#šgeneral
1 messages Ā· Page 336 of 1
It does
nah it should only be used on rpists and severe crmes
Nah
Look at the French revolution
Yeah how long ago was that
Oh wait, it harrier
the death penalty is a tool of the state btw
They ragebaiting
Rate the state of the world
Don't worry lol
this has to be ragebait
shitty
10
It is
Nah I genuinely think the death penalty is a good thing as much as I may ragebait
I wouldn't want to live there
never cook again bro
So real for that
@earnest cradle help
I guess im no good
im playing suzerain
Nations of other people did that lol š
A dude who creates hated gifs somehow managed to spark a long conversation on politics and the death penalty on the discord of a god simulator game.
Belemid here to ruin the fun
I am toooo????????
^ Itās a nation war against other players(people) which is why it looks chaotic š
FUCK YOU
Do u like my lenin
yea
Wild
very avthentic
Im following an optimal sordland-rizia guide rn!
wow thank v
Do we fw conservatives?
No
Gloria Tory? No
No
What turn arr you at
conservatism is a cancer
Circas..
which
@earnest cradle I dyslexic I meant libertarian and thought I read that lol
He is THE communist of sordland
THATS EVEN FUCKING WORSE
Write a story in 1 min
Leftist libertarian
Only communist MP in the history of sordland
modernizer š
@earnest cradle reformist or dictator?
reformist
Reform UK has ruined the word Reformist in the UK
??? That's what the fucking 8values test said sorry I'm social libertarian
dont worry ill purge them later
because now its used for Far Right people
Whats ur budget rn
and not
it depends but it usually is because it shakes up the old order and doesnt benefit the elite
like 6
Reformers
Which is left wing
Chat got political fast
Hell yeah f the elite
so
More constant I refer too
You have to watch ur budget gretchen
True!
Dip too low...or too high and some special event will happen!
Democracy for the win!!!!
left wing is socialist ideologies, OR if we go to social leftism, then its tolerance
people need to actually get organized and fight against the global elite
sorry but if you're basing your politics off of 7values you're dumb as a brick
anyhow
conform to ze new world order
@queen marsh I prayed 20 at home but I made it a lil too realistic like in a mosques
I accidentally left my heater so it was hot like hell
Wow
So dedication
Brochacho i know that left-right is economic policies and that is WHY i said āthats why its left wing because it hurts the capitalist eliteā
I refuse to believe Reform UK actually dislikes the elites, mayhaps the CURRENT elites, but elites as a whole I can't trust them
8values and no. I'm using it to label my values, doofus. It's ok tho, I forgive you
You do not have to educate me
"left wing is socialist" ā
Bebrbrbebebebebe
Couldt make it to the mosque yeah
:3
Anarchism isn't socialism
Social democracy isn't socialism
the left wing is the left wing of capital, not communism
It kind of is š½
I never SAID THAT
Hey gregcchen wanna get expanded human rights in sordland
communism and socialism arent really interchangeable
dawg why the fuck is it snowing on march 12th
Yes
There are like 3 left wings doofus
socialism is a lesser of communism, i understand the fuckup on my part though
socialism is on the LEFTIST side of the ECONOMIC spectrum of politics
But anarchism is a left-wing ideology.
So
Dont ban any youth group+WRA+MRA+WLA
You in Midwest?
no im in new jersey
can i kill the young sords though
this is making me mald im considering summoning oil john like mahoraga on you
not really, it can be
But what about left-wing liberals?
No
why not
Still in the winter section tho. Sorry
@honest osprey omg MJ hai
im talking about the economic spectrum
For some reason not banning fascists contributes to human rights
not the social one
bro thats besides the point
this NEVER happens
ok ill kill no one except the young sords
yeah cause āfreedom of the expressionā
You are the devil
Until it happens. Get snowmogged by the white powdrr
Stop beating agno-sords!!
WHICH IS WHY I THINK WE SHOULD REFER TO SOCIAL LEFTISM AS LIBERALISM, INSTEAD OF CLALING BOTH ECONOMIC LEFTISM AND SOCIAL LEFTISM BEING THE SAME NAME
But liberals are also part of the economic spectrum.
GOD i hate the english language
But the left has differences.
yeah brochacho youre fucked
yeah, thats why its called a spectrum
Leftism and liberalism
Radical Left = Socialism, Communism, and Anarchism
Oh holy guide save me
Moderate left = Liberals, social democrats
I would say Anarchism is on a different spectrum
Center left = Lula
Libertarian Democratic socialist here.
Anarchism and control
far right*
lula is far right bolsonaro is just
satan
Anarchism, technically, also has importance in economics.
sorry suzerain isnt open ended enough for me to tell you what you can do
For example, in anarchism there would be no money.
Anarchism is order in disorder right?
pr*udhon š¤¢
not really
Everything is everything else
People would work for a greater good and to help each other.
You should replay suzerain
anarcho-capitalism is a thing
Yes, I wouldn't have the money.
Libertarian anarchism or anarcho capitalism
too poor
Neo-Lib š„¹
But anarcho-capitalism argues that there must be money in anarchism.
Yeah im right none of yall know politics anyway
Buy me galmland dlc
okay can we just, rework how we use words
No, how would anarcho-capitalism function without money?
I bought rizia
In fact, how does anarcho-capitalism work?
Anarchist money in an anarchist society!
lets have SPECIFIC spectrums for SPECIFIC things
communism also has this so like
Anarchist store with anarchist owner
and have a bunch of spectrums
8values
anarchism is just communism but lowkey worse
Because anarchism and communism are, ultimately, the same thing.
yeah, but better
Inf values
The difference is that socialism is an important part of communism.
one is āits joeverā and the other actually believes in widescale human cooperation š¤
yeah thats it
@fossil wolf go forth
heās correct
since its definition is bullshit
heās incorrect
isnt socialism a transitional stage into communism
anarchism is a lack of societal structure and communism is a specific structure in which goods are distributed for human need
Well, I was inaccurate.
no
what is it then
Yes
qevie in general chat in the big 2026?
originally yes
im highkey here cause im bored
no
You're confusing it with socialism.
building the worlds in worldbox
Yes
hello bored
My internet might be less Polish
Marx never once distinguished between socialism and communism in his writings
The person who did was Lenin
Im sleeping soon.
Someone's angy.
But theories evolve.
you're breaking my heart
Who described socialism as both the DotP and communism, with the DotP being ālower-stageā socialism and communism being āhigher-stageā socialism
That is, the process of abolishing capitalist social relations and the end where capitalism is dissolved as both āsocialismā
To say that something is wrong because the first person who put it on paper didn't specify what it should be, is wrong.
Marxism needs no evolution
(DotP= Dictatorship of the Proletariat)
He did specify
Yes, it's necessary.
What part of marxism required modernizing?
buildworld when will you join our fight bbowa
I am not
I actually know what Iām talking about
evolution and modernization are different
?
evolution is simply change
They in fact are not
Yes
@subtle sigil
thanks i just joined the stream
in this situation
There is no need to modernize or shift the core doctrine within Marxism
neat
Liberate the people of halati
What exactly is socialism then
:shoop:
i can absolutely attest to the fact they are not the same thing.
thats not even true
I'm the better socialist here
Humans evolved = they came from a common ancestor with the chimpanzee until reaching Homo sapiens.
Humans have modernized = They have acquired things or traits considered modern.
which also lenin made it clear that the dotp sought near-immediate abolition of capitalism
They are
@queen marsh When add the shoop emoji?
do we all have to adopt a corporate tone to avoid the big bad scary moderator ban hammer
Holy fuck NO ONE knows what theyāre talking about
@midnight mauve spawn in a random world before The great Modpack Remake Vs After
Socialism is a transitional phase towards communism, where the role of the state is, theoretically, to socialize the means of production to eliminate the bourgeoisie until it becomes useless and collapses on its own.
When you sell me quatian terroe haha
communists will die before they read marx
idk
ā
ā
ā
Sounds like you're just mad no one agrees with you
what did yall do to it
wait
all of these are generated structures?
They disagree because theyāre wrong
Wait no
careful John
The first image is the after
Big admin is watching
"All who disagree are wrong. I'm the only right one ever"
how did yall obliterate lakes
The second one is the before
then alot of socialists evolved to see it as a stand alone thing
@tender bone, However, in Marxist-Leninist theory, many MLs believe that a country can only be considered socialist if it has undergone a revolution.
others didn't
Idek
Minimalist and Maximalist
Yes
The eye protects you
yeah i am not gonna enter the world of communist theory and debate until i actually read theory
I won't lie
I'm not gonna join the modded server
Therefore, countries like Venezuela are not considered socialist.
I'm not read in theories. Im just human
Why not
ātransitional phaseā in no way has this ever been described by anyone except for revisionists and non-marxists
āthe role of the state is socializing the means of production and suppressing the bourgeoisieā this is the dictatorship of the proletariat, through which a socialist economy is to be implemented and with its implementation the dissolution of the state as a proxy of class rule
That's a very wise and intelligent thing to say.
eh
mods aren't my thing
Georgie Orbeefwellington hated those guys
-Sees one screenshot
Marxist-Leninists are not marxists
its actually ignorant but i want to weigh things equally
The dictatorship of the proletariat is socialism.
i do find it odd how
government control/ownership of industries or businesses is considered socialism when it's not
-guys. I don't know if I'll be able to play.
The marxist-leninist strain of thought is a fundamentally revisionist and anti-marxist strain
It is not
They are amazing btw
I agree actually
there are a few I like
but
they either add too little
or
completely change the entire way that the game is
they arent even leninist btw
thats why they should have their own name
dotP is just the government that achieves socialism and then eventually marxism
in an idealized situation
Orion should establish the DotP
,roll when do they add roll here, 1984
What you call revisionism is, in fact, an evolution of the theory.
always 1984
yes!
And have the state wither away
Every theory evolves.
can we talk about how Monarchism is a stupid word
But what is to be done?
The DotP is specifically a state that acts to suppress and destroy the non-proletarian and anti-revolutionary aspects of society; to transform the society into a communist one (to implement a socialist economy)
Or do you think the earth is a cylinder because the Greeks said so first?
im kidding Orion is becoming a worker's cooperative state
Not cool enough
It is not evolutionary it is contradictory
and it's definition is so bullshit that Monarchism in theory is purely based on titles
Hey I have an idea for Orion its called social democracy
this just makes what i said into a pragraph
sob
Compare Marx's theory with what would happen in reality.
we already have social democracy
Oh. I thought we were gonna talk about how funny it sounds
worker's cooperative is the future for Orion
We shoukd abolish social democracy btw
ok so wait do you define socialism as the economy within a communist state
I LOVE THE NORDIC SYSTEM
(it's actually controlled by the corporations, which are run by Fakheris)
@tender bone you will achieve this š
the Fakheri deepstate
Belemid bad take 400
Karl Marx: Socialism is the eradication of capitalist social relations; these include but are not limited to the commodity-form of production, the expropriation of surplus value generated by laborers, and wage labor
this guy bro
Marx said that for revolution to happen, capitalism had to evolve enough to reach the necessary conditions.
@fossil wolf can we get the social democracie image
@fossil wolf what theory should i read
marx and what else
Marxist-Leninists: We can have a little bit of commodity production
However, most of the countries where the revolution took place were poor and in a post-war state.
No he DIDNT bro
don't forget theories on both sides of the spectrum
Oiljohn reads a lot of theory i think he is right
Good take 500
I'm trying to talk to you about it š
so i have to listen to bookishpick for 2 minutes?
WHICH IS SO BULLSHIT
id rather kill myself
IT MEANS MONARCHISM HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY
You have no other choice
Bookish is on a different spectrum
Woo that was fun
The autism one
Marx specifically said that his theories related only to the historical development of western europe and in his later years he would recant on the very stance you claim to ascribe to him; his opinion of the peasantry as an anti-revolutionary class shifted and he believed a communist revolution was possible in Russia, though as he was not overtly familiar with the state of affairs there, he gave no model of how it would occur
So when Marx says something different, it's ok, but when other people change it it's bad?
I think we should start hating on the word monarchism
because it has a bullshit definition
Too funny sounding
Yeah because Marx was right and the other people are wrong
"A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.", Progress Publishers, Page 263
"No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society."
Page Reference
now hold on there bucko
enlighten me
what is monarchism?
And he is SPECIFICALLY TALKING about the historical development of western europe here
I DON'T FUCKING KNOW ANYMORE
@velvet flax the US tree if it had a dedicated Casemate TD or a heavy tank
THATS THE PROBLEM
there's the truth of it
@deft pewter I found the original furry webcomic for your approval
the huh
its a form of autocracy- but also elective monarchies- but also parliamentary monarchies- but actually doesn't have to be hereditary- its a form of hereditary rule
PICK ONE
@wicked nimbus they found something for you
A furry webcomic from 1986
revolution was not possible in russia btw
he was delusional
Monarchy is when King or queen
damn uncs
Give
what about principalities
duchies
electorates
etc etc
'T.H.E. Fox'
It's a duchy then
@midnight mauve when is orion feeding me my next national development fund
Feed us the hoglings
also what makes a king an actual king other then the title
it was and it did happen, though it would need to rely on concurrent revolutions in western europe to avoid degeneration into capitalism (which obviously didnt happen, and so russia degenerated)
why are we mentioning monarchism when we have a worse version of this in the chat today
than*
Being related by birth
nope, they're widely accepted a CIA psyops.
Theyāre dumping 400 million barrels of oil, and the price is still going up
the branches of communism go so far and wide that if you disagree with how you make youre coffee your a fucking class traitor
FUUUCK
Actually the bolshevik revolution was a color revolution from imperial germany
Not a monarchy
Yes it is
No
THEN WHY IS IT CALLED A MONARCHY THEN
Also
boy the cia implanted that idea into modern academia
Rawr
It shouldn't
the russian revolution is fake
For tradition tbh
Heres what we should do
Good taste @lunar surge
When does orion destroy commodity production
May his holy ichor bless your veins
In the "Preface" of 1859, Marx presents what he considers a universal law of historical development, and not merely a commentary restricted to Western Europe. Although he based his observations in the transition of feudalism to capitalism in Europe, He frames the text as a general theory about how social foundations (societies) transform, and I have proof of that.
leaves room for elective monarchism
That's what I believe
"At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production... From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution."
The Age of Revolution
yes it fucking does
I find it weird elective monarchies are a thing
Also add, "most be a king or queen"
see the problem with a lot of political theory is that definitions essentially exist in a vacuum
Is it not supposed to be hereditary
no
Not a monarchy then
because we live in a material world, where the rules of our systems are defined by individual locations
"New superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society."
It's 40 years old this year
"With the change of the economic foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed."
in his later writings on russia, when he was studying the russian peasantry, he specifically stated that he believed the communal system by which the russian peasants lived would serve as the framework for russian socialist development, he specifically said that revolution in russia was possible- though he gave no indication of how likely it was in comparison to the revolution beginning in western europe- and that it needed support from concurrent revolutions in western europe to avoid degenerating into a capitalist state of affairs
my thought was 'Electing based on kinships/dynasties' instead of indiviuals
marxās development was also incomplete by 1859
think about feudalism
But I never said that revolution wasn't possible in Russia.
And has to be king or queen
the traditional system of feudalism that we're taught didn't really exist in most places
feudalism my beloved
No
WHY NOT!?!?
Fish mw should return to feudalism
you said transformation towards communism required a capitalist state of development which it doesnāt
I said that Russia, at the time of the revolution, was a poor, screwed-up country in a state of post-war recovery.
BECAUSE THEN ITS BASED ON TITLE
I said that Marx said this.
true
AND NOT ACTUAL GOVERNANCE
sylstaria is apparently still semi-feudalist
And he told me to compare that with reality.
Plus heredity
and he didnāt, not in his later years
But you didn't even let me finish.
How is the..former monarchy seen in decafia
Eastern puppets@
Marx did, in fact, say that, as I have shown in the various texts above.
and
it would constantly be changing and evolving as the political and social structures of societies changed
'Monarchism- A form of Governance based on kinship.'
sylstarian puppets essentially
thats it
But that's impossible in reality, given Russia's situation.
no more
And title
no
W view
Yes
transition into socialism WITHOUT a capitalist stage of development was POSSIBLE in russia according to Marx
because titles and governance are two different things
So?
That's what I'm saying.
your not bullshitting your way out of calling Cromwell Monarchist
Okay im gonna go sleep
Are you paying attention to what I'm saying?
Oliver Cromwell
Oliver Cromwell
Who?
Which one?
parliament had the king killed
In this day and age?
Marx said that for a society to revolution, it needs to evolve to reach the necessary conditions (evolve within capitalism).
Brochacho
trv
you believe transition into socialism without a capitalist stage of development was possible in russia in 1880?
Tbh... Idc about this Oliver dude
But that was impossible in the reality of Russia.
I can afford sleeping hours
Cromwell simply led the military, couped the government and then turned it into another monarchy
I'm talking about 1917!!
Pay attention, stop talking, and let me finish my argument.
1880 is when Marx wrote about russia directly
W Lord Protector š„¹
You're next
Was he called King?
No
Lord Protector, his successor was his son
Damn it, bro, the revolution happened in 1917, I'm taking that date into consideration.
'Lord Protector'
chud richard
Lenin was also an active opponent of āstageismā and this deterministic mindset of history
Now shut your ass up and let me finish.
Lord protectorate. Not monarchy
not a King, but still a monarchy
Was his son richard
I hate politics
Okay then lets say 1917
Wow so rude..
Ok, Iām a stupid American and I genuinely want to be informed: are Islam and Muslim the same thing, are they two sectors of the same religion, or are they completely different?
What is bow typing
No. Lord protectorate
Was transition into socialism without a capitalist stage possible in russia
They are
Again, I'm going to start over, and I hope you'll let me finish this time.
Muslim is just
ok thanks
Answer the question boy
This is honestly one of the major problems I have with Bowistan (and for hosting medieval map wars)
Feudalism wasn't a standardized form of social and political order
It's more of a broad collectivization of how we view medieval (european) societies. Even though, those societies differed and varied structurally based on historical and environmental factors.
I AM ANSWERING
'Monarchism- A form of governance based on kinship.' not vague, leaves room for other types of monarchy, NOT BASED ON TITLES
Muslim means something that is islamic
nothing else needs to be added
Shut up and let me formulate the argument to answer your damn question.
If they are also King or queen
Bowistan is DONE
host polsea
Idoria:
No because that ruins the whole thing
Why r we arguing abt fking politics in the first placeš„
because
Not for me
why are you arguing with Karl's greatest reddit warrior btw
Marx said that a society, before revolution, needs to evolve to reach the necessary conditions (evolve within capitalism, since there is nowhere else to evolve before revolution).
But that was impossible in the situation in Russia in 1917.
@midnight mauve hello this is decafia we fly over to your palace and ask what will you do about the miran question
Russia was a poor, screwed-up state in a post-war state.
miran question?
Yes.
Emperors, Empresses, Princes, Princesses, Lords, Ladies, Overlords, Overladies, Marquisses, Duchesses, Dukes, Viscounts, Counts, Viscountesses, Countesses, Jarls, Earls, Grand Dukes, Grand Duchesses, Arch-whatevers and MORE
are NOT KINGS NOR QUEENS
Russia if industrializing was a challenge
yet are MONARCHYS
To expect capitalism to develop there, besides being impossible, if it were possible, could lead to the ruin of the revolution.
Russia got the short straw in history
Not they aren't
and should STAY MONARCHYS
yea they are
No
yea they are
Fuh naw twin
name one time period in which russia was a desirable place to live
Nuh uh
So, the only way was revolution, bypassing the evolution of capitalism.
@subtle sigil invade the ornish
He did not. He, in fact, said that Russia was a possible starting point for international socialist revolution- as early as 1880, in fact, long before the historical revolution- and that it would need to be backed up by concurrent revolutions in western europe
LET THEM SPEAK
So, to conclude my argument, yes!! A socialist revolution in Russia was possible without a capitalist state.
There are some way worse countries in this world than russia
WHAT do you have with them
Dude, go fuck yourself.
oh yes
plenty of undesirable places
(They're oldest alliance in Fish MW)
russia's always been one
There is a way...
Its called intelligence funded coup
Early latvia
Yeah
illegal!
England over the past 800ish years has been the most desirable by far
Why so sigma
Im not saying that russia is a desirable place to live in
I showed you countless texts to prove my point, and you seem more lost than a blind man in a shootout.
We should not stick with the old rotting alliances!
luckily
I know better
you showed one without the further context that marxās work is explicitly referring to the development of capitalism in western europe
Syrlstaria also illegally invaded our land and beat our people
maybe the last 60ish years england was desirable
Fuh naw
people who dont know history
With all due respect to the moderators, but I can't find the words in English to describe my feelings for this guy.
sucks to suck 
Yes you
So, vĆ” pra puta que te pariu
wow
englandās always been, in comparison to the rest of the world, remarkably developed
Filho da puta do caralho
He need ban
the english economy was largely capitalist in nature by around 1500
English
Russia got the short end of the stick, especially in Europe
Okay its midnight im
he always returns
Im gonna sleep
along with like
we should send oil to 1830s london as a poor person
Ban ip
Good night
all the other slavic nations
Yeah
i wonder if this sentiment will remain intact
Bye bowa
yeah iād rather live in london in the 1830s than anywhere else in 1830
Long live Decafia!
And what the hell does the English economy in 1500 have to do with the fucking Russian Revolution in 1917?
Early Estonia 10000 bc
down with the Srylstere!
You look like you're blind in a shootout, puta que pariu
There are some terms and conditions for living in the uk
this is an entirely different conversation
no...
the whole of england rather
Nothing you say makes sense.
doesnt give counterexample
We were just talking about Russia a moment ago.
Industrialization
what part of āthe english economy had transitioned into one largely capitalist in nature by around 1500ā doesnt make sense
cholera
Doesnt want to argue about fking useless things*
etc etc
Estonia ruled all of europe but theyre are nice country
And gave it al back
read gothic literature and study medical history of England
You can't get a person to maintain a train of thought.
@honest osprey this is a classic tactic of ignoring the point to then strawman
I'm praying that he says a slur and gets banned
and where would you rather live?
Rn?
English countryside
Is it that you can't control yourself, or do you derive an inevitable pleasure from interrupting others?
Not on this planet defš„
the other conversation was clearly over atp
Swiss countryside
America
On a villa
which is still part of england
Switzerland
Estonia mention
Man that would the life
when do we nuke?
oil has stated that he largely uses discord to debate people on communism
because you SPECIFIED London
my point is that england has been historically far more developed than the rest of the world and if you gave me a country to live in over the past 800 years iād pick england
Doing whatever you wwnt
proof?
No media on a random village
BULLSHIT
You can even try herding sheep to remain humble
yeah and look at what iām replying to genius
in agreement
Timmy toughknuckles
fish brought up london in the first place
i'd argue the eastern US was probably the most desirable place to live in the 1830s
I actually believe the last 60ish years have been worse
and you supported it
I mean
well
80ish
Alot of places
Portugal controlled the passage from West Africa to South Africa through Brazil and Angola. It had multiple ports in India and elsewhere. For a long time, it was one of the major powers in Europe.
and then you wake up in GEORGIA
oh wait
Wasn't japan isolated and peaceful
aint nothing wrong with georgia except for the massive slavery based economy
During 1830s
Spain was one of the most powerful countries in Europe, and, if it hadn't been boycotted by France, It would have continued like this until today.
the portuguese system was undeveloped in comparison to england, they maintained feudal aristocrat-serf relations at the time
FUH NAW
youāre confusing āpowerā with historical development
the large Cherokee population:
We got an england glazer here
England really only started to lead in the 1700s
i believe the cherokee were ethnically cleansed in the 1820s?
Boooooo Scottish independence!!!!!
wait, they were forced out before 1830, weren't they?
england was more developed, in a higher stage of progression, with wage labor and commodity-form production already being commonplace by 1550
yea
The civil war was before 1830 i believe
they werent
the trail of tears happened during the jackson presidency
IRISH FREEDOM BOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
For centuries, China controlled the largest trade route in the Old World, built a massive wall, and has always had an incredible history of militarization.
Yk gng if i had to choose what country id want to live in rn, id prob choose america. Not cause its better but because i just want fking guns
this has nothing to do with my claim of historical development
am aware
(this is why we need to remove him from the 20)
weren't they still trailing behind the other major powers politically and militarily
oh it was the 1830s
Trans person here. Same
AJ was not a good president
China, long before the Europeans, had gunpowder, paper, organized cities, and an entire plantation system.
ex: Not being able to get into the 30 years war
As a russian person i cant even imagine a freedom of owning weapons in there
and then burn his remains and dump them in an unmarked grave
very powerful but very colonial and very dangerous and violated many human rights in that colonial period. Something to be proud of.
no?? englandās historical development in comparison to france is what allowed england (which was objectively a shithole in comparison to france) to dominate them during the 100 years war
If 2 femboys clashed, would a tomboy be needed to mediate the peace?
Wdym the 20
The Aztecs had cities, a capital, a structured and organized government, and their own language.
it's kinda fun to go shooting every once in a while
So free broheme
Fhh yeah
yeah they were the like 2nd weakest of the major european powers during the renaissance
Andrew Jackson is the face of the $20 dollar bill
and what form of economy did the aztecs have?
The Incas had almost no firearms, possessed a complex monarchy, and had a writing system superior to that of the Europeans.
2nd to like Russia
𤤠𤤠𤤠š¤¤
What did bro even do
despite having MUCH better candidates
we chose JACKSON!?
To deserve that
Many countries have developed far better than England, and even before England.
these people are arguing with me about historical progression and they dont even know what that means
you say it like this is a punishment
The Aztecs also had gold and copper coins.
Lincoln is better
this is just a lie
Isn't
?
Lincolns already on the $5 and the penny
Your just wrong
the aztec āmonetaryā system, if one could call it that, was based around cacao, not coinage
while other countries had kings richer then other major power's entire countries, dominating the north, the new world, being a threat to all of europe or going toe to toe with the world power
We stopped Penny production though
gold coins existed but they had no monetary value
Wheres Roosevelt on a bill
So?
England was kinda busy with its self
new platform came out
and trying to get onto the world stage
like russia
true
but even so
they're in still circulation
In any case, many countries developed better and earlier than England.
the purepecha were more developed than the aztecs as they had complex metallurgy
Economics isn't everything.
Put Lincoln on the 20
I think id rather live in africa
āmarxistā who thinks that the economy and material conditions arenāt everything
Not to mention, economically Italy was ahead of England
Fahh
Just like middle of no where Africa in 1830s
Do you even hear yourself twin
ok what are we talking about???
But if my goal is literally to eliminate the currency
And Italy was a bunch of minor, moderate powers and puppets
Economics isn't everything.
they were in a different stage of historical development
Iām actually so tired of these lumpen bro
They were both in the renaissance
@tiny meadow do u fw my 2019 world
Material conditions are the driving force behind literally everything
@carmine field Holy shit can you stop reacting everything
šāļø
Holy lord
itās always the stupid rebrs
Typical for a āmarxist-leninistā
The Aztecs developed an entire country without an economy (in fact, gold coins were worthless in the Aztec Empire, sorry).
I have the freedom of reacting to messages and you cant take it away from me
Cocoa
Or whatever
You say it like a slur
Leninism and Marxism donāt even mix well.
a few months ago i restored a Mosin Nagant made in 1943 and then went out to shoot it
Not to mention bartering
It is a slur
it's a really really nice gun
MODS
it's so comfortable to shoot
The concept of an economy isn't contingent on the presence of a currency
It is a shameful descriptor
Thats awesome bro
Well its not like they did shit for the good of theyre hearts

Marxist-Leninists think an economy is when you buy things with money
Please ban Oiljohn
Religion is another matter.
the only problem with that gun rn is that the bolt does not like to open after you fire
I cant imagine how good it feels to have a firearm
Western brained
Me neither.
There also was a semi-universal currency in mesoamerica and the wider pan-american trade network, being cacao beans
the east and the west are basically the same. one of them is claimed to be the truth, and one of them is claimed to be a lie
Can we go back to saying Monarchism is a stupid word with a stupid definition
Oh
But this wasnt a currency in the same way currencies like the money that exists today are
Yeah
I read "god" instead of "good".
Taxes werenāt collected via cacao beans
Only hereditary and title
Sorry
Its like im not building you a house bc i want to without me getting smth
It was basically exclusively used by the proto-bourgeois merchant classes (which was not a strong class at all) in these societies
Key of mj is actually true
Then not a currency
Target should sell nuclear warheads for 10.99
Not hereditary exactly, not title certainly
i hope russia liberalizes some day, and stuff like gun ownership can happen
but if not you may find places to go shoot some temporarily
Overpriced
I agree actually
What do you consider to be a currency
Actually, title and heredity.
It was, a currency is just something you use in place of something with objective value to conduct exchange
āMonarchy- A system of governance based on Kinshipā
New monarchy definition, actually makes sense.
Money
Not standardized yes but like
i hope russia liberalizes just so i can visit some cool sites
Making systems of government based on titles is stupid
Agh
What can you only be democratic if you have a president or prime minister??
Currency ā standardized state produced tender
āMonarchy- A system of governance based on Kinship AND if they are kind or queenā
New monarchy definition, ACTUALLY actually makes sense.
Sadly thats probably not going to happen, atleast not in my lifespan. If anything russia is becoming even less liberal
Money
š
I can make a better definition.
Only dictators can be autocrats?
Brother you should pray that America loses the gun rights
Money is a form of currency, not all currencies are monetary
Genuinely stupid
We can only say that this little social democrat piece of shit doesn't know what he's talking about, since he can't let anyone follow a line of reasoning without feeling an inevitable pleasure in interrupting
Money
Adam smith literally talks about this in the first 100 pages of wealth of nations
He thinks Iām a socdem lol
Ragebait
If its inevitable why can I see it
Sum adam smithš„
he does he just doesn't know how to properly debate a person
āMonarchism- A system of governance based on Kinship.ā
DONE, THATS IT
Money
Does he know?
In which he describes the scottish pre-money currency of nails
And if they are king or queen
THAT SOLVES THE ISSUE OF THE MONARCHIST DEFINITIOJ
so would this make this every family owned enterprise a monarchy?
What do you think he's doing right now though
Thatās not a government
I cited numerous texts by Marx to prove my point, and he basically said "fuck you, bro" to all of them.
he's debating like a reddit user (he literally lurks on reddit)
I would argue
that 'kinship' isn't strictly familial
Unless you intended that definition
I am more leninist than lenin, the direct line from the great and admirable comrade amadeo bordiga through the ICP and its dissolution
āMonarchism- A political system based off a king/queen. Usually includes one leader.ā
Theres just something different about snowy spring
he does this
He just wanted to know the answer to something I was already answering.
I meant family and very close to family
That just brings back the old issue
How
Peak
Personally I think the 2nd amendment isnt worth the amount of innocent deaths happening every day
Of diarchies
But since he couldn't keep his damn finger in the corner, he kept interrupting, and I'd get lost in my own train of thought.
and whatās the issue?
i mean true but i am not gonna give up my guns
W mj key
Everyone keeps saying he's ragebaiting but all I see him do is just make points that people hand wave and swat away by labeling them as exactly that
Ragebaiting
It has no basis and excludes the majority of monarchy variations
America is too far in to do that
Not basis sorry
let me fix it
Ofc you wont if your neighbour doesnt
Nice
I kept interrupting because you were saying shit that is blatantly wrong. You have a menshevik, stageist, social democrat and deterministic conception of history- that a capitalist stage of development, implementing capitalist reforms, is first necessary to dissolve capitalism and then achieve socialism
Hi I just joined
What if he robs you
Governance shouldnāt be based on titles
YOU JUST SAID YOU ARE MORE LENIN THAN LENIN HIMSELF YOU DOOFUS
I love your videos
Thanks you too
Thanks
referring to somebody as a menshavik is genuine psycopathy
Only monarcy
Honestly second amendment isnt that bad of an idea, its just that the realization of it is a bit awkward
Lenin who famously loved the mensheviks and karl kautskyās belief that a capitalist stage was necessary
No
He's wrong on that front because I'M the one who's more Lenin than Lenin
Yes
Oiljohn is merely my disciple
Honestly
I don't believe gun rights **SOLELY ** contribute to these statistics
Switzerland is an amazing example of the 2nd amendment being done right. And, you rarely hear of gun violence there. (not that it doesn't happen)
Ragebaite
If any country in Europe gets the 2 amendment that country should be invaded and reige changed
āA political system in which a country is held by a single person (the monarch) who occupies the role of the monarch by rule of succession/inheriting it.ā
FIXED
If I see Switzerland get brought up one more time in one of these gun rights debates I'm gonna claw my face off
The Californian fent zombie hordes need to invade france
Wait switzerland has second amendment?
Yes but thats different from the us isnt it?
āA political system in which a country is held by a single person (the monarch) who occupies the role of the monarch by rule of succession/inheriting it. And it's king or queen"
Itās too specific, excludes a lot of the variations
BUT
there is something to be said about the social-economic difference between Switzerland and the US
which, I believe is more significant
America 2 but good
yes, it is
Diarchies should still be monarchies
you know switzerland has a very good gun ownership system
No
Same with CERTAIN elective monarchies
gun-ownership in switzerland is more regulated than the U.S.
Ragebait
Yeah im talking about a us style amendment where I can just buy a gun when im 18
Switzerland is better than us
Anytime I want
Alr thats bad
And anytype
Switzerland is better then most counties if we take out morals
Thats not a high bar
in my state i have to wait until im 21 š
āA political system of political authority ruled by a single person who holds the position of monarch.ā
marxist-leninists are just kautskyites who have aura
Fnaf 4 without the red sky
Yea
I wouldn't say that's possible
but
I don't know the specifics about Switzerland's gun laws
Switzerland is a third world country
Its not like your moving out before 21
Please don't enter the politics hellhole please you will be corrupted
I made some edit slop š„ŗāļø
Barbaric folks.
not being able to afford to in this economy:
Some 18 year olds canāt even drive! Why give them a gun for gods sake?
Ive been playing cyberpunk for the past twelve hours
I like the ncr
Cool
i mean i dont own any guns legally
but i already technically "have" two
I got in an argument with an indian white supremacist over whether or not suppressing the mestizo and indio voices in post-spanish latin america was good for the historical progression of these reasons
I had a pole in my hand before I ever even touched a steering wheel I cnl
That was a nice conversation.
Wooden ones?
Alr that sounded weird asf broš
no a mosin nagant
Totally
and a .410 break action
I got an at rifle
Oh nice
It didn't sound weird to anyone else but you
I want a rifle
easier to consolidate money under a working single-family home
:8ball: Outlook not so good