Seriously m8 I want to say read a book, because everything you're saying is the most basic bitch myths of what socialism is and isn't. >how they do that
Exploitation of labor and surplus value as well as promotion of hyperconsumerism. > he doesn't give a shit about Marx
Sure he does, because they actively oppose Marx's ideology, as it threatens their entire system by criticizing and exposing its ineffective and corrupt nature. >name literally anyone who was pro-immigration, pro-women rights, pro-gayshit, etc. who didn't describe themselves as a socialist<describe themselves
Are you retarded or just pretending? Besides the fact that most anti-socialist liberals, basically every modern "leftist" in the West promotes an idpol-addled rainbow capitalism. They just want more gay, black and female porkies, because they're retards. This is directly opposed to Socialist ideology which puts class issues first, and places idpol issues as secondary and only as part of class issues. Intersectionality is inherently anti-socialist, which is why Western liberal feminists have been excluded from genuine socialist circles since the times of Marx and onwards pic 1&2 related. >"you must work or u will starve" is bad <Lenin and the USSR literally promoted "Those who do not work, do not eat" except in regards to invalids, children, mothers and the elderly, (and even then invalids, and the elderly had opportunities for work if they wished so, but did not need to). Pic 5 related (this growth was built on labor)
No faggot, I'm saying that people should need to struggle like slaves to survive, because if they spend all their time laboring they have no time to become cultured and be actually self-actualized human beings (pic 3 related), poor people in the 1950s were reading more than people do today FFS because people literally have less time to even kickback and read a book, as they come home tired and just want to watch braindead escapist TV and drink beer (see Orwell). >If women choose, do men not have the choice <do the people who are traditionally the breadwinners of sustenance for their families get a choice to not do this
Nice goal-post shifting.>who will work besides the likely minority who won't devulge in earthly pleasures
See the USSR, AGAIN. People were encouraged but not forced to work full time because it was ingrained into the culture that people shouldn't be leeches and ought to work if they can, this freedom of choice meant rather than women doing the same exact work as men because of some delusional feminist equilism, they could pursue careers that interested them. Men ALSO pursued careers of interest but were also culturally obligated to work in general, because men are breadwinners and women usually became housewives and mothers with responsibilities there instead. Women in the USSR worked jobs that were appropriate for them and did part-time because they were encouraged to be wives and mothers without the stress of not being able to provide for their family. >so many questions answered by "fuck ethics and trying to think, lets just do shit on impulse"
c'mon now>Social issues come before economic
No they fucking don't. Social issues, unless they are incredibly minor, are usually linked to economic problems. The main issue of, say, racial equality is equal social standing through equal economic standing. People getting lower pay or being rejected for jobs because of race is a social issue based on an economic problem. The Base (economy) is more major than the Superstructure (society). As I've said many times before, 90% of identity-politics problems about women's rights and black rights and whatever the fuck would be solved automatically by a change in the mode of production and economic organization, because most of these delusions by liberals are actually just part of a single greater class issue. Pic 4 reelated>when they're living off of pills not to off themselves
Doesn't stop every Jamal, Vicky and Tom from organizing Pussy Parade protests and BLM riots, no matter how hopped up on Oxi they might be. >how little people give a shit about anything economically related… when muh 'leftists; became the cultural norm
Again, liberal capitalism with a rainbow coat of paint and virtue signalling is still capitalism, the WHOLE POINT of these liberal delusions is to distract from the fact that it's the ECONOMIC issues that are important, you wackadoo. It's like They Live but far less obvious. >do we need to change the system of good creation and distribution
Since a switch to socialism (actual socialism and not whatever you think socialism is) involves Alt+F4ing the Elite upper class and seizing their assets - which are basically the majority of the worlds resources - and organizing them under a planned system… YES. >seems kinda retarded for rich people to give their power away
The elite command the government and prefer when the government only restricts those who are restricting their liberty to exploit people. >Sounds like what Fascists want. What I want.
A planned economic system, with organized government to provide stability? Buddy, you want socialism, REAL socialism like Marxist-Leninism or the like, not liberal frauds or social democrat half-asses. The ORIGINAL fascist ideology was essentially a breakaway from Marxism, but it's incomplete and flawed.
Seriously, literally 90% of the things self-claimed fascists want are achievable through far less immoral and irrational means and with far more efficiency with Marxism-Leninism.