Most media is spearheaded by people who own everything, ergo antilogical and demented shit like this.

One day the masses will take everything from Steve Roth or his heirs. That is a fact of life and nothing can stop it. You can be sure that it doesn’t stop at a little wealth tax.

The thing about democracy is that every voter tends to assume that people who vote differently to them are doing democracy incorrectly, but alas, they are doing democracy flawlessly.

No matter how many requirements and spelling tests you add in front of the voting booth, no matter how many “guardrails” you implement, democracy always yields tyranny of majorities and always abolishes itself at some point.

So did Germany, the UK, the US, China, Italy, France, and virtually every other larger power.

It wasn’t “evil”, or “good”. It was a rational actor engaging in inter-state competition, just like all the other states involved.

I don’t want to paint post 1925 USSR in a good light, but wasn’t an immense number of Soviet citizens killed by the Nazis? I mean, I think it was something to the tune of 22 million last time I checked. Germany had roughly 8 million killed.

To me this smells like nationalism on Germany’s part and like an attempt to encroach on anti-war leftist and communists who might carry symbols of their movements at demonstrations, regardless if they’re Putinists/Stalinists or state-unaffiliated.

Just so people here know, it’s unlikely that this will lead to a pandemic or wider outbreak.

You gotta be careful with these levels of truth

Just as a counterexample: revolutions have been spurred on by the need to stop military conflicts and territories not advancing quickly enough relative to other countries. What you always see are demands by a section of people that evolve into movements, like that of capitalists to transform the peasant class and employ it.

Revolutions are not one-sided phenomena. They are not merely riots in the street carried out by the most impoverished. Capitalists themselves are moving beyond the demands that defined their class two hundred years ago. In the United States they are moving away from competition as a pervasive principle to very intentional centralisation. There has been a push to abandon antitrust legislation. For the individual capitalists this is needed and a logical step, but it fuels their own demise long term when it becomes a societal trend. You only need a comparatively tiny spark from below release the potential energy accrued by capital.

What you have in mind are certain narratives on the French revolution. Conversely I can ask why countries that experience famine or affordability crises don’t experience revolutions.

Oh great, Euro-nationalism. No, sorry, we are well on track to being the continued lapdog of the US and this sorry excuse of a chauvinism won’t change anything.

A stable government is not one you can overthrow.

Governments (nations) are in their nature not stable. Governments can be overthrown at any moment. It is a question of how many are willing to participate, which is not that many.

because you can’t have a communist revolution when stuff is going well

Not Lenin’s reasoning, nor is it as a statement true. Revolutions have happened exactly at points where things were looking up, take the transitions that have happened in history where monarchies were superseded by the liberal state. It is not a cyclical trend where, oh no, we have some sort of downtrend in productivity or some other sort of crisis and then the magical revolution comes to save the day. Revolutions happen because systems are forced to adopt organisational structures that satisfy (novel) needs, not because of shittiness.

While we’re at it, just yank the fucking CDC out of the meat industry. They are administrative bloat and we want to keep them borgers cheap. Thank me later

Funnily enough the Manifesto is quite regularly criticised by communists for focusing too much on the demands of the time and not moving beyond the state. It’s a pamphlet for agitation. They should have assigned you chapters from The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte or excerpts from Kapital.

I understand your criticism of the dependence on incorruptibility and decency with the current state of the world, sadly Marx’ theories on how behaviour and ideology arise are not handled in the Manifesto.

Your friend has an understandable perspective. In any case we should make sure that people don’t feel the need to use drugs in the first place. In my experience drug use is an act of desperation, even when people are sort of exploratory about it and not necessarily addicted to anything.

We should legalise all drugs.

Appealing to psychology when the root of people’s problems in this article is the economy, and more specifically societal organisation is exactly the mistake of chasing appearances without getting to the root of issues that Marx criticised.

When you are poor you become mentally ill due to poverty. When people are abused they are abused because they cannot afford to get away from people, they are abused because they are bound up in economical units like the family. When you are relatively rich or don’t have to work to survive you can afford to study phenomena in their isolation detached from the material realities that people face, you are able to psychologise and cut off science as a method of exposing causalities off at a specific point where you create cordoned off areas like physics, economy, biology, maths, engineering, an so on.

Communism may not primarily be a science in the way you think as it is a form of societal organisation, but communism is built on satisfying needs and therefore doesn’t deal with abstractions such as money and debt or phenomena understood to be internal when we can show that they are not. Communism is the society that gets together and consciously plans like an organism would in a concrete way that gets to the essence of things, i.e. is radical. As a result of this its study is inherently bound to a close pursuit of science.

But come at me again with your history when company towns make a comeback due to the shit housing market and you survive to work fulfilling the needs that are not yours, spending ten hours a day working a monotonous profession, two getting to and from work, another two for chores and maybe one hour of quality time and another hour for consuming a piece of media of your choice.

This is as real as it gets. Your psychology has psychoanalysts admitting that their work isn’t within the realm of science and your neurology can’t grapple with the fact that most research on consciousness, upon which a stupid amount of bioethics and therefore medical practice hinges, is not falsifiable.

This should be your call to read communist theory. Education should be about learning and creating knowledge, not cramming and being put off from pursuing your passsions!

Halp, I do not understand

This is totally not going to earn you the distrust of the majority.

I want to found literally anything.

Step 1: already be rich.

Now that this is settled, startups (or any company for that matter) require significant up-front capital. The gate is creating a company and not the point where a company fails. Most of the time lots of funds or not companies going to the dogs will just be liquidated instead of resuscitated.