Seriously, the best way to gain independence and self rulership is the refusal to work together with and for the state and cooperations, while developing the skills to use their tools (not their infrastructure - you canīt do a revolution in an industrialized country on facebook) for your own political purposes. Then build a network of autonomous communities with an own alternative infrastructure and means of production.
I donīt think that a violent revolution can do it, the critical mass will not be reached in the most developed countires before police starts firing at protestors. Still mass organization and alternative structures are the only sustainable way to a self determined furure.
Why the fuck aren't you in jail yet?
I think what he says is hogwash, dangerous and foolish, but if I thought for an instant that taking a bullet to the chest would keep him and others free to express themselves, I would take that bullet.
We can't pick and choose what free speech we'll tolerate.
This bilge he's foaming out? It's bad, but he hasn't yelled 'FIRE!' in a crowded building. Not yet, anyway. >_>
You want what I've got, well then come and get it... I dare ya.
And that's how they console themselves, iMaksim. They turn all of us into monsters, wealthy or not, to slay.
The first step to oppression/slavery/'cleansing'/etc: The notion that those you wish to oppress are less than human.
You have zero empathy, pal. Most of the ambiguously defined rich earned every cent through hard work and dedication.
Then some punks say they want to make everyone equally miserable by spreading the wealth around, mowing down neighborhoods to build identical apartment towers because anything else wouldn't be fair, I.E having one person living in a house while another lives in an apartment.
But worst of all, the assumption that wealth and power alone equals a lack of conscience. I hate most politicians. Anything above mayor or city council and I can count on two hands which ones I don't hate. But I am not so blind as to think even people like Obama have no conscience. The man, in all fairness, is simply doing what he thinks is right.
To listen to you, you'd think that as soon as you reached a certain net-worth, you enter a state of sociopathy. That is simply untrue. And you damned well know it.
It's a hell of a lot easier to tear someone's life apart (If not take someone's life entirely) if you dehumanize them first, isn't it?
I don't care if you have a problem with me. the only important thing is to change the world.
I could count the number of people who earned their massive fortunes on one hand and still have fingers left over.
I have empathy, that's why I believe what I do. I wish to change the world. It those who make billions off the suffering and exploitation of millions of workers who lack empathy my friend.
The problem isn't one person having a house and one person having a flat. The problem is a person owning multiple mansions while millions have to live in slums or on the street.
Look at the wealthily throughout history from the senatorial oligarchy of ancient Rome to the Pre-revolutionary French nobility to todays capitalist class. time and time they have proven not care about the needs of the working people, only for their class interests. it not blind hate, it is historic fact.
Shame Obama's conscience hasn't stop him from murdering untold hundreds of civilians in drone strikes.
KKK members are human, the Black Hundreds were human. South American death squads are humans, are you going to say they shouldn't be torn down because that would be "dehumanising".
Andrew Carnegie who while a good man tried to push in the idea of trsts and in so doing monopolies?
Henry Ford who made cheap cars at the cost of wages and who used strike breakers at every chance? And who later helped the Nazis and supported their view on the "jewish problem"?
Thomas Edison who stole his ideas from other scientists leaving them to die unknown and penniless while making millions off of inventions not of his own making.
Steve Jobs who's original working conditions were at the level of Asian sweatshops (and still are in some places).
Mark Zuckerber created Facebook and it happned to catch on, Face book has gone from revolutionary to obsolete and dangerous in less than a decade.
There are countless other wealthy people I could name who didn;t help at all, not even superficially like these people did.
On Rockefeller, do you have sources to back that?
Andrew Carnegie was a man of his era, I cannot doubt that. But to dismiss the amazing revolution he ushered in because he was also an aggressive businessman?
Henry Ford's goal was to make cars at a wage his employees could afford. His philosophy was that any of his workers should be able to afford the products they made. And yeah... There are a lot of people in history we'd have to expunge from the books if we took out every person who has ever attacked the Jewish people >_< Ford is unfortunately still a product of his time.
Yes, a handful of Edison inventions were not his own and have very questionable origins. But the majority of his achievements definitely belonged to him. And inventors like Tesla were generally their own undoing. Tesla was a god awful businessman.
Yes, Apple Inc is a high stress environment... But it also pays pretty freaking good.
How is Facebook obsolete and how the Hell is it dangerous? How is the ability to communicate with one another dangerous?
Edison, a handful? He was an arrogant man who electrocuted puppies trying to prove that DC was better than AC.
here is a list of the most famous of his many stolen inventions
1. The Electric Bulb or Incandescent Lamp
2. The Electric Chair
3. The Movie Camera
4. The Power Generator
5. X-Ray Photographs (fluoroscope)
6. The Storage Battery
7. The Record Player
8. Wax Paper
9. The Telegraph
Rockafeller, Boy oh Boy; TH eguy si a robber baron that
Apple Inc. Pays good when its in a country that wouldn't allow a bad price
Twitter, and half a dozen other communication systems exist that are more effective. As for dangerous;
Facebook has been at the center of several recent controversies that are increasingly leaving users disillusioned and in search of alternatives. At the center of these controversies is Facebook’s “news feed” feature. Ideally, news feed would work by showing on your timeline updates from those individuals and organizations you follow. There are two options for news feed – “most recent” and “top stories.” Facebook has decided to upend this feature by insidiously controlling what appears on your news feed regardless of which option you select.
Now, you will no longer receive regular updates from accounts you follow, and instead will see a “filtered” version determined by Facebook’s algorithms. Many Facebook users are unaware of this fact and are perplexed as to why they are no longer receiving regular updates from accounts they follow.
Facebook’s own explanation as to why they’ve implemented this policy is as follows:
Rather than showing people all possible content, News Feed is designed to show each person on Facebook the content that’s most relevant to them. Of the 1,500+ stories a person might see whenever they log onto Facebook, News Feed displays approximately 300. To choose which stories to show, News Feed ranks each possible story (from more to less important) by looking at thousands of factors relative to each person.
Facebook’s real motivation is more likely a combination of implementing soft-censorship and an effort to monetize news feeds by forcing content makers to pay in order to access people already following them. What’s left is wealthy content makers like large corporate media outfits monopolizing the public’s attention whether the public wants it or not.
News feed has also been used in at least two involuntary social engineering experiments where the news feeds of users were manipulated without their knowledge to influence them psychologically. In the most recently exposed experiment, Facebook manipulated the news feed of some 2 million Americans in 2012 in order to increase public participation during that year’s US presidential election.-
In 2013, Facebook would again manipulate news feeds of unwitting users to influence them psychologically. A report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) titled, “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks,” stated in its abstract that:
We show, via a massive (N = 689,003) experiment on Facebook, that emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness. We provide experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient), and in the complete absence of nonverbal cues.Not only are the findings troubling – illustrating that Facebook possesses the ability to influence the emotions of its users unwittingly through careful manipulation of their news feeds – but the invasive, unethical methods by which Facebook conducted the experiment are troubling as well.
Those involved in the experiment were neither notified before nor after the experiment was conducted, and along with news feed manipulation during the 2012 election, it appears Facebook sees the news feed feature in terms of influencing people as Facebook and its clients see fit rather than the feature being used to inform users as they themselves see fit.
Ford's success nitially was fine but he then started repressing workers rights, and I don't just mean that he was an antisemetic he supported the Nazis actively along with GM Texaco Oil etc. his sucess has nothign to do with him as a person.
My father's income is right in the middle of the middle class. He has never stepped on toes to earn his money for his family. He's 67 and still working.
And yeah, Obama's a bastard, but I don't think you're getting what I'm saying...
You're trying to compare people who are simply wealthy for whatever reason (Most of whom provide you with goods and services at prices well within your reach >_>) to monsters to console your envy and bloodthirst.
Remember much of the first Klan was made up of confederate veterans many of whom made untold fortunes from slavery and most death squads are controlled by wealthily backers.
The middle class count for nothing, they are still proletariat or at the very most petite bourgeoisie. they still have to sell their own labour rather than us the labour of others.
I get what your saying I just disagree.
I don't compare, most of the time they are one and the same.
It's because, and I may be shooting in the dark here, your knowledge of how big companies are run is limited to what you've seen on TV shows and movies.
And if that's the case, then that's fine! But I think I'd be *SLIGHTLY* more comfortable if you condemned an entire demographic of people for indiscriminate, mass execution based on something a little more comprehensive than seeing how a notedly Left-leaning media says that demographic live and work.
Oh, and if this opinion of yours is based on that bloated gasbag Michael Moore saying that 'Rich People' could pay off the national debt and there'd be plenty to spread around to everybody, then firstly, SHAME on you, and secondly, check this out: www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLiypw… and while you're at it... www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f6FZG… might help too.
You've had one noise screaming in your ear for most of your life and your perceptions have been painted thusly.
They use the labour of others to achieve their fortunes.
I spend time reading on the subject and while we're here I would guess most of knowledge of Communists is based on Cold Warrior ramblings.
Revolution is a about removing the ruling class from power and keeping them from taking it back. This something they won't allow without a long and bloody fight, Just look at the American or French Revolutions.
The media is owned by the capitalist class with the with the expectation of a few smaller ones. Almost all News outlet have a more or less rightist and pro-establishment in their outlook and reporting.
Lee Doren oh please. "Hear the news and learn what the experts are not telling you." said everything about the guy.
Shame me all you like, it won't change the fact that the capitalist class have between 21 and 32 trillion in capital hidden over seas, even if they lost 90% of their wealth they would still have more money than they could spend in a lifetime and more than ether of us could earn in a lifetime of honest labour.
Despite what you say that isn't the case, there was a time when I had many fairly centre right views, These views changed as I learned more and came to different opinions. You're just pissed off that I have a different world view and that I won't be cowered like some Liberal.
'Jews are money-grubbing parasites, let's kill them.'
'Farmers are hoarding all the food, let's kill them.'
'Wealthy people who didn't play ball with our ripping apart of the economy are trying to leave the country, let's kill them.'
'It's been brought to my attention by reporters that my own people are cannibalizing their children because of the terrible conditions my Communistic country has placed them under, let's kill the reporters.'
So easy to bring ruin if you conveniently forget that they're people too, huh?
That is simply not so.
Boy howdy am I glad you're not in charge or ever will be! ^_^
Do you have any idea how incredibly stupid you just soun-No, of course not.
Show me where your dear Hillary 'What difference at this point does the deaths of four Americans who should have been under my protection but were denied it make?!?!' Clinton's 'vast right wing conspiracy' is and I'll show you a paranoid.