The best? We survive off of imperialism and produce essentially nothing ourselves.
By the best do you mean the best leaches? Because last I checked the form of capitalism china has at least produces stuff lmao.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Your ignorance of economics is absolutely staggering. Read a book, for Christ's sake.
Here: plain English even a commie can understand.
Basic neo-liberal economics?
How about you read das kapital- part one.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf
it has a bit under 600 pages. If you finish it, you can start on the others :)
No, just OBJECTIVE analysis. It's actually hilarious how retarded socialism can be.
can you even define socialism?
really? my books prove how capitalism must always collapse due to the internal contradictions within it.
There is no contradiction. Capitalism is not a system, any more than not damming a river is a system. It's the natural order.
its a natural order? What's natural about private property rights, they have never existed without a government and most of society before capitalists military-lead domination was gift, feudalistic, and medieval socialist economies.
I can see why you'd think that.
You know that phrase "possession is nine tenths of the law"? That's what I'm talking about, in a pragmatic sense.
You probably reject pragmatism, and that's your right, but it won't get you far to do so.
"Your ignorance of economics is absolutely staggering. Read a book, for Christ's sake."
your the one who claims you don't have to learn about any economic system.
https://espressostalinist.com/u-s-imperialism-page/
here is a nice list of dictators the United States has backed to secure resources. It also includes countries we have bombed and countries we have tried to assassinate leaders in.
hint: Its a lot
The book isn't about one economic system, dummy. It's about the universal principles of economics that apply to any economy.
let me guess, it thinks human nature is fixed?
Let me guess, your use of "it" is meant to be condescending.
That's not how you do it, you fucking diva cup bitch!
Human nature is evolved, so it can obviously change with further evolution. But you're probably a social constructionist cunt, who thinks everything is society. You're retarded to deny that human nature comes, in part, from nature.
also the it was referring to the book, not the author. I really don't care though and I'm fine with it being both lmao
Haha
The human nature that comes from nature is the need for social interaction and validation and the need for food water and shelter. Everything else is built on top of that and is entirely a social construct, mainly being forced on through social interaction and validation.
You're entitled to your dogma, even if it contradicts knowledge.
you ever here of the internal contradictions of capital accumulation?
Internal_contradictions_of_capital_accumulation
how about imperalism the highest stage of capitalism?
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/
Hint: it can't be revisionist as you claim, it was written as it was happening.
I have no problem with imperialism. Western culture is the best. Fuck all the rest.
that means when the time comes for roles to reverse we will slaughter you mercilessly.
Um, no. What did I just say? Western culture is the best, meaning it won't be defeated.
The account is pretty clear on this. How much of the world speaks English?
What's the world reserve currency? Remind me.
karl marx was one of the founders of sociology.
Figures, sociology is bullshit.
yet he predicted much of modern society, hundreds of years later.
Nietzsche predicted much more accurately, and he hated socialism.