>>2614724Trouble in paradise.
>>2614719>Ah, yes because capitalism is merely an extension of the anglo-saxon culturei mean thats not exactly incorrect
>You're literally advocating for retvrn you moron. >What do you even think culture is?its pretty obvious they are talking about the various ways of living that people engage in because of differences in geography and natural resources. we dont want to eliminate these, we want to preserve and overcome them
>>2614727because imperialist peace is always temporary and the profit motive demands conflict, mr kautsky
>>2614730The EU is a vassal of the US and now that the latter is crumbling the former is struggling for a sovereign foreign policy (which will it not get).
In pure material terms, the superimperialist bloc remains united in their economic interests, but can not escape their fate, namely, being overcome by a superior mode of production (Socialism with Chinese Characteristics).
This is the world you live in and the sooner you accept this the sooner with your butthurt problems will alleviate.
Have a nice day, gringo
>>2614716>balance the booksNeoclassical meme. Countries aren't households.
>>2614725I was almost quoting you verbatim
>There are historical examples of nations fighting oppression by re-inventing their own cultures and languagesOK? How does that have any contradiction with anything that I said? I said that nationalism /could/ be good it just often isn't
>You just outed yourself as (what was already expected:) an American. You don't get to lecture us on languages (of which you speak one – barely) and cultures (which you don't possess).Literally the most blatant example of no true scottsman ever. There's a culture you don't like, so you simply don't call it a culture, because you like all cultures. Incredibly stupid. At least we agree that american culture needs to be destroyed.
>Ciao!I don't believe for a second you won't read this post.
>>2614726Palestinian
Kurds
All first nations
Uyghurs
I am honestly confused as to what you think defines a nation if you think that nations are defined by nation states. Like what definition or even vague notion are you going off of?
>>2614728That is what I was trying to say… I even clarified that by eliminate I meant radically change to the point that it can't be recognized anymore. The reason I said eliminate is because when people say "eliminating a culture" except in the case of literal genocide some part of it is always preserved, so I felt it would be dishonest to say that I merely want a transformation as it would imply that I want something less radical than other capitalist "eliminations" of culture when I don't (although I am against some oppressive measures such as censorship to achieve this purpose).
>>2614732>The EU is a vassal of the US and now that the latter is crumbling the former is struggling for a sovereign foreign policy this describes russia more than the eu
united kigdom germany belgium netherlands denmark france are all outright imperialist on their own and most people also would include italy spain austria sweden and norway (and japan and south korea)
japan getting cucked in the 80s was also inter-imperialist before the ussr even fell
>>2614735>That is what I was trying to say…idk if you are "nations are a spook" anon but saying so very much implies that nations are something we shouldnt think about or consider and instead the duty of communists is to blindly ignore them damn the consequences and act as if they are already abolished, and of course this is the anarchist position, that states have to be abolished before capitalism, when the marxist position is the opposite, that communism has to be global before the state can wither away
>>2614739>idk if you are "nations are a spook" anon I was not. I said I agreed with him more than most of the other people in this thread, but that he was going too far.
>>2614735>I even clarified that by eliminate I meant radically change to the point that it can't be recognized anymore. i think they just mean a ussr type policy where you preserve the language and customs, and the part about uniting them for a shared goal reads to me as preserving this historic knowledge for future benefit, kinda like not destroying the rain forest because there are plants we evolved alongside for billions of years that could cure cancer, or how maybe autists could bend space if we feed them spice so we shouldnt genocide them incase it locks us in the sol system
>>2614660Based Chechen noticer
>>2614735>How does that have any contradiction with anything that I said?Like your rants about destroying everything and borgifying it? Don't even deny this, everyone can scroll up and see how you progressively modified your radical (sounding) manifest to more sane policies, like the little cuck you are.
>There's a culture you don't like, so you simply don't call it a culture, because you like all cultures.99% of American radical leftist (whatever that means) agree with me. USA/pol/ would agree w me that the only "culture" the ciuntry has is consumption. Fucking Chapo Trap House would agree with me.
Maybe convince your fellow countrymen before trying to educate me?
>PalestinianIs a nation state accepted by 98% of the global community oppressed by zio-usa.
>KurdsNot a nation. A collection of similar cultures, languages, and religions split between like 5 countries.
>All first nationsNot a naton. You fucking colonized and eradicated them. What remains are coca cola drinking eminem listening people who wish to reclaim something they will never have again.
>UyghursAn autonomous region inside China. Their distinct culture is preserved and cherished.
>I am honestly confused as to what you think defines a nation if you think that nations are defined by nation states.Well I'm sorry that actually existing history hurts your sentimentality. Many such cases.
>That is what I was trying to say… I even clarified that by eliminate I meant radically change to the point that it can't be recognized anymore. The reason I said eliminate is because when people say "eliminating a culture" except in the case of literal genocide some part of it is always preserved, so I felt it would be dishonest to say that I merely want a transformation as it would imply that I want something less radical than other capitalist "eliminations" of culture when I don't (although I am against some oppressive measures such as censorship to achieve this purpose).Gigacope. See above.
>>2614736>Russia is a US vassal by fighting against literal neo-nazi US color revolutionYou have to try harder
>>2614748He won't read problematic anti-LGBTQIA+ Stalin. He wasn't progressive enough for him, even though crushing the nazies, you see…
>>2614753Lol wtf are you even saying
>destroying everything and borgifying it?>everyone can scroll up and see how you progressively modified your radical (sounding) manifest to more sane policies, like the little cuck you are.OK I'll quote my first post up the chain:
<If capitalism reverts to a literal slave society that would also mean the large scale destruction of all existing nations/cultures. That would be a bad thing.How on earth is this advocating for borgifying anything?
>USA/pol/ would agree w me that the only "culture" the ciuntry has is consumptionOK so? Sounds like a culture that needs to be destroyed then. It still counts as culture. Slave culture counts as culture too. I don't have any investment at all in convincing you the extent to which American culture is good. The worse it is, the better my argument is that there are cultures that need to be destroyed.
>Is a nation state accepted by 98% of the global community oppressed by zio-usa.Still doesn't have a state, the two halves of it aren't even under the same government.
>A collection of similar cultures, languages, and religions split between like 5 countries.Does that invalidate it from being a nation? Was Germany not a nation before German unification? Did it stop being a nation when it was split into east and west germany?
You still haven't given me a definition of nation. At all. Or even a vague notion.
>>2614759>Sounds like a culture that needs to be destroyed then.Consumption isn't a culture, nor a nation.
>>2614759>Does that invalidate it from being a nation?Yes.
>Was Germany not a nation before German unification?It was unified, redrawn, conquered, and wiped off several times, only solidifying as a singular nation after unity.
>Did it stop being a nation when it was split into east and west germany?Yes. There was the barbarian US vassal state and the civilized German socialist nation.
>>2614755What the fuck are you talking about? The article he linked was Stalin during his anti-nationalism period. It more or less agrees with me.
>>2614760>the only "culture" the ciuntry has is consumption>Consumption isn't a cultureThis is literally Aristotelian thinking where you are going to have to have two different words to describe the same thing but one word is for when it's good and one word is for when it is bad.
Even that would be tolerable, so long as you knew what you were doing and were clear about it, but you're not self conscious enough to even know that you're doing it.
>>2614762Why even use the term nation state then when it seemingly just means state?
Once again, what is your definition of a nation?
Also, you know that your definition is not inline with historical Marxists or… pretty much anyone else, correct?
>>2614764>This is literally Aristotelian thinking where you are going to have to have two different words to describe the same thing but one word is for when it's good and one word is for when it is bad.
>Even that would be tolerable, so long as you knew what you were doing and were clear about it, but you're not self conscious enough to even know that you're doing it.As I told you before: take this up with your supposed fellow-countrymen "comrades" at USA/pol/ and Chapo Trap House. You are the minority here. I agree with their assessment: American "culture" does not exist, only American consumption patterns.
You coward want to comvince me, a non-American, how I should think about your country? Take it up with the guys who can actually wreck you, you faggot narcissist.
>Why even use the term nation state then when it seemingly just means state?<S E E M I N G L YMaybe apply your text comprehension to your own posts before posting more trash. Please?!
>Once again, what is your definition of a nation?The Stalin text was posted several times over just for ((((((you)))))). Maybe study it, you unbearable parasite?
>>2614765Kirk died for our sins
I will now repent
In any case…. Russia is winning and Ukraine is losing.
What can a NATO-patriot like myself do to reverse this trend?!
>inb4 nothing
Such pessimism is counter-reactionary!
>>2614767>As I told you before: take this up with your supposed fellow-countrymen "comrades" at USA/pol/ and Chapo Trap House. You are the minority here. I agree with their assessment: American "culture" does not exist, only American consumption patterns.They already are convinced. They don't believe that literally. They say "our culture is dogshit" way more often than they say "we don't have culture". The former implies the latter is false. Why do they say both? Because the second isn't literal and is only meant figuratively as the first.
<The Stalin text was posted several times over just for ((((((you)))))). Ah, the text that you didn't read?
>A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common cultureIs Stalin's definition. That would apply to Germany before it united. It would apply to the Kurds. It would apply to the Uyghurs. And nowhere in that definition is there any requirement for a state to exist. In fact Stalin explicitly points to Georgia, which wasn't a country at the time. But you didn't actually read even the first section of the text you think somehow refutes me.
Thread full.
Plz bake
>>2614770You don't have a culture. Americans aren't real.
This is a fact. Go play out your mental sickness in your containment thread.
>>2614775Every dipshit nationalist wants to either be the next hegemon or be allied with the next hegemon, and thinks that once they do they won't get just as dumb as the old hegemon. Happened with England, happened with Spain, now it's happening with the US. Your nationalism, whatever it is might be fine for now, who knows, I don't know where you live, but if it ever succeeds, it'll get just as stupid as the average American. All else is cope.
>>2614770>>>>stable community of peopleWhat other forms than a state could such stability take? Georgia became a state proper in the federated USSR. Xianjang autonomy similarly. By what definition is Kurdistan real, especially after aligning with the imperialists over and over again?
Oh, didn't you hear? Kurd automomy struggle is now cancelled by Bibi, after the ISIS state was enforced.
Much stable. Much culture. Totally not a collection of useful idiots in any shape or form.
>>2614776>Everybody will become a butger eventuallyThe imperialist burger dream failed. We won't.
BYE! >>2614778>By what definition is Kurdistan realNot meaningful to this discussion at all
<By what definition is there a Kurdish nationBy Stalin's definition
>especially after aligning with the imperialists over and over againWhy on earth do you think that that is relevant? The German nation was real enough when it invaded the USSR. Whether you think that Kurds are good or bad is irrelevant to the issue of whether they are or were a nation. At the very least, it is irrelevant to Stalin's definition.
>Kurd automomy struggle is now cancelled by Bibi, after the ISIS state was enforced.OK? Even if every Kurd was killed that wouldn't mean that Kurds weren't historically nation, it could mean that it isn't one anymore, and perhaps the kurds are losing coherence as a culture and community for the reasons you are listing, but that just would mean that they were a nation but now their nation is dead or dying.
>>2614780>The imperialist burger dream failed.Spanish dream failed too, the new hegemon still became an idiot. That's the point.
Bake?
>>2614754Russia was a vassal and is now struggling for sovereignty. Even didn't block Yugo and participated in war on terror. At first slowly starting in 2008 and then ramping up after 2011 when they barred Exxon from purchasing a majority stake in oil and instead renationalized it, which in turn led to the Maidan.
>>2614755yeah well gay rights happen because urbanization and capitalism get rid of the need for straight couples having 9+ children to harvest crops. communism will be even gayer.
>>2614789bruh they've self consciously been there for over 100 years. Stable wasn't referring to stable geopolitical conditions it was referring to that the grouping itself is stable.
>>2614764>The article he linked was Stalin during his anti-nationalism period. It more or less agrees with me.i posted it because he describes how nations arise from commerce collecting in cities at the beginning of capitalism and needing a common language brings rise to nationalism as it creates a common culture or "psychological makeup" as he calls it
of course this is simplified and applied to soviet conditions but he lays out the basic framework for identifying a nation and you can extrapolate it to modern conditions easily
by that i mean you dont have to have all four like he says, economic life takes precedence over language, like china and india are nations, even if they are made up of multiple nations. also counts for natives/indigenous, "black" nation etc because they have a common economic life and psychological makeup
and of course lenin says that doesn't mean you support reactionary splitters and secessionists or borg casino owners, you just support their right in principle and weigh each decision according to its material conditions
>>2614794Under communism there will be no gay rights because there will be no rights at all, fyi
>>2614798The grouping itself is not stable, however
>>2614812>people are hetero because of societal pressure and the need to reproduce>people are gay because of lack of societal pressure and a lack of need to reproduceYou have a poltard's understanding of human sexuality. The approx. 5% non-hetero statistic has been consistent throughout class societies. For hunter gatherers? Homosexuality was pretty much unheard of. Bisexuality? Occasional.
But I literally dont even fucking care dude about your idiocy. I don't care if everybody sucks dicks under communism as long as I can have a home and have to work no more than 2 hrs a day.
But foe you it's rhis cancerous cultural vendetta that you must wage against lenpatriarchical heteronormatives, or what fucking ever.
Get a fucking job, parasite.
>>2614812>Pic>Those who owned 11,000 assesBruh
>>2614826>But foe you it's rhis cancerous cultural vendettano i just think you are a retard for trying to bring up and conflating LGBTCIA with social progress brought by changes in material conditions. its you who is leaning in to the liberal narrative that human rights are separate from economic development and are a result of "culture"
>>2614840Stop projecting. I'm not the one who thinks in terms of rights here, to begin with.
make a new thread uyghurs
>>2614687Christianity was fucking stupid, because even the earliest Church councils had to ban self-castration because Bible clearly states that worldly desires are evil while castration negatively impacted population statistics for feudal lords. Even so, Christians had this weird obseesion with masturbation, sex and purity with communal overwatch over what happened in people's bedrooms.
This has nothing to do with LGBT or whatever, it's about a Cult organization controlling sexual life of cultists
>A reason why the Christians were prosecuted was literally that they didn't jerk off to the literal God-Emperor of the Romans.Nah, Christians were simply annoying as fuck, same as they are today. Romans tried to remove annoyance - same way Chinese and Japanese did, by the way. But unlike Romans, Asians have managed to prevent this disease from taking root and have maintained their relatively progressive religious customs over totalitarian (in)sect(oid) religion of Europeans
>>2614872Are you one of the wiggas who genuinely thinks that pagans had queer shamans and druids?
Unique IPs: 12