HOME | DD
Party9999999 β YCL Fight the Rich
#ameirca #american #anti #antiwar #army #britain #british #capitalism #capitalist #communism #communist #cpb #debs #donald #east #empire #fight #great #imperialism #imperialist #iran #iranian #kingdom #labor #labour #league #left #leftist #leninism #leninist #marxism #marxist #middle #military #movement #oil #party #political #politics #poster #president #revolution #revolutionary #socialism #socialist #states #struggle #trump #united #us #usa #victor #war #wing #ycl #young #eugenen #cpgb #v #yclbritain #yclb #cpbritain #persia #propaganda
Published: 2020-01-08 00:58:15 +0000 UTC; Views: 3622; Favourites: 41; Downloads: 6
Redirect to original
Description
To quote the great American Socialist Eugene V. Debs: "Let the capitalists do their own fighting and furnish their own corpses and there will never be another war on the face of the earth."ΒRelated content
Comments: 57
AmoralisticCommunist and Marxist don't care if the poor don't want to fight. They'll be forced to fight the communists' war, just like Stalin forced a good chunk of the Russian population to fight in WWII. Unlike Stalin, however, modern communists don't have a leg to stand on regarding forcing the poor to fight the rich on their behalf. Stalin was trying to force the Nazis out of his country, modern communists want to try to force people who work harder than them out of the country.
π: 0 β©: 1
I grew up in a middle class home, but I willingly became a traitor to my class because I believe every human being has a right to live with dignity.
As long as the rich can profit off of wars there will be no peace and they will still send the sons and daughters of the working class to shed their blood for their profit.Β Β
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Dont believe in the greedy capitalism and their bourgeois governments. The whole world would be destroyed but these rich leaders and parasites already have super nice luxurious safe life and mansions.
My parents worked very hard in factory for 20 years, now they are near retirement with nothing! Working people should stand up, protest, revolution and unite everywhere on the earth. From Hong Kong.
π: 0 β©: 1
I am sorry to hear that comrade π
Hong Kong unsurprisingly has one of the highest gaps of income inequality in the world.Β While the rich there live in penthouses and such, the poor are subjected to living in squalor of small rooms no more the size 3 to 5 meters long.Β Not to mention they have people lying cages (this is common among the elderly) as their homes and the UN and Anmesty International called it an affront to human rights (which is is).
I come from a middle class family and live in comfort. But I willfully betrayed my class ot origin because I believe every human being has a right to live with food, shelter, and the resources they need to prosper.Β Communism aims to build a society where we all share in the fruits of our labor and where we do not have to fight each other for scraps of the table of the wealthy!
π: 0 β©: 0
*Implying that only capitalists wage war.
May I introduce you to the Soviet Union, komrade?
π: 1 β©: 1
"Fight the rich" does imply that socialists will fight a war too, just not for the interests of the rich but for the interests of the people. The Soviet Union fought monarchists, fascists, and capitalists in defense of the workers of the world against such reactionary powers that seek only to keep everyone poor while those at the top get rich
π: 0 β©: 2
USSR was never communist. It was degenerated "workers" state, which had one-party dictatorship and Russian imperialism. Stalinist China and Stalinist Russia fought in Black river because the interests of the bourgeois ruling class.
π: 0 β©: 1
The USSR was never communist, that is the historical stage after socialism which can only be achieved once socialist governments are achieved all across humanity, but it was a socialist state. I used to be a Trotskyist who believed the USSR was an evil dictatorship but it was in fact a democracy even if it may have been flawed in some respects, just like how Western democracy are flawed by capitalist corruption. Pure democracy can never be achieved unless the entire world is united by socialist governments, eliminating the influence of money and the bourgeoisie, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't give imperfect socialist states our support. The USSR and Maoist China may have made some mistakes, but their successes greatly outweigh those errors and neoliberalism which has decimated the welfare of Western Europe would never had arisen if the Russia and China stayed true to the cause of socialism.
π: 0 β©: 0
I was about to ask you to explain how the poor benefited under the Soviet Union and Maoist China, but then I realized that you'd pull a No True Scotsman fallacy again.
A world where everyone is the worker means there's no leadership, no government. We have a word for that: Anarchy. Implying that "everyone secretly wants to depose the capitalists and make a worker's utopia" also implies three things: (1) That everyone has an identical mindset and thus wants the exact same thing, therefore hive mind mentality. (2) That everyone wants to sacrifice individuality for the sake of the collective, something that no sane person would do, unless they WANT a lower quality of life (but hey, muh revolution). (3) That mere mortals can create a utopia in the first place.
π: 1 β©: 2
There is no need to pull a "No True Scotsman fallacy" because I am not denying that the Soviet Union or Maoist China were socialist, they clearly were. They also both had clear successes, from defeating Nazi Germany, to launching the first man and woman into space, to bringing about gender equality for over a billion people, to supporting anti-colonial freedom for the oppressed peoples of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, etc, etc, etc. That does not mean that they were perfect utopias, nothing is an utopia and they were both greatly sabotaged by capitalist nations, but they were better than the capitalist powers which continued to oppress billions for the sake of giving a few wealthy CEOs more wealth than they could ever hope for.
Socialism is just a stage in human development, and is more efficient than capitalism because it expands democracy from being limited to the governmental sector to also include businesses as well. Capitalist democracy is not true democracy because corruption allows for politicians to be bribed against the will of the people. If however all corporations and businesses were under the control of the workers and all their assets able to be controlled by a voting then we would have a true democracy which works in the best interests of the people, not wealthy elites.Β
Socialism only helps to expand freedoms and individuality for the people because under capitalism you are greatly limited in what you can do your amount of money. Capitalists like Jeff Bezos gain their money not by working hard but by forcing others to work for them and deceiving their investors to claim up to the top of the capitalist pyramid. Socialism is undeniably a more moral system than capitalism ever could be and the main reason that we didn't achieve full communism in the past was because of limits in technology that impeded mass coordination of the economy. Now that we have computers and the Internet the ability to achieve a socialist system that will be much better than the current capitalist system is within our grasp and the only thing standing in the way are the few thousand billionaires trying to keep all the wealth for themselves.
π: 0 β©: 0
You are very cleverly replacing concepts. A world without capitalists is not a world without leaders. Just under socialism, everyone gets paid in accordance with the labor invested. And the director of the plant gets more than a cleaner. As long as he is the director of the plant. And the second one. No one sacrifices individuality when working in the public interest. These things are in different planes. You confuse individuality and selfishness.
π: 0 β©: 0
I grew up in a military family and over the course of my life, I've developed a deep respect for those who put on the uniform and risk their lives for our country. But I don't think any of them know what our country stands for anymore. The higher-ups send our mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives, and children to some back-water country that's only real value is the resources it holds and fight insurgents defending their home from invaders: when I was a kid, only the bad guys did the invading.
The only real winners in war are the corporations that manufacture the guns, ammunition, armor, and equipment that's needed to ready our soldiers and the executives are in their mansions sipping booze that costs more than what their employees make with an expensive hooker in their lap while they watch CNN and Fox News to see our soldiers die for theirΒ cause.
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
Oddly Back then the rich funding communist to be in power in the first place, so your saying your betray your master then?
π: 0 β©: 4
You didn't even know what the world means.
π: 0 β©: 0
Not really true at all.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
m.youtube.com/watch?v=cAUSNNF6β¦
π: 0 β©: 2
The Bolsheviks had a few wealthy supporters, that's not the same as the whole bourgeois supporting them as a class.
π: 0 β©: 1
Considering he had the imperial german government supporting him to start this revolution, sounds pretty much like he did...
But okay tumor...
π: 0 β©: 1
No they didn't. In fact the German Empire came close to destroying Soviet Russia within months of the revolution.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's not what history says...
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimβ¦
If any thing Lenin did exactly what they wanted him to do...
π: 0 β©: 1
Actually it is what history said:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operatioβ¦
And then the German forced the extremely harshΒ Treaty of Brest-Litovsk on Soviet Russia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_oβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Dosen't change the fact lenin was a servant of the Kaiser...Β
m.youtube.com/watch?v=g3HxNBvVβ¦
But okay Tumor...
π: 0 β©: 1
That isn't a fact, it's an outright lie and no number shitty youtube videos changes that.
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay tumor.
www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.coβ¦
Wait you mean like your shitty simpsons memes?
π: 0 β©: 0
it's true, look that up.
π: 0 β©: 1
the proof of burden lies with you, not me.
π: 0 β©: 1
Guess you didn't look it up, I'll remember that.
π: 0 β©: 1
Again, the proof of burden lies with you, not me. If you want to convince me, show me yourself
π: 0 β©: 0
Whichever ones he deems to be the "wrong" ones...or just anyone who makes more than 50k a year
π: 0 β©: 1
And who is this person that has the unelected authority to determine the "Wrongs" ones, and to fight someone who may be making their fortunes by the sweat and grit of their own committed hard work? Like my uncle for instance, who is a millionaire.
Sounds like laziness and jealousy to me.
π: 0 β©: 1
Your uncle's a millionaire?
π: 0 β©: 1
Self made. Business owner.
You didn't answer my question.
π: 0 β©: 1
What business does he own?
I don't know, but I garantee you he/she will be elected into office by crooked means
π: 0 β©: 1
Hobbies and remote control vehicles; formerly refurbishing exotic vehicles and a computer store before then.
And how do you know this person will be elected into office via crooked means? Has it occurred to you that some people succeed because they put in the time and commitment, or is everyone rich a villain just because they're rich and you're not?
π: 0 β©: 1
Because that's typically how people get into positions of power: by greasing enough palms and knowing the right people.Β
And yes, it has occured to me. When did I say that I think every rich guy is evil?
π: 0 β©: 1
"Typical" is not "All.
I find it interesting that you replied to my inquiry when the inquiry was not directed towards you; giving me reasonable right to assume that you either follow the same line of thinking as the person I inquired too, or you feel yourself to be relevant enough to reply on either his behalf or to inject yourself without first portraying a purpose to do so.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, but it is the norm
It's the internet, everyone has the right to voice their opinions...most of the time. Why, do you not prefer for me to reply to you?
π: 0 β©: 1
Who decided it's the norm?
I answered your question with every basis of my assumption.
I don't know you to know if I want your opinion, and since the question was not directed at you, why did you reply?
π: 0 β©: 2
When people don't care enough to want to change anything, and just let people in power, like now, it becomes the norm.
I was only giving an opinion. You don't like it, just block it. You don't have to try and dssect it to find some hidden, insidious meaning.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's people, and the lack of people action doesn't make it the norm; it makes it commonplace, but not automatically normal.
Heterosexuality is normal because procreation is biological law.
Homosexuality is common because homosexual relationship are common place in society.
I'm not going to block it, you're entitled to have an opinion, but involving yourself where you were not invited is rude.
π: 0 β©: 0
Who decided that a stone falls from top to bottom? This is the law. The rich either makes meanness or ceases to be rich. And the amount of work is not affected. Have you turned a hobby into money? Well done. But this is only possible where there is an excess of money. In fact, you eat delicacies from the table of those who are really rich, and you think that you eat at a rich table. How many more hours a day do you have to work to get like the Rothschilds? By your logic, does a poor coffee picker work less than you?
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>