their political theory, basing entire nations on these ideas.
So 75 million dead in Russia, not a feature. But fantastical notions of perfection. Feature. Gotcha.
Those restraints are only considered necessary now, after the fact, as a result of watching the results of not having those restraints in place. Its a pretty weak argument you got there, dipshit.
Says the guy who doesn't even know what the dialectic is.
Right, so rational classification = No one is a communist unless they get Mikhail and Dumar's specific approval before hand
Popular definitions exist for a reason. Sorry you wish you could rewrite the whole world to fit your specific definitions so everything would fit neatly in your little box and you could ignore the literal piles of bodies your ideology has resting at its feet, its not gonna happen though.
So a rational standard is to completely ignore Mao's writings, his actions in his life, his life history, his operating paradigm, and to just take all the Communist apologists word for it that none of these other people were REALLY Communists, no. But you? Oh you know how to make this revolution happen RIGHT this time. Just trust you. Right?
I accept your admission that you are wrong and laugh in your face.
No, I said Marxist Dialectic was the accepted catch all term for socialism in an academic context. Everything else has been your butthurt and mad at how wrong you are.
And Marxism isn't socialism because you said so. Right?
Egg evolved something like I can't even remember how many millions of years before the chicken ever appeared, actually.
Thin grounds? I'm not defining any term. I'm showing you what the literature says, from the guy who wrote it. Other authors have defined socialism and even communism differently. You're free to read them, criticize them, and whatever else all you want. I can claim a communist nation is one of farm animals with pigs in charge, then write about it. But that's not what Marx literature says.
