Class struggle in Somalia? What is the relationship between rich and poor somalis?

[Som]

I can't believe this Commie is actually using CHINA as an example of the success of Communism

China only started the process of becoming rich AFTER 1978, when Chairman Mao died and his replacement instituted market reforms. US Capitalist companies like Nike put their factories over there.

Many multi billion dollar corporations arose in China during the 1980s and 1990s

China turned rich when they turned capitalist. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to you. The irony is rich here

Without Mao, China would be poor like a south east asian country.
Compare China under Mao and China in the beginning of the 20th century

 

[Radical]

You talk about human flaws like greed and power-hunger in one sentence, and then you propose a socialist system which will only REINFORCE these negative human traits. What do you think happens when people are appointed for political reasons rather than maximizing economic efficiency? Remember what happened in Zimbabwe when Mugabe gave farms to his friends, or in Venezuela when Chavez appointed loyalists to work in his oil fields?

Do you really think you'll get maximum efficiency by delegating responsibility to political actors? And when I mean political actors, I include Unions, Collectives, and Cartels. All of them have interests much different from the consumers

And no, it was not a fluke. That's a load of BS. The success of Asian countries was being praised in 1979, when China was still a poor backwater nation. People then thought it was a fluke. But China imitates some of this exact same policies and look how rich they are today compared to 40 years ago!

You believe Nairobi has gotten worse since the 1980s....

You're citing irrelevant articles about Australia that have nothing to do with the topic. Even granting the premise of that article, that proves everything I'm saying. "Australian incomes fall for the first time since 1992" is making the assumption that Aussie incomes were rising every single year since then! Yet you're gonna use a 1 year decline as an indication that Aussies are poorer today than in 1992? Is this what you're arguing?

Greed and human flaws are at their best in capitalism, Mugabe is a fine example with his hyper inflation fiasco, thanks for bringing that up

A good example would be private property, rather then personal possession, it coercively forces people into exploitative situations. the owners of the apparatus of production steal the surplus value of those working for the owners. who are forced into servitude because all other means of natural survival have been cut off by ownership of land without occupation. the concept of private property has also been used by colonialism to tear away the land and rights of indigenous populations around the world, killing hundreds of millions. You cannot deny that's a product of capitalism, you might say it was in the past but it's still happening with Neo-Colonialism in Brazil and other third world countries who are being stripped away of their natural resources. IT'S LITERALLY DESTROYING OUR PLANET

all because of a name on a piece of paper in an office somewhere is why people are starving and why we are throwing away enough to feed them yearly. The claim of privately owning the means of survival is cruel, selfish and inherently oppressive, and to privately own production is also inherently exploitative.

Now for Communism/Socialism rather than trying to "Fix corruption" it instead tries to minimize the power any corrupt individual or group can wield.

Only when the distribution of a societies productive capacity attempts to mimic worker ownership through redistribution have we seen broad inclusive prosperity. Capital seeks to concentrate control and power at all times. It is fundamentally self-perpetuating, authoritarian and dominating until a critical mass of popular opposition pushes back

It was definitely a fluke, all the nations would've been as successful by now. and I have first hand experience in Nairobi, everyone believes the 80s and 90s was when the country was at its peak, if you're still skeptical then you can visit a Kenyan forum

Again where are your sources? I'm tired of repeating myself, the rise in young adult suicide rates isn't enough for you? Australia was only one of them, I could give you more

 

[Kaafiye]

Greed and human flaws are at their best in capitalism, Mugabe is a fine example with his hyper inflation fiasco, thanks for bringing that up

A good example would be private property, rather then personal possession, it coercively forces people into exploitative situations. the owners of the apparatus of production steal the surplus value of those working for the owners. who are forced into servitude because all other means of natural survival have been cut off by ownership of land without occupation. the concept of private property has also been used by colonialism to tear away the land and rights of indigenous populations around the world, killing hundreds of millions. You cannot deny that's a product of capitalism, you might say it was in the past but it's still happening with Neo-Colonialism in Brazil and other third world countries who are being stripped away of their natural resources. IT'S LITERALLY DESTROYING OUR PLANET

all because of a name on a piece of paper in an office somewhere is why people are starving and why we are throwing away enough to feed them yearly. The claim of privately owning the means of survival is cruel, selfish and inherently oppressive, and to privately own production is also inherently exploitative.

Now for Communism/Socialism rather than trying to "Fix corruption" it instead tries to minimize the power any corrupt individual or group can wield.

Only when the distribution of a societies productive capacity attempts to mimic worker ownership through redistribution have we seen broad inclusive prosperity. Capital seeks to concentrate control and power at all times. It is fundamentally self-perpetuating, authoritarian and dominating until a critical mass of popular opposition pushes back

It was definitely a fluke, all the nations would've been as successful by now. and I have first hand experience in Nairobi, everyone believes the 80s and 90s was when the country was at its peak, if you're still skeptical then you can visit a Kenyan forum

Again where are your sources? I'm tired of repeating myself, the rise in young adult suicide rates isn't enough for you? Australia was only one of them, I could give you more

The entire concept of "surplus value" is a myth and is based on the false belief that value is objectively defined.

That couldn't be further from the truth. Value is subjective. Value exists only in your brain. I can't definitively tell you what an expensive Gucci bag is worth, or what concert tickets are worth. The value exists in the minds of the customer, and any "profit" is a manifestation of that.

If a woman purchases a $100 kit of makeup, I might consider it a waste of money. But clearly she values the item, or else why would she purchase it? And wouldn't she purchase the same item if it cost $105? Clearly she values the item more than she does her money, or else why would she make that trade?

By Marx's faulty logic, a man doing a useless task like digging holes with a shovel must be creating the same amount of value as a man who uses a steam shovel to do the same task. That's not true.

And yes, I can fully deny that this is a product of capitalism. You don't even know what capitalism is, or else you wouldn't be making such a silly argument. Humans have been conquering, enslaving, and colonizing each other since the Dawn of Time. Even the socialist governments of Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin engaged in the same acts of colonialism and exploitation. The Romans did it. The Greeks did it. Yet you take this universal concept and apply it to capitalism, which shows how little you understand about the system you're critiquing

And how much profits do you think a company earns? By Marx's faulty logic, he made it seem as if businessmen "siphon" a huge chunk of the value created by the worker. If that's the case, then what about when a company takes a loss? Last year, we've seen enormous numbers of corporations take billion-dollar losses. If profits are a function of a worker being "underpaid", then are losses indicative of workers being overpaid? Should the workers have to forfeit some of their salary once they realize their company took a loss that year?

And how do you even judge the value creation of an individual? You can have 2 workers, doing the exact same job, but working for two different companies. One of them works for a profitable venture, and the other worker works for a company that takes huge losses. By your logic, the first worker is being "underpaid" while the other worker is "overpaid" despite the fact that they're doing the same job

And your assertion that "all of the countries should be rich by now" is a bald-faced lie. Only someone who hasn't paid attention to the 20th century would make such a conclusion. There have been hundreds of wars, civil wars, as well as the installation of socialist governments all over Africa, Asia and Latin America. There have been MANY countries (including Tanzania, Venezuela, etc) that got POORER as they adopted socialist policies. Read up on Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and how these men totally destroyed their nations because of socialism. The richest countries in the world are the ones with the most economic freedom. That isn't a "fluke", that is a pattern that has held up over time

And your bullshit take on suicide rates.....yeah you're not gonna get away with that. I can look at that trend and easily blame the rise in suicides due to the decline of the family unit, the decline of religion, the prominence of global media that amplifies bad news coverage, etc. Pointing out to small examples isn't gonna get you anywhere. Your own source admitted that Aussies were getting richer every year since 1992. So for a solid 28 years, the average Aussie was doing better and better. Yet you take their one-time decline as an indication that they're getting poorer! Are you fucking kidding me? That's like me pointing to the 2008 Recession and then make the absurd conclusion that the average American was doing better in 1900 than he was in 2007. That's the logic I'm hearing right now

If you're gonna bring a source, make sure it's relevant to the discussion. Don't give me some bullshit info about Aussie suicide rates.

 

[Kaafiye]

Without Mao, China would be poor like a south east asian country.
Compare China under Mao and China in the beginning of the 20th century

This is one of the most ignorant posts ever made on this forum

Mao is responsible for the deaths of millions of Chinese people due to starvation, violence and displacement. Mao deserves ZERO credit, and he set back China at least a century

Mao did more damage to China than even the British and Japanese dared to do.

Congratulations, you made an ass of yourself

 

[Radical]

The entire concept of "surplus value" is a myth and is based on the false belief that value is objectively defined.

That couldn't be further from the truth. Value is subjective. Value exists only in your brain. I can't definitively tell you what an expensive Gucci bag is worth, or what concert tickets are worth. The value exists in the minds of the customer, and any "profit" is a manifestation of that.

If a woman purchases a $100 kit of makeup, I might consider it a waste of money. But clearly she values the item, or else why would she purchase it? And wouldn't she purchase the same item if it cost $105? Clearly she values the item more than she does her money, or else why would she make that trade?

By Marx's faulty logic, a man doing a useless task like digging holes with a shovel must be creating the same amount of value as a man who uses a steam shovel to do the same task. That's not true.

And yes, I can fully deny that this is a product of capitalism. You don't even know what capitalism is, or else you wouldn't be making such a silly argument. Humans have been conquering, enslaving, and colonizing each other since the Dawn of Time. Even the socialist governments of Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin engaged in the same acts of colonialism and exploitation. The Romans did it. The Greeks did it. Yet you take this universal concept and apply it to capitalism, which shows how little you understand about the system you're critiquing

And how much profits do you think a company earns? By Marx's faulty logic, he made it seem as if businessmen "siphon" a huge chunk of the value created by the worker. If that's the case, then what about when a company takes a loss? Last year, we've seen enormous numbers of corporations take billion-dollar losses. If profits are a function of a worker being "underpaid", then are losses indicative of workers being overpaid? Should the workers have to forfeit some of their salary once they realize their company took a loss that year?

And how do you even judge the value creation of an individual? You can have 2 workers, doing the exact same job, but working for two different companies. One of them works for a profitable venture, and the other worker works for a company that takes huge losses. By your logic, the first worker is being "underpaid" while the other worker is "overpaid" despite the fact that they're doing the same job

And your assertion that "all of the countries should be rich by now" is a bald-faced lie. Only someone who hasn't paid attention to the 20th century would make such a conclusion. There have been hundreds of wars, civil wars, as well as the installation of socialist governments all over Africa, Asia and Latin America. There have been MANY countries (including Tanzania, Venezuela, etc) that got POORER as they adopted socialist policies. Read up on Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and how these men totally destroyed their nations because of socialism. The richest countries in the world are the ones with the most economic freedom. That isn't a "fluke", that is a pattern that has held up over time

And your bullshit take on suicide rates.....yeah you're not gonna get away with that. I can look at that trend and easily blame the rise in suicides due to the decline of the family unit, the decline of religion, the prominence of global media that amplifies bad news coverage, etc. Pointing out to small examples isn't gonna get you anywhere. Your own source admitted that Aussies were getting richer every year since 1992. So for a solid 28 years, the average Aussie was doing better and better. Yet you take their one-time decline as an indication that they're getting poorer! Are you fucking kidding me? That's like me pointing to the 2008 Recession and then make the absurd conclusion that the average American was doing better in 1900 than he was in 2007. That's the logic I'm hearing right now

If you're gonna bring a source, make sure it's relevant to the discussion. Don't give me some bullshit info about Aussie suicide rates.

A myth? What are you even talking about?
So let's say that I am the owner of a clothing company. The materials for each shirt costs $3. The tools to make the shirt (between initial purchase, upkeep, and saving for new tools to replace old ones) are on average $1 per shirt. I have miscellaneous expenses after this (marketing, design, etc.), but we'll simplify here. Based upon the designs, cut, and material, my people tell me that I can expect to sell these shirts at $15/shirt. That is the *market value* of the product.

I know that in our production facilities, a single worker can make five shirts every hour. That's 5 shirts at $4 of materials / tools for each shirt, a total of $20 each hour in expenses. I can expect to sell these 5 shirts for $15 each, or a total of $75. $75 - $20 = $55. This is the money I have left to play with.

How much will I pay my employee to make five shirts an hour?

It has to be less than $55. But how much?

In a labor market, I'll pay them as little as I can. If I'm struggling to find workers, then I may have to pay them as much as $40 or $45 an hour to attract them. If there is high unemployment and people are clamoring to work for me, than I may pay them $10 an hour. Or I may send my production facilities overseas like those Chinese sweatshops and pay them as little as $.50 an hour.

The point is this: the worker never receives the full $55/hour. He does not decide how much he receives, etc. That is exploitation. The degree of exploitation can vary, but it is exploitation nonetheless. All decisions, from wages to how the profits are used in the company, to how VALUABLE a worker is are decided by the capitalist. The worker has no say, and he is exploited because of this lack-of-say.
That is capitalism in its most basic form so yes I know what it is

Humans have been conquering, enslaving, and colonizing each other since the Dawn of Time all in the name of personal gain, which is also what fuels capitalism, why are deforestations and intruding on indigenous land still happening in Brazil? Again personal gain, these savage ways will forever continue for as long as capitalism exists

Even those successful capilalist countries that you worship like Singapore generally does not have economic freedom. Don't let the pretty towers fool you, The capitalist class violently enslaves the workers & sells their production. This violence starts with the claiming of land & natural resources by the top 10%. Without such, they would not own the means of production. There's literally pollution in the whole country
people like you always equate economic performance in terms of numbers with the value of a state and I would argue that free access to healthcare and education and housing would create a more "economically free" populace than a society where some live in filth and poverty while some in gigantic mansions.

Yes blame literally everything on suicide except the low minimum wage and rising inflations, the most plausible

Where are your sources again? Are you incapable of giving any? And stop being so fixated on Australia, that was only one example, I gave you four other articles to dispute or educate yourself with.

 

[Marcus]

A myth? What are you even talking about?
So let's say that I am the owner of a clothing company. The materials for each shirt costs $3. The tools to make the shirt (between initial purchase, upkeep, and saving for new tools to replace old ones) are on average $1 per shirt. I have miscellaneous expenses after this (marketing, design, etc.), but we'll simplify here. Based upon the designs, cut, and material, my people tell me that I can expect to sell these shirts at $15/shirt. That is the *market value* of the product.

I know that in our production facilities, a single worker can make five shirts every hour. That's 5 shirts at $4 of materials / tools for each shirt, a total of $20 each hour in expenses. I can expect to sell these 5 shirts for $15 each, or a total of $75. $75 - $20 = $55. This is the money I have left to play with.

How much will I pay my employee to make five shirts an hour?

It has to be less than $55. But how much?

In a labor market, I'll pay them as little as I can. If I'm struggling to find workers, then I may have to pay them as much as $40 or $45 an hour to attract them. If there is high unemployment and people are clamoring to work for me, than I may pay them $10 an hour. Or I may send my production facilities overseas like those Chinese sweatshops and pay them as little as $.50 an hour.

The point is this: the worker never receives the full $55/hour. He does not decide how much he receives, etc. That is exploitation. The degree of exploitation can vary, but it is exploitation nonetheless. All decisions, from wages to how the profits are used in the company, to how VALUABLE a worker is are decided by the capitalist. The worker has no say, and he is exploited because of this lack-of-say.
That is capitalism in its most basic form so yes I know what it is

Humans have been conquering, enslaving, and colonizing each other since the Dawn of Time all in the name of personal gain, which is also what fuels capitalism, why are deforestations and intruding on indigenous land still happening in Brazil? Again personal gain, these savage ways will forever continue for as long as capitalism exists

Even those successful capilalist countries that you worship like Singapore generally does have economic freedom. Don't let the pretty towers fool you, The capitalist class violently enslaves the workers & sells their production. This violence starts with the claiming of land & natural resources by the top 10%. Without such, they would not own the means of production. There's literally pollution in the whole country
people like you always equate economic performance in terms of numbers with the value of a state and I would argue that free access to healthcare and education and housing would create a more "economically free" populace than a society where some live in filth and poverty while some in gigantic mansions.

Yes blame literally everything on suicide except the except low minimum wage and rising inflations, the most plausible

Where are your sources again? Are you incapable of giving any? And stop being so fixated on Australia, that was only one example, I gave you four other articles to dispute or educate yourself with.

All the supposed negatives you write about are positives. Had the workers any competance, they wouldnt need to work for an employer, theres nothing from stopping the workers from organising and building cooperatives. But reality is, people need to be lead.

 

[Radical]

All the supposed negatives you write about are positives. Had the workers any competance, they wouldnt need to work for an employer, theres nothing from stopping the workers from organising and building cooperatives. But reality is, people need to be lead.

Competence like being selfish and amoral? To you its a dog eat dog world huh? That's an ugly individualistic way of looking at things,

Tell me why the US keeps Interfering whenever a country suggests an alternative? To secure the status quo and keep their corporate overlords happy perhaps?

 

[Marcus]

Competence like being selfish and amoral? To you its a dog eat dog world huh? That's an ugly individualistic way of looking at things,

Tell me why the US keeps Interfering whenever a country suggests an alternative? To secure the status quo and keep their corporate overlords happy perhaps?

Obviously, the US is a hegemony and wants to maintain its interests in the world. This has always happened. Seems like all you have is what you view as moral.

What exactly is immoral about capitalism and define what you mean by immoral. It hurts peoples feelings isnt a moral argument.

 

[Radical]

Obviously, the US is a hegemony and wants to maintain its interests in the world. This has always happened. Seems like all you have is what you view as moral.

What exactly is immoral about capitalism and define what you mean by immoral. It hurts peoples feelings isnt a moral argument.

Maintaining the current state which includes such harsh working conditions to the point where people are required to have adult diapers and suicide nets while getting paid peanuts is a bit immoral to me, don't know about you.

 

[Marcus]

Maintaining the current state which includes such harsh working conditions to the point where people are required to have adult diapers and suicide nets while getting paid peanuts is a bit immoral to me, don't know about you.

Seems pretty based to me

 

[Kaafiye]

A myth? What are you even talking about?
So let's say that I am the owner of a clothing company. The materials for each shirt costs $3. The tools to make the shirt (between initial purchase, upkeep, and saving for new tools to replace old ones) are on average $1 per shirt. I have miscellaneous expenses after this (marketing, design, etc.), but we'll simplify here. Based upon the designs, cut, and material, my people tell me that I can expect to sell these shirts at $15/shirt. That is the *market value* of the product.

I know that in our production facilities, a single worker can make five shirts every hour. That's 5 shirts at $4 of materials / tools for each shirt, a total of $20 each hour in expenses. I can expect to sell these 5 shirts for $15 each, or a total of $75. $75 - $20 = $55. This is the money I have left to play with.

How much will I pay my employee to make five shirts an hour?

It has to be less than $55. But how much?

In a labor market, I'll pay them as little as I can. If I'm struggling to find workers, then I may have to pay them as much as $40 or $45 an hour to attract them. If there is high unemployment and people are clamoring to work for me, than I may pay them $10 an hour. Or I may send my production facilities overseas like those Chinese sweatshops and pay them as little as $.50 an hour.

The point is this: the worker never receives the full $55/hour. He does not decide how much he receives, etc. That is exploitation. The degree of exploitation can vary, but it is exploitation nonetheless. All decisions, from wages to how the profits are used in the company, to how VALUABLE a worker is are decided by the capitalist. The worker has no say, and he is exploited because of this lack-of-say.
That is capitalism in its most basic form so yes I know what it is

Humans have been conquering, enslaving, and colonizing each other since the Dawn of Time all in the name of personal gain, which is also what fuels capitalism, why are deforestations and intruding on indigenous land still happening in Brazil? Again personal gain, these savage ways will forever continue for as long as capitalism exists

Even those successful capilalist countries that you worship like Singapore generally does not have economic freedom. Don't let the pretty towers fool you, The capitalist class violently enslaves the workers & sells their production. This violence starts with the claiming of land & natural resources by the top 10%. Without such, they would not own the means of production. There's literally pollution in the whole country
people like you always equate economic performance in terms of numbers with the value of a state and I would argue that free access to healthcare and education and housing would create a more "economically free" populace than a society where some live in filth and poverty while some in gigantic mansions.

Yes blame literally everything on suicide except the low minimum wage and rising inflations, the most plausible

Where are your sources again? Are you incapable of giving any? And stop being so fixated on Australia, that was only one example, I gave you four other articles to dispute or educate yourself with.

Again, what a ridiculously simplified way of looking at an economy. By that logic, a business owner would be guilty of "exploiting" the suppliers of raw materials since he's also charging a premium on these items.

The "market value" of the t-shirt is subjective and it depends from person to person. Your ridiculous analogy doesn't seem to include the fact that the price of the t-shirt can vary depending on what the customer wants

According to your flawed logic, if I hire a worker to make a plain white T-shirt, and pay him $5 to make it, that's fine. But if I take that SAME t-shirt, and I put an Air Jordan logo on it, it's now worth 10x the price. Despite the fact that no extra work was done on it, and the materials/shipping/tools was the exact same.

Yet the t-shirt with Michael Jordan's logo on it is somehow worth 10x more. Are the workers in the plant being screwed 10x harder? Is that the logic you're coming with? Why are some shoes worth only a few dollars, while other shoes cost hundreds of dollars? Are the workers for the expensive shoes somehow more valuable than the ones who work for a cheap shoe company?

That's what you can't seem to understand. Value is SUBJECTIVE. You don't know shit about capitalism or else you wouldn't be making such a dumb analogy.

And regarding Singapore. This is a nation that was poorer than most African nations as recently as 1965. If you look at Singapore today, it's like night and day. Yet you have this Communist who's disconnected from reality trying to tell me with a straight face that Singapore sucks and the people are "violently enslaved" by their capitalist overlords

You talk about Capitalism inherently exploiting Asian workers, despite the fact that Chinese incomes have increased more than 10x fold over the past few decades. Former sweatshop workers who used to make shoes have now moved onto higher-paid jobs. Companies like Nike are LEAVING China and relocating to places like Bangladesh where the workers are paid less. If capitalism was responsible for suppressing wages, then why would wage rates increase more than 10x fold in the absence of any Government law mandating it? Why isn't everyone in America getting paid minimum wage if that's what all companies wanted to do? Why are companies paying US workers $25 per hour to work at an office when they could pay them $8 instead? It's the legal minimum right?

You're living in your own reality where water is dry and the deserts are wet. You're full of shit because you point to environmental destruction and make it something unique to capitalism or the West. Humans have been shitting on the environment under any system. The Soviet Union was a notorious polluter and was responsible for all sorts of environmental damage. We're arguing past each other at this point

And yes, I keep bringing up that situation with Australia because it encapsulates how full of shit you are. You posted an article that you didn't bother to read, and it's conclusions contradict everything you're arguing. Aussie incomes were literally going up every single year for 28 years, yet this guy actually posted that link thinking he was dunking on me. You've gotta be kidding me. This tells me that you're more of an ideologue rather than someone searching for the truth.

 

[Kaafiye]

Maintaining the current state which includes such harsh working conditions to the point where people are required to have adult diapers and suicide nets while getting paid peanuts is a bit immoral to me, don't know about you.

Yes, you pointing to extreme examples of workers being treated like shit isn't an argument for anything

If that was the case, then why isn't every single worker in America being paid 7 dollars an hour? Most Americans aren't even in Unions, so what's stopping an Accounting Firm from reducing everyone's salary? Or an engineering firm? If profit margins need to be maximized, and if capitalism tends towards suppressing people's wages, then why aren't people being paid the lowest they're legally allowed?

 

[Kaafiye]

Competence like being selfish and amoral? To you its a dog eat dog world huh? That's an ugly individualistic way of looking at things,

Tell me why the US keeps Interfering whenever a country suggests an alternative? To secure the status quo and keep their corporate overlords happy perhaps?

The US is a perfect scapegoat for any Marxist who can't defend the failures of their system

Cuba is still a shithole. So was 1970s Tanzania. So was East Germany. So is Venezuela (which wasn't even fully Marxist, but leaning in that direction). Whenever any of those nations fail, it becomes convenient for the Marxists to blame America for their failures rather than owning up to the flaws in their ideology

 

[Habane]

The problem with Somalis whether in Somalia,Somaliland,Kilinka Shanaad,Jabuuti and Northern Kenya is not wealth inequality or some sort of economic oppression but rather it is Qabyaalad and the products of that disease such as corruption,armed conflict and zero-sum political thinking.Qabyaalad causes corruption and corruption is the reason why monopolies in SL and Jabuuti for example exist.

Our religion is the answer to our problems.Democracy and the western styles of governance with our toxic clannism (I am also infected with this disease) is what is stopping Somalis from uniting and building a nation safe and prosperous for all Somali muslims and our muslim minorities (Bantus in the south,Yemenis in the North,Cadcad and Oromos)

 

[Kaafiye]

Karl Marx was a man who actually believed that in the future, we can live in a world where "all workers" can unite and live in a utopia

We'd have no money, no laws, no armies, no nations, no family structures, no private property, no governments, and no borders.

He was a remarkably stupid man with ideas that my 9 year old self could debunk. Yet we have grown adults in this day and age studying Marx and repeating his lies

No man in history has done more damage to the human spirit than Karl Marx. We need to ditch that c*nt and move on

 

[Marcus]

Karl Marx was a man who actually believed that in the future, we can live in a world where "all workers" can unite and live in a utopia

We'd have no money, no laws, no armies, no nations, no family structures, no private property, no governments, and no borders.

He was a remarkably stupid man with ideas that my 9 year old self could debunk. Yet we have grown adults in this day and age studying Marx and repeating his lies

No man in history has done more damage to the human spirit than Karl Marx. We need to ditch that c*nt and move on

Marxists are usually university students of middle and upper class backgrounds. They're just Larping.

 

[Kaafiye]

Marxists are usually university students of middle and upper class backgrounds. They're just Larping.

A bunch of privileged kids with no understanding of economics or how the world works

I mean, go and study John Maynard Keynes at least! Or Milton Friedman! Or Friedrich Hayek! Or someone else who's smart and has solid arguments. The 3 men I just listed all disagree with each other, but they're all very intelligent and I can respect someone who disagrees with me. Maybe Keynes was right, maybe Hayek was right. That's up for debate and I can see the logic from all 3 of them.

But why Karl Marx? None of his predictions even came close to being true. His understanding of human nature is incredibly stupid. Why is he worshipped by these people?

 

[abdullah233]

Marxists are usually university students of middle and upper class backgrounds. They're just Larping.

Marxism is incompatible with religion in general he once said religion is “the opium of the masses”

 

[Habane]

Marxists are usually university students of middle and upper class backgrounds. They're just Larping.

I took Poli Sci classes and they do teach Karl Marx, I had read some of his work like his Manifesto in Western Political Philosophy.The universities (here in Canada) in general are extremely left-leaning,they force feminism and Qaanis rights on their students.Alxamdulilah I switched out of poli sci into accounting

 

[abdullah233]

I took Poli Sci classes and they do teach Karl Marx's, I had read some of his work like his Manifesto in Western Political Philosophy.The universities (here in Canada) in general are extremely left-leaning,they force feminism and Qaanis rights on their students.Alxamdulilah I switched out of poli sci into accounting

Most university’s lean politically left due to donors