Why do communist love acting like Aristocracy and Bourgeosue are the same thing despite them being entirely opposed and the Rich having more in common with peasants than Aristois?
>>18251517>Why do communist love acting like Aristocracy and Bourgeosue are the same thing despite *retarded opinion with no reasoning*Great post op. It's because they're both oppressors, just with slightly different justification.
>>18251522>oppressorsAt the end of the day you just hate your dad
>>18252605Nta, but peak projection. Loving autocracy and daddy issues go hand in hand.
>>18251517They don't think it's the same thing, but they view the bourgeoisie as a step in the natural progression where the "working class" will depose them on the same grounds as they deposed the aristocracy and thus seize power over the means of production, culture, etc.This is actually the fundamental flaw of socialism if you skip the details and logistics of it altogether. That it's a fan fiction of the French Revolution with no actual tangible basis in history or reality and where its followers imagine themselves as oppressed revolutionary subjects like the French liberals.
>>18251517communists and socialists believe in universal humanity. being poor is not a lifestyle and given the chance no one would live as a poor person.
>Poverty is not socialism. To be rich is glorious.Deng Xiaoping
>>18251517>>18252708I was sympathetic to NRx as a stupid teen due to their hatred of bourgeois class and of markets and I see myself being more and more drawn back to it as I age. A strong nation state ran by Moldbugian CEOs with protectionism and no immigration or leaving the nation is the ideal state.
>>18251517God is the one who pretends that "Bourgeosue" and "aristocracy" are the same thing, he demands that I recognize small business owners, accountants, urbanites in general (including black people) as "nobility", "better than me", " different and superior species", God is a retarded tranny who absolutely doesn't see a difference between "Bourgeosue" and "aristocracy", the only area where you have any kind of point is that he also expects me to view anyone taller or more attractive than me as "nobility", "better than me", etc, even if they're not rich, an urbanite, a white collar person or a business owner.
>>18251517>>18252850He also expects me to view anyone with more money or power than me in general as "nobility" even if they are retarded unsophisticated, loud, obnoxious, disgusting blue collar people
>>18251517Communism is merely the aristocracy realizing that the bourgeois are plain retarded and are not only wasting other people's lives but also their own
I'm not bourgeosue retard you've spent my entire life violently enforcing that I'm a peasant who only exists to be enslaved, dominated, abused etc by bourgeosue people (who you call nobility, "kings"), with anything you consider "bourgeosue" violently gatekept from me including things like instant noodles, cheetos, corn chips, salt, white bread, brown bread, fried chicken, cheeseburgers, ground beef in general, KFC, walmart popcorn chicken, hamburger helper, snickers, orange soda, etc
>>18252708>They don't think it's the same thing, but they view the bourgeoisie as a step in the natural progression where the "working class" will depose them on the same grounds as they deposed the aristocracy Marxism is actually a bourgeois phenomenon although Marxists don't like to think it is. It's a critique of bourgeois society, but it arises from within bourgeois society. However, it argues that capitalism has not lived up to the emancipatory promises of the bourgeois revolution. It presupposes a bourgeois revolution. It's only intelligible within a world that capitalism has transformed. It's historically tied to Enlightenment rationality and universal reason. It's bourgeois.
>>18252690trashy women and blacks actually despite autocracy and authority in general.
>>18251517When a family has been rich for a long time and the wealth keeps being inherited over and over, what is the difference between that and an aristocrat?
>>18253296>Marxism is actually a bourgeois phenomenon although Marxists don't like to think it isMeanwhile in reality one of Marx's main argument was that how capitalism and bourgeois society was a necessary step in human development.
>>18253314That they do not command an army like the aristocrat.
>>18251517Because they always align on the same issues. The only time their interest diverge is when there's a bourgeois "revolution" brewing. But even then they will collaborate to undermine the proleteriat. The rise of Fascism proved that the capital class will always betray pro-labor movements within their circle when they are presented with an ultimatum.Marxist literature does not focus on irrelevant details like how one group of reactionaries dislikes their king and another one group would offer their wives and daughters to their king.
>>18253314the tradition to cultivation of wisdom and martial skills. Not all of them are successful, but every aristocratic endeavor from civilisations not terminally suicidal is in some way there to teach skills fundamental to leadership that every middle manager fails to learn. Even horse riding is useful in in how directing a skittish beast gets one used to a mob of people. The english are an odd outlyer, since they've incorporated the mercantile class into the upper class at one point. Though some of the practices remained.
>>18253584Are you sure about that?>>18253613Rich kids are also trained in leadership skills.
>>18253712Marxist definition.Lower class = owns nothing, rentersMiddle Class = owns something, rents out, has lower class people working for themUpper Class = Like Middle Class + power/government.
>>18251517>Why do communist love acting like They dont. >AristocracyLand owners when feudal mode of production was dominant. >and Bourgeosue are the same thing despite them being entirely opposedThey were opposed. French and American revolutions were bourgeoisie revolutions against nobility. >and the Rich having more in common with peasants than Aristois?Bourgeoisie were a middle class above peasants but below clergy and aristocracy originally.
>>18252860>God is a trannyAmen.
>>18253723Lumpen-Proletariat (Beggars, Homeless): live on charity or crime, owns nothing, doesnt take part in productionProletariat (Workers): = lives by exchanging labor for wages, takes part in production, owns nothing, rentersPetite-Borgeoisie (Small Business Owners): = takes part in part in production, owns means of production and/or land, rents out, has proles working for them, can have both wage and surplus value/rent incomeBourgeoisie (Investment Banker): owns means of production and/or land, doesnt take part in production, has proles working for them, lives exclusively on surplus value/rents
