Hey its a good question, and its one that a lot of reforming liberal democrats like yourself, and myself at one time, struggle to understand. A revolution is necessarily violent and authoritarian, right?

Well, kind of, maybe. I’m a Marxist and Marxists tend to think of revolutions as a change in the fundamental relationship that humans have to production. What gets made, who makes it, and why. A group of revolutionaries who seize control of the government but do nothing to change those fundamental relations are not revolutionary. Its just the same system with new leaders, maybe a new flag or something. The capitalist revolution took a solid 250-300 years with about 250-300 years of development beforehand. Kings and queens were replaced by industrialists, the divine right replaced by the social contract, church and god replaced by corporations and profits. The capitalist revolutions were hella bloody, with the exception of maybe the American one, which was based partly on the institution of slavery.

But what ended the divine right of kings wasnt the guillotine, it was taking their shit and redistributing it to the bourgeoisie. The slaves weren’t freed by killing their masters, they freed themselves and went over to the union armies. The changes that made real lasting effect were not cold blooded murderous action, in fact the French revolution didn’t last 15 years. It was social, cultural, political change. It was people changing themselves in order to change the world.

The bourgeoisie will use heinous violence to protect their interests, fascism is one of capitalism’s immune responses from mass organization and revolutionary activity. There are others, but that’s the big scary one we are dealing with now. Revolutionary change in the world begins with revolutionary changes to ourselves, and to each other, a cumulative historic project of liberation of the oppressed from our oppressors.

Deposing the bourgeoisie is not to become a new bourgeois. We can’t do what they do to become something that isn’t them. We will have to defend ourselves from violence but violence will not bring the changes that are necessary to create a better world. There will have to be justice for crimes against humanity, and what that justice will look like will be orders of magnitude more humane, and this bears out in historic examples from the Paris commune, to the Russian revolution (which was almost entirely bloodless until the civil war) to the Cuban revolution, and so forth.

He’s a total ideologue.

I’m warning you that ai could accomplish what it is designed to accomplish

Pure psychopath shit.

That’s an interesting perspective and I see where you are coming from. But practicality is out the window with the Trump admin. Transparency is practical

Not every conversation, but every conversation between powerful individuals.

And maybe that’s an impractical standard, but the spirit of it is more liberating than letting corruption fester in the darkness.

You’re right, there are secret meetings between powerful individuals that should remain hidden from public knowledge

Totally because they are looking out for the billionaires, the people they are supposed to serve

inevitable only in hindsight

I’m not so sure. I’m still friends with a guy who told me emphatically “you dont understand what we did, we destroyed the global economy” and then explained the whole subprime mortgage scam to me, back in like 2007. Lots of downstream businesses, new home builders, paint and drywall companies, building materials stores, started folding several months before the official crash as well. I wasn’t nearly as aware of things then, I was a grown adult but not yet 30 and with little formal education, but there were definitely huge flashing signs. Only the media, based 100% on the words of the banks and insurance companies, thought that a crash was undetectable.

I’m not sure quite what it would look like yet, but I’m willing to bet if you look where these data centers are being built, when the cash runs out to keep the whole scam afloat, these big companies will stop paying their bills. The smaller companies providing services and supplies will run out of money before the huge mega corpos start showing signs, so that is one of the metrics I’m watching closely. I just happen to live in the shadow of these data centers so I’ll be pretty close to it, that is if I’m right.

Did you just assume @hitlerball_lover1488’s gender?

Isn’t that just like regular school? American schools students have to do all sorts of patriotic nationalist hoo ha

So has anybody considered like trying to get a job at ice, but never doing the job just eating up as much time as possible? Just like showing up and asking a lot of questions, telling stories, etc., and then if you do get hired you just continue to take up as much time and energy as possible? I think if you could organize a bunch of people to do it, or just one at first, you could probably learn a lot. Like they’re desperate for people to hire, there’s gotta be a way to further mess with that

we’re willing to die

I’ll just sit back

Willing to die in a seated position doesn’t cut it goofy

The 22nd amendment ratified in 1951?

Same shit, different pedophile

Wow the subtext to this image is actually terrifying.

Jesus didn’t die for our sins, he rescued himself from consequences. He uncancelled himself

1000%

But exploitation is about human freedom. Getting rid of billionaires doesn’t end exploitation. It’s just a beginning.

The struggle for human freedom will never end

Sigourney and Gillian aren’t billionaire capitalists, they’re wealthy because they’re talented actresses. Their talent makes the owners of production companies lots of money, and they’re paid a fraction of it. But they still have to find someone to buy their labor. They had to audition to get jobs before they were big stars.

TS’s dad bought a record label and signed her to it.

Class analysis can be tricky, especially the entertainment industry, but it isnt always about being rich or not. The surest way to tell is “what is the relationship to production?” Tay is a billionaire because she helped ticketmaster and Live Nation create a monopoly, she’s a parasite. Without Gillian and Sigourney, the movies and shows they worked in wouldn’t be as good.

She’s worth 1.6 billion so its actually less

Sending that much money to a two year old doesn’t make sense. They literally have no concept of money or social responsibility. Why send money when the kid clearly needs a Dr.

/s

Charity from billionaires always looks so fake. Just send it anonymously. Otherwise its just a publicity stunt.

If her entire fortune was $100000 she would have given $6.25. A handful of pocket change and a fiver. Yet I don’t get articles by the independent written about me when I give an unhoused veteran a $20

I’m glad that someone in her position did less than the absolute bare minimum to help that child’s family. What a moving gesture.