krishna bound

4y

That's honestly a really good question; I think there's room for debate. Marx isn't the be-all end-all of theory; others down the line definitely have their own additions and nunances which make it a little hard to be completely concrete in any argument or explanation. Marxism definitely isn't "hedonistic", but its roots are certainly parallel to hedonism in that they're both individualistic. The entire point of Marxism is essentially that guaranteeing facets of survival from the surplus of means of production means individuals can focus on fulfilling individualist "duty" past said point. I'd say the difference is hedonism tends to imply gross overindulgence, whereas Marxism isn't attempting to imply such (although i do think some people online may have misinterpreted it to be such); it's more like "duty" in the sense of choice separate from societal shackles which would otherwise prevent such from existing. But...at the same time, this is disputed, since evolutions of the theory definitely veer into collectivism over individualism, where there are not "mandated" per-se, but "universal" ethical duties which apply to all people.
Part of what I think makes it complicated is the idea of context or prior existence; people can't intrinsically unlearn environmental factors. For example, if I learn something is "blue", even if I learn a different word for something which is blue, it is always going to be "blue" no matter what word I use for it. Derivatives like Maoism kind of talk about this...hence why Mao was obsessed with the "blank slate culture" and "cultural reset" ideas; he was right to the extent to think that you had to kind of restart form the beginning culturally to create an environment in which you don't have pre-existing conceptualizations - hence why, say, when we even talk about things like landlords (i.e. this thread), we can only do so within the context of capitalism like I mentioned earlier in the thread, because people don't know anything else; even USSR (or ironically Maoist China), only could framework their societal and governmetnal structures in comparison to the global capitalism that pervaded the world around them. I'm not sure if the concept of "hedonism" would even exist in a society which didn't progress alongside the same lines; it's like how some cultures don't have words for certain concepts, and therefore they have to be explained in different ways.

Villainous B

4y

Majority of those deaths came from famines that happened before the agricultural revolutions hit those areas. Something people of refuse to acknowledge when it comes to things like famine, just how frequently they happened

DVLPR

4y

So there were no mass killings but famines and Wikipedia lying?

Synopsis

4y

Slavery existed before the Atlantic slave trade, but even then slavery as a mode of production is a different point in history. But like I said, apply your dumb a***ysis to anything else. Guess the french revolution shouldn't have happened.

Direct democracy

Villainous B

4y

Most regimes have some form of mass killings, one of the best revolutions in history, the Haitian Revolution, had a small genocide to go along with it, if you're trying to change society in a wholesale way, there probably will be blood.

donalddrumpf

4y

You think a direct democracy is practical in a country of like 330M people?

You going to write the bills?

Who is going to count all the votes?

DVLPR

4y

@donalddrumpf How much blood and horror is at the bottom of all good things!

Villainous B

4y

I don't think there's any horror in having slave owners maimed, think it's probably a beautiful site

Synopsis

4y

If I didn't have a landlord i'd have a lot more money, see how that works?

the landlords extract whatever little wealth the working class has built up, in order to perpetuate the system.

DVLPR

4y

I’m against blood.

frank 2022

4y

chicken and egg.
if you had more money you wouldn’t mind the rent so much or you’d just bounce.

imo the problem is with the concept of money in general, but I don’t know how much that can or should be changed. Regardless of the system, every society reverts to a small upper class, a larger middle class, and a vast lower class.

I believe in this country there’s at least somewhat of an opportunity to take your situation into your own hands. I can pay a months rent in 5 evenings of DoorDash. You can blame the system, accept your loss and spend your time reading books about how the system is stacked against you, or do what you can to change your situation.

Villainous B

4y

It's not pretty, but sometimes it's for the best. Like when the Haitians rebelled against the French and killed all their former oppressors, that was poetic.

DVLPR

4y

Yeah I don’t know anything about that but I wouldn’t want a US socialists vs capitalists civil war.

Villainous B

4y

Have politics become a mostly grassroots thing, have people actually engage in their local politics a lot more

Villainous B

4y

Apart from some crazy people, capitalists, no one wants a civil war

donalddrumpf

4y

That doesn't answer statements 2 and 3

Who is supposed to be in charge of the bills, counting, processing, implementing?

Faygo

4y

Landlords are definitely in a parasitic relationship with the rest of society. They produce nothing of value themselves and provide no useful skill, labor, or talent, and get paid an inordinate amount of money just for owning real-estate that they didn’t even help to produce. They give nothing to society and yet take so much.
The landlord takes advantage of the proletariat within every society and must be removed by any and all means necessary. The property of landlords must be removed from their possession by the people in order to enact communal living (https://ktt2.com/my-theory-on-communal-living-92821) Most of your paycheck is taken by the landlord and whenever you falter they take away your basic right to shelter.

DVLPR

4y

Is a civil war different from a revolution?

Villainous B

4y

Both Russian revolutions of 1917 weren't civil wars, apart from a couple of strategic assassination and the deleting of the Romanoff bloodline, there wasn't massive blooshed, not until bootlickers instigated a civil war.

Villainous B

4y

So you're saying he ought to just turn the blind eye for inhumanity he can see happening before his eyes? You sound a bit scummy, my man.

Faygo

4y

these idiots are missing my point entirely. imagine d***sucking systems that you are exploited by

frank 2022

4y

no I didn’t say he should do that.

Misery

4y

Complete fools

You Disappoint Me

4y

you 3 clowns solved wealth inequality in the world, congratulations you guys are gonna get the noble piece prize for your ktt posts, no one has ever had these ideas before in the history of the world