No.3000
China
No.3001
Cooperation is more efficient than competition and all exploitation has inherent contradictions that must be isolated constantly to sustain the relationship. Look into dialectics more.
No.3002
also cool pic
No.3004
>>2999Yes hierarchy and ingroup favour will always exist in forseeable future but there is no reason for it to be politicised.
No.3008
>>3004when hierarchy and ingroup favor determine power relations how can they not be political?
No.3009
Why wouldn't things change?
No.3011
>>3009since the dawn of civilisation, class domination has been the fact of hman existence and every project to change this has failed. I don't see any realistic chance for this to happen.
No.3012
>>3011How do you know that?
No.3013
>>3010>la voot dems manI know that
It makes Foucault pretty pathetic to have lost a debate to the likes of him
No.3014
>>3012What do you mean? Like how I know that class domination has been a fact since urbanization in mesopotamia?
I read it in a book.
No.3015
>>3014Well I have read many books, multiple ones that do point out that civilizations have collapsed before and there's no reason to think ours won't. Plus it is not like human societies work on the principle of mathematical induction…
No.3017
>>3015>civilizations have collapsed before and there's no reason to think ours won't. but what makes you think the next collapse will actually do away with hierarchies and classes?
yeah, there have been several ones in the past, but none of them lead to something else than a new form of power structures.
No.3018
>>3017yes, communism literally starts from the material reality of class conflict
you seem to be an ultra-liberal that's just looking for an end of history in ideology so you settled with "anarcho-nihilism" where you can at least create one in the safety of your mind
No.3020
>>3018>you seem to be an ultra-liberal that's just looking for an end of historysaid the one who believes that the next revolution will somehow be authentic and different from all the ones before. like what the fuck are you on about?
No.3021
>>3017So what if the ugly beast rears its head again in a few decades? I just want to enjoy the fresh air for a while.
No.3024
>>3020never even said that. guess i should be the one asking you what the fuck you're on about
>>3019you need to have massive cognitive dissonance from booj class interest to ignore class conflict
No.3028
>>3024i'm not denying class conflict, i'm saying that your secularized second coming of christ is never going to happen
No.3030
>>3028im not a teleologist but thanks for telling me something that i already knew
No.3033
>>3024>never even said thatso you agree that there is no reason to believe that classes and hierarchies will be abolished, good to know
No.3035
>>3033class definitely will, one way or another, there’s no doubt about it
“Today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once. You will have to be lucky always.” —IRA
as for “hierarchy”, not even most anarchists seem to give a shit about that i think
No.3037
>>3035>there’s no doubt about itwhy? what makes you think that?
>as for “hierarchy”, not even most anarchists seem to give a shit about that i thinkbruh
what do you think anarchy means? like literally the etymological background of the term is 'against hierarchy'
No.3038
>>3037it's the ruling class that's always defending its own existence for its own self. sooner or later, they will fail and take all of their supposedly eternal mores and ideologies with them
No.3039
>>3038yes, this happened several times in history after all… only to be replaced by a new ruling class and new forms of class relations and domintaion.
again, what makes you think next time would be different?
No.3040
>>3039dude why does there need to be any final end? of course history goes on
No.3041
>>3040im not talking about history here but history of class domination.
like i ask what makes you think that classes will be abolished, you say theyll sooner or later fail at defending their own existence for their own self, I point out that just because the current ruling class will be overthrown it doesnt mean that class domination will end because alot of ruling classes have been overthrown in history only for new class relations to be established and you ask me why I want an end of history like what? can you not engage with what Im saying? are you somehow retarded?
is there any reason to believe that classes will be abolished and if so what are they?
thats all I want from you, nothing about le end of history or whatever. just what makes you believe in what you stated before like here
>>3035 No.3043
>>3041you're replying to someone else
communism is "different" because it came from the proletariat who didn't have any interest in creating a new class society, and simply wanted to stop having their lives determined for them by exploitation, exploitation that you seem very interested in reinforcing in your personal fantasies
No.3046
>>3043there have also been communist revolutions.
none have led to communism.
why should the next?
why are you so dense?
No.3047
>>3046i'd lead you on and ask something along the lines of how do you know the futurue but it's pretty clear you're just bourgeois and not actually an anarcho-nihilist
No.3048
>>3047im not the one claiming to know the future.
you claim that communism will happen.
im saying ther eis no reason to believe that.
oh but I must be bourgeoi because im questioning your faith in saint marx lol
No.3049
>>3048i dont need to have faith in saint marx, but you are swallowing saint nihilism's dick whole like every dime a dozen reactionary booj
No.3050
>>3049again, what makes you think the next revolution will be successful at abolishing classes?
it seems like you cant rell me reason and it also seems that you know this and come up with million counter-accusation. just like a christian.
No.3052
>>3050why do i need to know???? why are you so adamant?
all i need to know is that life rn is full of exploitation and needless misery that constantly justifies itself as necessary
No.3053
>>3052because believing in something without a reasoning behind it is really fucking stupid.
its basically a religious belief.
No.3054
>>3007This isn't the own you think it is.
>>3013>Foucault pretty pathetic to have lost a debateYou really think human nature man "won" that debate?
No.3055
>>3053We do that
all the fucking time.
No.3056
>>3055you mean you do that and now just make up another baseless accusation to divert the discussion away from what you can no justify.
No.3057
>>3056It's so funny that a so-called nihilist thinks human beings are actually able of rational thinking. What's next, upholding science and objectivity?
No.3058
>>3057of course rationality exists. it just as no absolute or essential meaning.
like you dont know shit about nihilism. fuck off already you uber spooked cuck.
No.3059
>>3058You don't even know about the values you yourself spouse. Sad! Keep thinking your beliefs are correct and the product of your rational mind and not something that clicked with your brain just because.
No.3060
>>3059such things surely also exist.
but what are not talking about your favourite color or music, but a belief in a set of political or philosophical systems.
like yeah, subcounscious decisions are a thing. but political decisions come about through counscious evaluation. unless of course, you are chasing a phantsam, like you are.
how hard can you cope btw? what are you gonna come up with next? epistemological arguments? just stop anon, you sound like a retard.
Unique IPs: 17