Capitalism can only end when profit is no longer the incentive and is rendered useless, that requires either resource depletion or a change of the MOP as to underminet he cost of labour and the need for employed labour.
Never in history has a mode of production been forcefully "fought" and replaced, there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of production, nor for any in the history of civilization. Communism is a bourgeois movement that postures as the real process of change, when change can only come when the mode of production runs its course.
There is only one thing that people who want change can do - they can wait.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
>>2714310counterrevolutionary
>there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of production,what are the napoleonic wars
>>2714316>what are the napoleonic warsA bunch of nothing, feudal monarchy vs bourgeois republic which didn't matter since the real change of the mode of production came from industrialization, the industrial revolution was the sole reason feudalism died.
>>2714316>counterrevolutionaryThere's no revolution ya larper.
>>2714327i know, just a little thing i'd thought be funny to say
>we wait
>bourgeoisie launches the depopulation virus
>religious psychos suicide bomb the world with nukes in retaliation
The waitionary needs two things to exist - an armchair and a bed.
Great things come to those who wait.
Short live the waitolution.
>>2714330As if they have the mercy to make the decision to end this for you. They will use their cattle until they no longer hold utility.
>Never in history has a mode of production been forcefully "fought" and replaced
Logical fallacy. Lots of "never happened before in history" have happened, otherwise history wouldn't exist because nothing ever changes.
>there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of production
Yes there was, only they were not self conscious of it in the beginning of the process. But later on became fully aware of what they were doing, especially in the latecomer countries.
>Communism is a bourgeois movement that postures as the real process of change
“Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.”
>when change can only come when the mode of production runs its course
Capitalism->Communism is not inevitable without communists. The world can simply end.
>>2714310https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rateIt is impossible to extract more labor if population is declining. Capitalism ends soonish as it has become a fetter on the development of the productive forces.
>>2714310The USSR literally existed though. It's like the Italian merchant republics of the middle ages, a primitive precursor of the world to come. Since progress under capitalism grows exponentially we won't have to wait 8 centuries, the USSR arose scarcely a century after the rise of industrial capitalism, and the modern capitalist world has a few too many contradictions to remain stable over this century
>>2715905Nobody in the medieval world considered Venice or Florence an existential threat to feudalism though, not even Byzantium
>>2716066well then they were a bit stupid weren't they
>>2716620no? neither ended up being a threat to feudalism
>>2716066venice and Florence werent trying to export their model
>>2714347The real movement doesn't just happen automatically. Otherwise it would be illogical to even talk of a real movement that can be defined as seperate from everything else that happens in capitalism. Also you haven't actually disproven anything I said, you're just spouting non sequiturs and buzzwords.
A scientific understanding of the world enables you to change your state of affairs through conscious action.
>>2714310>Never in history has a mode of production been forcefully "fought" and replaced, there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of productionWhat about the School of Salamanca? Or much of the Enlightenment liberal thinkers who wanted to get rid of noble privilege and open up the markets and establish all the banking BS in the Dutch Republic which they exported to England in the Glorious Revolution.
>>2714330Oh epstenians overlords, please do this today. I don't want to take that crowded bus ever again.
Communism is neither bourgeois or proletariat, scientific communism states that the revolutionary subject is the proletariat
>>2716705>neither ended up being a threat to feudalismbecause they were, as anon said
>>2715905>a primitive precursor of the world to come >>2714330>>2714346Thinking the world will end is idealism, nothing ends. The bourgeosise are some magical force that can hit the kill people button and murder everyone. You are a liberal who is egotistical enough to believe that without your special touch the world will collapse. Get Over Yourself.
>>2717948 (me)
>The bourgeosise are some magical force that can hit the kill people button and murder everyone. are not*
Some business owners only own businesses because they actually want to fiollow their dreams but that's 0.1% of the amount of businesses. Many businesses would sell shittily-made and cheaply-made goods for a fortune, only caring about maximising profit over the actual quality of the goods
>>2717192>asia has been industrialized enough to be unprofitableit's true that this is the only way for Africa to develop capital,because otherwise they won't be able to have a manufacturing base when buying from China is still cheaper and will just end up being ressource extractor but more advanced
>>2714310>Never in history has a mode of production been forcefully "fought" and replaced, there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of production, nor for any in the history of civilizationThere literally was though, every 18th century bourgeois revolution, and even going back to feudalism that was brought on by the collapse of the western roman empire and intense localized violence
>>2714310>there was no capitalist movement to end the feudal mode of production<doesn't know about the enclosures🙄
>>2721083>>2721088Neither of those were movements. And neither spent decades theorizing how to do it nor had to suffer a loss like that of the USSR and its consequences globally.
>>2721182except they did, do you have any knowledge of the early modern period, like at all?
>>2721198Who wrote about abolishing the feudal mode of production 200 years prior to industrialization? Thats what we're at with Marx, and 200 years later it is still the capitalist mode of production. Where were their analyists? Where were their great men? Which was the great capitalist nation that fell during feudalism only for capitalism to come to be later? What was their USSR?
>>2721198There was no capitalist movement during feudalism, it all came to be after the industrial revolution, which was spontaneous as a result of random smart asses rediscovering the steam engine. The bourgeois didn't have to suffer like we did, they got it all handed to them right there and then.
>>2721229>What was their USSR?technically speaking the dutch republic, more accurately parliamentarian england during the civil war, for a good while afterward a large amount of reforms were placed in to reduce the growing tide of liberal capitalist reform, like in france, parts of germany, etc, it was only in the latter half of the 18th century that liberal capitalism started to be a real force
uygha they spent centuries theorizing liberalism before the feudal order actually fell wtf is everyone talking abt
>>2721230>there was no capitalist movementwhat was the enlightenment?
It was the liberal movement, it didnt call itself a "capitalist" movement
Unique IPs: 23