Not sure why you’re being downvoted. The Soviet Union was indeed shit at being a country. Because it wasn’t a fucking country.
Your educational level on this subject is as embarrassing as your trolling ability. If you can’t do better than this then giving up maybe your best option in life.
This has to be satire. Of all the uneducated and simplistic of shitlib takes this must be the most uneducated and simplistic of shitlib takes that could be posted on a leftist sub.
If you haven’t taken the time to educate yourself on Marxism and DiaMat then all you have is the idealist liberalism, the ideology of capitalism, that’s been shoveled down your throat all day every day since birth. It’s not an education. You should know this, be humbled by it, and educate yourself fully and completely on matters outside that perspective. It’s the opposite of pushing Jon Stewart shitlib takes into public platforms.
Don’t know shit? Don’t post shit. Educate yourself instead. And no education comes quickly or easily.
There’s nothing useful about someone if they allow the lib audience a distraction from ever having to fundamentally think about stuff differently
We deserve better than Noam Chomsky.
Be prepared for disinterested and privileged liberals to dismiss this outright as either “exaggerated,” “the failure of individuals,” or “a terrible but ultimately good and necessary cost for the expansion of freedom and prosperity in the world.”
“Acceptable” was probably a poor choice of words there. OP was just saying at an earlier point in time liberals understood gambling was bad and exploitative but have shifted, as expected, to an even less-acceptable take.
Holy shit those comments are abysmal
Literally page 2 explains the sole function of the state as a tool of oppression for the purpose of serving class interests and its existence is evidence of the existence of class antagonisms.
No way you read that, understand it, and then make a comment like what’s displayed here.
There are some great answers here. But the fundamental piece to remember is that you’re not ultimately responsible for someone’s inability to comprehend an evidence-based analysis.
Not saying this applies here directly since I haven’t watched the video but it’s something to always keep in mind: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge’s_law_of_headlines
What’s the “same music beat” for October? Doesn’t everyone just listen to The Misfits every October?
Tl;Dr? Class is not about income demographics, which is imprecise and subjective. It is about a relationship, specifically a relationship to the means of production
Surely there are more accurate and descriptive terms to use for the range of possible outcomes other than “cancelled” which is a contemporary, ill-defined, and temporary term to encompass a wide range of circumstances.
It’s also based in arrogance in that it assumes the person being “cancelled” somehow has a permanent entitlement to their position or title, that regardless of their behavior the market owes them a permanent place and recognition. This is bourgeois nonsense.
Censorship, market conditions, silencing, etc. are far better descriptors of most circumstances where “cancelled” is used.
They’re just voting on how you behave.
One of his best talks. Very informative on the genocide perpetrated by the US government in Yugoslavia.
When I try to recreate this one that site I see “Jackson Hinkle.” Ant idea why it doesn’t match?