I want to debate someone.

[rednoise]

Don't know about what or with who, though.

[Testycalibrated]

I will do it.

[Pingu]

I thought you had school work to do, rednoise?

[AllRightMeow]

Topic: Worst poster on the forum

[ksen]

AllRightMeow is the worst poster on the forum.

I will take the affirmative.

[rednoise]

I thought you had school work to do, rednoise?

it was hairy for about a week because of some stuff that happened with work, but i got it sorted now.

[Old Dan]

AllRightMeow is the worst poster on the forum.

I will take the affirmative.

I reckon I might be able to give ya a run fer yer money, there, kson.

[ksen]

As the worst poster on the forum?

You might have me there.

[AllRightMeow]

AllRightMeow is the worst poster on the forum.

I will take the affirmative.

I'm not sure you're qualified to judge.

[Old Dan]

As the worst poster on the forum?

You might have me there.

Hot dog, I done won a debate on TR! yee haw

[ksen]

I'm not sure you're qualified to judge.

And this is why you're the worst poster on the forum.

I rest my case.

[Testycalibrated]

vote

[Requiem]

Don't know about what or with who, though.

Let's have a real old style marxists debate.

The Terror is a necessary component of revolutionary logic. I will propose:

Eat the rich.

Your response?

[AllRightMeow]

And this is why you're the worst poster on the forum.

I rest my case.

Best ironic argument ever

[rednoise]

Let's have a real old style marxists debate.

The Terror is a necessary component of revolutionary logic. I will propose:

Eat the rich.

Your response?

well, i agree, so

[ffejrxx]

its not much of a debate when we all agree on the same topic

[Non-Euclidean SlapBracelet]

You should debate what you should debate.

[Autonemesis]

You should debate whether to debate and decide you shouldn't and then kill yourselves.

[Requiem]

well, i agree, so

Ahh, but, perhaps you agree from a perspective of bourgeois jealousy, maybe you secretly covet gaudy lawn ornaments and philipino house slaves.

How do I know that you don't want to eat the rich out of a twisted fascist ritualistic lust, born out of your true ideological subjection to the great man narrative and a repressed commodification of human flesh?

[Requiem]

Okay here's a better one. Let's debate liberalism.

Something like Liberals/Liberalism will be the death of us.

I can imagine taking a stand for or against.

[rednoise]

Ahh, but, perhaps you agree from a perspective of bourgeois jealousy, maybe you secretly covet gaudy lawn ornaments and philipino house slaves.

How do I know that you don't want to eat the rich out of a twisted fascist ritualistic lust, born out of your true ideological subjection to the great man narrative and a repressed commodification of human flesh?

nah. so, i'm not going to go through the whole historical materialism thing because i'm unsure if it's actually altogether accurate. but suffice to say, if you're going to subordinate a class to your own, especially if your main goal is to snuff out that class (and the concept of "class" at all), then some amount of terror is going to be needed. this doesn't necessarily have to come from jealousy, although that certainly might play a bit, but rather it can come from a desire for independent emancipation.

here's the split, though: if you come at it from a place of jealousy, then i don't think it's going to be a very humanist revolution. it'll just be murderous and will probably even turn dictatorial, throwing power behind one or two autocrats. i think capitalism actually breeds jealousy among the working class, which is partly what drives things like aspirationalism. despite the claim of being a "christian" system by some people, it actually makes people covet objects that others have. and from there, it goes.

so, when the working class is given to jealousy, because that's what they are more or less taught by capitalism (and then they're derided for it by those who seek to uphold capital, ironically), and a revolution happens but not a social revolution also, then it can get needlessly terroristic and murderous with little chance of being salvaged.

on the other hand! i think if your revolution takes on a primarily emancipatory character, then you're not concerned with -- necessarily, though you could be still -- things like jealousy or "getting back" at the capitalist class. your focus is on liberation, and not revenge. the terror that would be involved in this revolution might take on a softer and more merciful character, perhaps. the Paris Commune was an example of an emancipatory revolution, while Lenin's revolution took on a more jealous character, trying to constantly beat the capitalist states rather than seek to truly emancipate them.

anyway. that may be all bullshit. probably is. but the tl;dr: i think "terror" can take on different forms, but it will always be necessary in a revolution. i also think, in the beginning, the working class should take a defensive stance. work refusals, mass rent and loan strikes, etc. if the capitalist state decides not to negotiate a transition to a workers state peacefully, and decides instead to use the army, national guard, etc., to protect private property, then the working class would defend itself and its holdings (while hopefully socializing all holdings in the process) against the capitalist state and eventually subordinate the capitalist class through any means it needs to do so. that's my revolutionary dream.

[AllRightMeow]

Debate sugarhitman on why he should kill himself

[rednoise]

Okay here's a better one. Let's debate liberalism.

Something like Liberals/Liberalism will be the death of us.

I can imagine taking a stand for or against.

yeah, i can see both sides of it, though i'm not sure i'd be up to arguing either. i used to have a visceral hatred for liberals, but now i'm in a solid state of "not giving a shit".

[Pingu]

You need a debate, urgently, then!

There must still be something you give a shit about?

How about: "Nihilism is doomed to fail under the weight of its own internal contradictions"

[rednoise]

i don't care about nihilism