"negative peace "

cringe and/or lame

who were they doing it for, an-crap?

cringe

imagine a society not dependent on individual charity (with wealth expropriated from the working class) for improving material wellbeing.

does a ‘nice’ king justify monarchy?

deleted by creator

no. power centralized in the beaurocratic state apparatus is also oppressive. electoral politics are a sham, and democracy is impotent when the capital owning class can simply buy influence.

if 9 people vote to kill the 10th, is that just?

itt: those in the priveledged position to rely on the state for defense of self and community would rob others of the ability to enforce their bodily autonomy and community defense.

‘only the [fascist] cops should be armed’ brain worms,

enforcing the capital owning class’ monopoly of violence (against ourselves),

a negative peace at the expense of justice.

you know-- bootlickers.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism

the practice you are claiming as essential to communism is just the result of authoritarians and self-proclaimed vanguardists placing party above people in a self-perpetuating class-based heirarchy antithetical to communism (see: Marxist/leninism under Stalin)

what is generational wealth?

incredibly simplistic perspective, and intellectually dishonest; we traded monarchy for a dictatorship of the capital owning class.

reactionary recuperation of revolutionary aesthetic-- shallow, reductive simulacrum of class analysis, stripped of systemic critique, intersectionality, and radical solidarity.

conservative pandering. lame af.

scrub the influencer brainworms from your gray matter for one moment and produce a critical thought–

engagement with what, exactly?

the signal which carries no message is white noise.

meaningless engagement is distraction, wasted bandwidth.

an emoji is not a meaningful improvement to the material condition of the working class, or a threat to the status quo. It’s not even relevant to the abolition of work.

thank goodness internet tough guys exist to defend limp-dick slacktivism.

hashtag resist

like and subscribe 👍

petitioning for a fucking emoji epitomizes the criticism that social media is a vehicle for diverting action into impotent dialogue.

since we’re on the subject

retributive violence against individual actors is not the same as dismantling oppressive systems, and should not eclipse the important work of creating resilient communities and networks of mutual aid to replace those heirarchies.

this is news?

we don’t need to acknowledge or address the efforts of those acting in bad-faith to delegitmize egalitarian leftist philosophy.

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. Jean-Paul Sartre”

but have you considered putting the right smart guy in charge?

lhd suggests otherwise, yank.