Tucker Carlson’s interview with the activist revealed the mainstream right is being flooded by extremism – and it’s now impossible to contain

  • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    Brother you literally cited capitalist realism like it supports your claim when the guy who coined the term was a LITERAL SOCIALIST HIMSELF. You’re not educated about anything.

    Other economic systems fell as a result of contradictions between classes. The roman empire fell because there were no lands left to pillage and no slaves left to misuse. Feudalism fell because the peasants wanted to be free labourers and the lords wanted money and not agricultural products. Capitalism WILL fall because there are contradictions between who owns the means of production and those who are subject to it. This contradiction is being accelerated by climate change and the global south is experiencing the brunt of this.

    Shut the fuck up and do some reading

    You don’t even know what the term idealism is😂🫵. You think I’m using it to call a system great or something. You’re a halfwit!

    • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Have you read capitalist realism? The guy killed himself because he placed all his hopes that it wasn’t the case. Literally read a fucking book.

    • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Capitalism falls to what? What replaces the system? Technofeudalism?

      You are so propagandized you have no idea what I said, the type of system does not matter in so far as it is a dominance hierarchy.

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Capitalism falls to whatever solves the contradictions between the working class and the owners of capital. Most likely some form of socialism

        Your dominance hierarchy has nothing to do with this. The working class has the revolutionary potential, so it is necessarily the working class who will seize the means of production and we end up with socialism. That is Marxism in a nutshell

        • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Vulgar Marxism, and history has already shown the masses are an inertial force. The ideal circumstances for socialism was last century, only dominance hierarchies formed.

          Ideological delusions to think otherwise.

          • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            No idea what you mean by dominance hierarchy pal. As far as i know, the working class has the revolutionary potential and will seize the means of production when pushed to the brink.

            Climate change is accelerating this reality

            Also what nonsense is this about the working class always being inertial? There are plenty of moments within history where the working class was in pole position to start an uprising. You’re the one ignoring history here. Occupy wall Street was literally that. Bernie Sanders fucked up the moment by being a lapdog to the democratic party

    • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It is impossible to conceive of fascism or Stalinism without propaganda – but capitalism can proceed perfectly well, in some ways better, without anyone making a case for it

      Capitalist Realism, M. Fisher.

      You didn’t read the book and yet claim you know the contents. Lol.

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        That quote undermines nothing of what I’ve said😂. You’ve taken Fisher out of context like most idiots do. The point of capitalist realism is that the ideology of anti-capitalism and capitalism sustains itself because people are led to believe so. Capitalism fails all the time, like when the market crashes, but governments bail them out because to them that’s just how it is. To them the system can’t fail because they can’t fail because they can’t envisage another outcome.

        Capitalism realism is just an extension of Marx’s theory of false consciousness. Which is when the actions of the proletariat do not align with their actual class position.

        This is why it is necessary to sensitize the working class towards socialism, otherwise, capitalism realism happens, where people convince themselves there’s no other alternative. It’s a diagnosis of a problem, but dimwit ms like you misquote Fisher.

    • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      You should probably explain what you mean, because I already stated that ideological fantasy does not determine objective reality.

      That is the exact opposite of “idealism” you dolt.

      It was explicitly outlined in Marx’s writing. The dictatorship of the proletariat. As Žižek wrote in The Sublime Object of Ideology, “ideological fantasy creates social reality.” However, that social reality does not determine objective reality, merely how we interact with it. The Marxist position of achieving class consciousness is a falsehood, it is a presupposition that ignores human nature. There is no deeper philosophical meaning, the surface is the truth, the masses are an inertial force, an object not a subject. In a deterministic universe, all we have to do is look at past results to predict future outcomes.

      A quote from my copy of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, “What is universally valid is also universally effective; what ought to be, in fact also is, and what ought to be without [actually] being, has no truth.”

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Your brand of idealism is that capitalism is unbreakable. That we’ve reached the final stage of history. This is fatalistic and therefore idealism. Go to school kid

        • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          I spelled out that it will collapse, what replaces it is eventually another dominance hierarchy if we escape extinction.

          Sorry bucko, no socialist utopia in any future.

          • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            The dominance hierarchy is one where the proletariat rules over the bourgeoisie. After that we end class altogether. You’re way out of your depth here

              • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Mate your ignorance is glaring here. There are many socialisms. There’s Marxism-Leninism which warrants a vanguard, there’s anarchism which believes in decentralisation, there’s democratic confederalism which is a fusion of the state and decentralisation. You’re so ignorant it’s not even slapstick.

                This is why you’re not intelligent. You’re wrong, but some dogma is holding you back and i don’t know what it is.

                • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  Any form of socialism is not feasible without human consciousness evolving into some kind of singularity. You’ve already contradicted yourself and betrayed the principles of Marxism by claiming the proletariat would dominate the bourgeois. If socialism is about the worker owning the means of production, there is no bourgeois class, except for the worker. In the real world, all you get is some type of authoritarian state capitalism.

                  • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    Any form of socialism is not feasible without human consciousness evolving into some kind of singularity

                    Bruh what😂.That’s just not true. The workers only need to be class conscious. That means they need to realise that they’re oppressed and must revolt. That’s all that is necessary. We’ve gotten close many times, but those opportunities have been squandered. Once again, i refer you to the Occupy Wall Street movement which started to put capitalism back into the minds of the working class.

                    by claiming the proletariat would dominate the bourgeois. If socialism is about the worker owning the means of production, there is no bourgeois class, except for the worker.

                    The bourgeoisie would be in a constant bid to reinstate itself throughout socialism. This fight not only exists within the state’s own borders, but outside of it. This is the main fight. That is what is meant by this. I don’t have quotes on hand, but I can find you specific Marx quotes if you’re adamant about it.

    • MrSmiley@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Feudalism fell to the capitalists, the only revolutionary class in world history.

      Talk about reductivist slop, it’s not wonder socialists make ideal converts to fascism.

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Bruh. That’s literally the point. Feudalism was supposed to fall into capitalism. That was the entire point. What’s your problem?