/lit/ - Literature

right but it's leftism not liberalism

>>15951388
no one cares about meme definitions of right and left only used by a small irrelevant group of online spergs

>>15951377
>subverted
There was no subversion. Marx was always a liberal (philosophically speaking).

Reminder that Marx was a "class reductionist." Whoever uses that term hasn't read Marx.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spgXiTUzxws

>>15951399
lenin used it

>>15951400
>wrote thousands of pages against liberalism

Karl is still writing his fucking book. It's 2AM already. "Don't be so hard on yourself, bro," I whispered.
"But I need to finish this book so that /lit/ can include it in their 100 essential list, Fred!"
Karl grumbles without looking at me. My chest aches.
"Who gives a fuck about /lit/."
"You don't, but I do. Please go to bed, Fred."
Silence fills the room. I hate this.
"I'm sorry, I just..."
"It's fine. Go to sleep, Karl."
He turns off the lamp and goes back to his book.

I stand behind him and rub my beard on his cheek. He loses focus and his writing stops. Even though it's dark, I can see that his face is reddened. His eyes are wide open.
"What now, Fred?"
"I'm just missing you, buddy." I start to smell his neck.
"Stop it. I'm trying to save the world here and all you want to do is fucking with me and want to get in my pants."
"It's fine to let loose now and then. It has been more than a year since the last time. I miss the smell of your pant, bro."
I hug my boy and start kissing him all over. He lets out a few quiet moans but I know that he's trying his best to control himself. I miss his body so much. He has never realized how much I crave for his warmth. I wish we both could get on the bed right now.

But socialism is also important.

"I will let you continue on your book."
"Not if you keep molesting me here, Fred."
"Well, I will only limit myself to this so that you can do your important work." I kneel in front of his crotch and open his pants. I start licking his hairy budge and swallowing his penis.
Karl doesn't say anything else. He keeps himself stoic and picks up the pen. Still, as far as I know him, he likes my work here.

I'm so glad that I can contribute to socialism.

>>15951429
>yet still maintained deeply liberal philosophical positions

>>15951400
you mean progressive right?
also, philosophically? why? because he speaks of freedom? are you retarded?

>>15951458
No, I mean liberal.
"Philosophically" because he inherited liberal philosophical assumptions from his influences who occupied the liberal philosophical tradition.

>>15951482
your determinism is retarded

>>15951568
>man says he's not an X
>man holds an unexamined assumption that necessitates he be an X
It's not that hard to understand, anon.

>>15951633
just plain retarded

>>15951675
>retard retard retard!
You've got nothing, dumb cunt. Now let's see if you'll go for a fourth

>>15951729
you haven't said anything more beyond Marx was a liberal because the people he read were liberals. I prefer to believe that a teacher told you that as a joke and you took it as an absolute truth

>>15951377
Neo-Marxism was not Marxism subverted by Liberalism. It's an attempt to apply Marxian thought to non-economic areas like culture.
If anything, Liberalism was subverted by Neo-Marxism.

>>15951400
Marx rejected progressive movements like the feminists. He also thought Mexicans were too stupid to accomplish anything and concluded that the USA taking California was a good thing.

>>15951752
No, I didn't say that. Rather, I said that he inherited unexamined liberal philosophical assumptions. If you wish know what I believe these to be, then by all means ask. As it stands, I've been reluctant to do so as you haven't demonstrated a desire to engage in earnest conversation with me.

>>15951377
>slowly
seemed pretty definite around the time of Marcuse and Foucault

>>15951765
Those positions are consistent with a liberal worldview. The clasical liberals were also not egalitarians.

>>15951377
Left-Wing people are morally, culturally, Phenotypically and (usually) racially inferior to Right-Wing people. This is not a controversial statement, it's actually the entire platform of the Left, bitching for Right Wing people to help them when they wouldn't piss on a Right Wing man if he was on fire. "Hurr durr muh class struggle" amounts to upper middle class white homosexuals sniveling about how evil working class men are.

Calling it Subversion is giving left-wing "people" far too much praise. If you actually take Leftoids at their word, you might believe this, but if you look at what Leftoids DO, it speaks to an entirely different picture. They retreat ever behind their shallow banner slogans and tedious posturing about racial/class/religious/sexual inequality without actually articulating any concrete empirical reason for how or why these inequalities are being imposed. They are inherently cowardly and their tactics range from shaming via affected weakness to outright bullying through institutional power.

And yet they still, consistently and without exception fail. And the reason for this is simple: Left-Wing ideas could work if you killed all Left-Wing people. Right-Wing people could execute a communist society effortlessly, it would just never occur to them to do so because they already execute capitalism effortlessly. All pleas from the Left boil down to begging Right-Wing people to do work for them because they're too stupid and weak to do it themselves. They are LITERALLY inferior.

>>15951794
based and spiteful mutant pilled

>>15951794
>Right-Wing people could execute a communist society effortlessly, it would just never occur to them to do so because they already execute capitalism effortlessly
Lmao based

>>15951794
They’re so smart yet so incredibly weak. It astonishes me just how weak they are sometimes. I truly feel sorry for them.

>>15951782
fair, go ahead

>>15951794
>Left-Wing ideas could work if you killed all Left-Wing people.

This is literally 100% true and any argument to the contrary is cope.

>>15951765
wasnt cali inhabited by like a few 1000 mexicanos at the time? wasnt it more to do with it being completely unused land?

>>15951794
kek, no
https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Psychological-Science-2012-Hodson-0956797611421206.pdf

>>15951794
You're delusional. Actual right-wingers don't have power. The status quo isn't right-wing. The elite don't hold political beliefs, but since the money is in leftism that's where they go. You're either a trumptard that thinks trump has actually done anything for the right, or you've never stepped outside your home and take the word of twitter trannies as truth

>>15951928
right wingers don't have institutional power but the power of left wingers is exagerated because of social media outrage and social pressure

>>15951827
Like his explicitly liberal predecessors, Marx assumes man as ontological prior to, and as the condition for superstructural entities -- like authorities -- and society in toto. In these explicitly liberal thinkers, we find this ontological position in their fundamental anthropologies; Hobbes' and Locke's "state of nature", Smith's "land of barter", etc. In Marx, we find it in his formulation of "base-superstructure".

>>15951377
The problem with Marxism is that it's all destined to end up with the Marxist's grand-daughter being fucked in the ass by a capitalist.
How does it feel knowing that the grand-daughters of the Russian revolutionaries now all dream with marrying an American?
This is the ultimate refutation of any political theory. If it ends up with your daughter getting fucked in the ass by your enemy, then it isn't very good.

t. Brazilian, have seen - many! - Venezuelan whores in the streets since mid-2014 or so

>>15951913
>Actually trying to do this when the American Left consists almost entirely of niggers and spics

Okay lol.

>>15951928
You didn't engage my point at all. What are you even talking about? Power? Trump? Twitter? What does any of that have to do with what I said, which is that Left-Wing people are inferior to Right-Wing people and that everyone agrees on this until you say it out loud.

>>15951913
>read abstract
>gay definition of left and right wing
dropped

>>15951377
Not me. Also while I do kind of understand trannies and the like I think they're pretty shitty because they're basically a caricature of whatever gender they try to "be." It's like a goddamn parody. Seriously. Like they're role playing. Maybe if we didn't have such strict "gender roles" it'd be different.

>>15951981
this is the answer i will get from a first year law student. if that's the case for you, Bravo:
You are not even aware of the role Feuerbach played in the antropological turn in Marx' thought.
Not only that but you share the common misconception of Base-superstructure product of a mistranslation of terms.
You speak of liberals as if that meant something resembling a cohesive movement when is not, The obvious difference that of State of nature in Hobbes. Locke and Rousseau. (Locke also supported revolts if the ruler was unfair, hobbes did not)
You confuse thought experiments (State of nature) with "fundamental antropologies" in the case of contractualist thinkers: Covenant in Hobbes, Trust in Locke and Social Contract in Rousseau (yes, the names come from there). I guess you don't mention Rousseau because he's frequently referred to as one of the enemies of liberal freedom while being a liberal himself.
You also fail to explain the reception of liberal ideas and the french revolution in the german idealist tradition and it's influence on Marx.

You have not explained anything, i hope you are just baiting/trolling because if you are not then that means you education did not serve it's more important purpose, do not speak of something you don't understand.
If you think i misunderstood you, please correct me, if not, at least let me know i did not waste my time on you and you learnt something.

>>15951377
I don't think you know what liberalism is friend.

>>15952141
You have done a very good job of telling me that I am wrong, but very little in the way of explaining why. Your critiques of my understanding of the history of philosophy and the deployment of disciplinary terms are consistent with my reading and the readings of others, and assume a lack of knowledge where there is simply different knowledge (for example, Locke supporting revolts is consistent with my reading of his liberalism). These critiques can be discarded without a second thought, and as it stands you have not addressed the main point.
A very simple question: does, or does not Marx place fundamental ontological priority on the material relations between members of a society? Yes, these relations are mediated "superstructurally". The question however concerns "ontological priority".

>>15951400
Holy shit read a book nigger

>>15952291
Not only that but you proud yourself of "your" reading of one example of liberal thinker that is almost on an absurd level of abstraction based on the more fashionable elements of Marx's thought. As a result it appears more complicated than it is, but first:
>A very simple question: does, or does not Marx place fundamental ontological priority on the material relations between members of a society? Yes, these relations are mediated "superstructurally". The question however concerns "ontological priority"
Here you seem to confuse structure and superstructure with Workers and Capitalists to conclude that there is an ontological diference in both, but theis analysis is misleading in Marx as it does not make it an ontological analysis as it's obscured by the ontic non-human elements of existence (law, class, gender, etc). You have not explained otherwise.
Now from this, how do you relate it to liberalism? I don't know and i don't think you know either because how it appears to me, you are making things up as you go.

>>15951764
>Marxian thought
>non-economic areas
No such thing
>inb4 cope about oppressor vs oppressed even though that's been around since man first wrote if not before.

>>15951377
This is 100% correct and anyone who disagrees hasn't read a single book about politics in their entire lives.

>>15952453
only americans agreeing so far

I don't live in Europe, but aren't countries like Denmark or Norway the closest to communism?

>you can't just reduce everything to class struggle. true communist will support the individual struggles of marginalized groups. if you aren't actively fighting white privilege you're a heckin racist and part of the system of oppression.

>>15952433
Once again, your reply contains no argumentative substance, because you know that engaging with my argument would vindicate my position. Instead -- like a dogmatic ideologue -- you revert to the meta-argumentative strategy of critiquing aptness (i.e. purity) of my use of disciplinary terminology and subscription to convention.
>Here you seem to confuse structure and superstructure with Workers and Capitalists to conclude that there is an ontological diference in both,
This has not occurred. The only ontological "difference" assumed here is one of *priority* -- of one ontological category conditioning the other. Try again.
>Now from this, how do you relate it to liberalism?
Holding this ontological position would implicate the holder in the liberal anthropological position of placing man as ontologically prior to and the condition for society, which would subsequently implicate the holder in the various incoherencies of liberalism, namely those relating to authority ("authorities only receive their authority by virtue of some super-authoritarian entity like "the people", etc."). I suggest you read >>15951981 again.

>>15952525
>Sure, this is your movement against police brutality, but can I interest you in a pamphlet about Vladimir Lenin and the Workers' Struggle?

It's actually the other way around dude. Marxism was so unpopular that now creepy Marxists try to hijack other people's movements like LGBT, Arab nationalisms, or as we can see in Portland, BLM.

>>15952525
based

>>15952565
it makes no sense but i appreciate the brave disregard for integrity and coherence obviously product of being self-teached

>>15952622
You were filtered by it. Perhaps you should have "self-teached" yourself the English language before grappling with it.

>>15952654
sure bud

>>15952515
No fuck they aren't.

>>15951399
then how about proper definitions of words like liberalism

>>15951377
the irony is how much shit lenin got for his no-nonsense approach to theory and yet every single thing he claimed about the reformist deviation turned out to be 100% true

>>15954067
ditto stalin, every single thing he accused trotskyism of came true

>>15951989
The problem with Marxism is that it wants to end with democracy and will kill all culture in order to achieve it.

>>15952570
I see lgbt as purpose engineered consumer cattle deracinated bug people reduced to bleating out hr ideological gibberish consuming product and proudly getting fucked in the ass. Gee maybe marxism was the last stand of white identity after all.

>>15951794
True, I'd probably be more left leaning if every leftist I know wasn't such a limp wristed faggot who is more concerned with black trannies than anything else in life

>>15954089
The Soviet Union wasn't like that, modern lefties are just liberals who like the color red.

>>15954111
Sure, but the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore

>>15951794
Only an American could say something this retarded

>>15951794
Marxist trannies might seethe, but this is absolutely correct.

>>15954111
Just fyi if you look at that pic and think it looks cool, ur gay lul

>>15954327
You've completely fallen for the polarization that the media elites have been pushing towards for decades. It's not enough to simply disagree on politics, the people who disagree with you are STUPID and EVIL. Is it possible to have a more shallow take than that? What ever happened to trying to understand the opposing argument well enough to be able to make it yourself? "He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that". Maybe try entering into a dialogue with a "leftist" without overt hostility and you may learn something

>>15954111
Actually unless you were in the underclass man of serfs and farm people the majority of communists who held elite positions were typically in fact very limp wristed and tended to be rather sickly in both mind and soul.
Also quite prone to bribery and general greed.

You can still see the remains of those old people when you head to Russia in some of the older towns, like where I grew up. They're all general alcoholics with gripping addictions

If the American leftists addiction is BBC than the old Soviet's is drugs and Alki
I mean the serfs are also alcoholics don't get me wrong, but they at least know how to do farm work and general maintenance

t. 25 year old serf

>>15954356
Marxists are legitimately stupid and evil, and are also trannies.
I can disagree with tons of people from all over the political spectrum about the specifics of policy and society, but Marxism (and transgenderism) is an insane suicide cult.

>>15954356
Not that anon, but I argue with leftists all the time on /lit/ /pol/ and /his/
The only thing I've come to realize is that all my biases hold true

This is why no one takes America seriously any more

>>15954369
Do you even know the appeal of Marxism? And if you give me a flippant answer like they hate the rich I will take that as a negative

>>15954370
What biases are those?

>>15954374
>cries in europoor

>>15954299
Don't remind :(

>>15954379
Marxism is appealing to unsuccessful losers who pretend to care for the poor while only serving their self interest

>>15954379
General ignorance combined with pathological narcicissism and an entitlement complex.
It's what liberal arts college kids get brainwashed unless they get into Ayn Rand instead. Growing up and learning how industries actually operate is tge cure.

>>15954341
Thinking it looks cool is different then sexual attraction

>>15951377

>>15951989
>Everything is about sex.
Yes correct, Freud is the victor of the leftwing soul, Marx is to manly and rightwing for them.

>>15954379
the funny thing about the appeal of Marxism is that its the main thing that is lost in translation during the process of trying to apply the theory to real life, which is why i will never in a million years take a marxist seriously, because they lack the critical thinking skills to understand that they are chasing a comforting fantasy that only exists within their minds and will never translate into real life and its been proven time and time and time again

>>15954383
Leftists will often than not stick with the same debunked views that have been argued over countless times, they tend to generally not seek any sort of middle ground or understanding but rather change the definitions of words or feign ignorance when confronted with well know established communal ideas that we generally know, such as pic related

Even if you can break them on a singular point, the next time you interact with one they will have no recollection of ever giving in their ideal and will simply repeat doctrine once more.

Simply put, jewish arguments.

>>15954398
Correct me if I am wrong, but the basis of a capitalist economy is the ability of those with capital to employ it for a profit, which in almost all cases requires laborers who are payed out of the revenue of the owner of the capital. This system allows for the enrichment of both the owner of capital and the laborer. Is it not a concern, then, if advancing technology and globalized labor markets shift that balance of power in favor of the owners of capital? This consolidation of the revenue from the employment of capital appears to me to be a looming fatal error which threatens to topple the system built on that original balance between profits and labor.

I believe we are already seeing the ill effects of this as millennials fail to find good paying jobs, fail to buy houses of their own, and fail to start stable families of their own. This seems to be as a direct result of the shift of global economic policy regarding labor and the trade of goods (looking at China specifically here). Can we not agree that there is a problem here?

>>15954424
I won't have to wait long to interact with one seeing as I consider myself left wing, but as for your characterization of a certain individual whose name begins with V, I agree and find him to be a very distasteful person with bad political ideas

>>15954442
No, because this has always been hapening constantly throughout all of human history.

>>15954442
millennial's are failing to find good jobs because a terminal lack of nationalism means 90% of the economy is outsourced to bug people, and they cant buy houses because mass immigration drives up demand of a limited resource exponentially and fail to start families because they believe being a manchild and spending your life binge drinking and smoking weed and playing with children's toys and turning into trannies is "liberating" and the family the right hand of oppression

>>15951377
Subverted? Cultural marxism was begat by his contemporaries of the frankfurt school. This was all part of the psycho's evil, genocidal vision.

>>15954452
Human history also contains incidents like the monopoly formed by Standard Oil, which required action on a scale without precedent. I don't think your argument holds as we are living in an economy so vastly different than anything before, especially if things like automated cars eventually become commonplace (I believe it will happen within a decade or two but even if it takes longer it will be a massive economic revolution when it happens).

I think a certain rate of technological advancement can be assimilated into the system, meaning the Luddites were a bit premature and their methods were wrong, but that eventually there will be such a shift as to destabilize the very basis of the economic system which undergirds our countries

>>15954442
Whilst correct, the stability of consumerist capitalism revolves around a certain percentage of people that you use to build up your capital.

America is a failing shit-hole because it's systems are set-up from the 70's to accommodate maybe 100 million people max where at least 20 million of those will have the carry the rest.

The end result of massive immigration and importation of a globalized society means those same 20 million people now have to carry 180 million people on their backs and simply put there isn't a system which can reliability do that.

China wins out because of closed borders and has an ability to control their workers to a certain extent, but even they can't fight against a homogenized system and have breaking points at every turn (see hong kong)

Marxism would maybe work in turning the situation around by employing stalins method of killing off the useless and starting fresh, but it's unsustainable if another country simply chooses to promote a better way of life thus removing the 20 million high grade workers that would keep a country running.

If you're looking for a system of stability, I would advise for monarchy rather than Communistic ideals

>>15954460
I agree those things are bad, but it has been big business who have pushed for all of those things because they reap the reward of cheap labor, both from immigrants and slave type labor like they have in China. I think there is a real opportunity for a coalition of left and right people against the mainstream corporate politics which have been ruining our countries for a long time now

>>15954478
I want to emphasize that I don't believe communist ideas hold merit, just that the rise of Marxism should indicate that the system is failing to such a degree that a well documented terrible political agenda is gaining popularity. Personally I would like to see the principle Adam Smith outlined in The Wealth of Nations when he said "Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer.”

>>15954481
of course, and "big buissnesses" aren't abstract entities, they're people, people who do what they do because they have no higher loyalty, basically hyper individualist rats. there's a reason the concept of nationalism and racial identity has been torn down, it all gets in the way, and its the only real solution.

>>15954475
I don't.
As we create more excess more efficiently, we just put more social programs into place till new industries form.
At least in capitalist countries.

>>15954496
That too simply put is an ideal, placing any sort of trust in the lament or the consumer will inherently turn into a flawed system.
Simply put, why care for the consumer when you can instead change his mind.

The producer can produce shit, but if the consumer has no other options but to buy and eat it, why not strive for it.
Mcdonalds in particular is very good at that, It takes kids from a young age and fills them up with intense dopamine when they are young so that at an older age when they look back at starry eyed nostalgia in order to feel happiness they will simply think of MacDonald and his Big Mac

That is the essential end game of any system which prides itself on being "for the consumer and his demands"

>>15951377
Could this be the work of postmodern neo-marxists I've heard so much about?
There's one explanation for the dilution of marxist theory and the displacement of the central role of class in its construction. The Frankfurt school thought that the West was too resistant to developing proletarian class consciousness, and thought that the marxist revolutionary project could instead be advanced by promoting secondary struggles, prompting much of contemporary identity politics in its wake.

The funny part is that this isn't marxism, and in fact, it actively weakens marxism by destroying the entire material basis of the theory. In their attempt to subvert subversion (like the negation of a negation in dialectics) they failed and it backfired.

>>15954528
Class is as much a spook as all the "privilege" bullshit that replaced it.

>>15954528
I have been thinking about this and listenedt to some guy who made me realise something

The reason marxists hate white people and european culture so much is because they are the only group of people who didn't fall for communism and even defeated it, so frankfurt school came with all the gender/race/critical theory bullshit to subvert the West
And now that marxism has won and the west is finished they are all came back into one thing called intersectionality

>>15954507
Well, yeah the social programs are the thing I was leading to as being necessary, I'm a bit skeptical as to what kind of labor requiring industries are going to crop up as things like driving vehicles becomes automated though
>>15954523
I take the quote to be more of a overarching goal rather than a narrow or short sighted axiom. It's an observation that the system of capitalism has been adopted because it is the best at producing commodities for the consumer, and the value of the system is based on how well it does that. So I guess I agree that it is an ideal, but in practice it does not translate to "do what the consumer says" it is more "do what will produce the best system for the consumer whether he is able to articulate that system or not and judge that system by the output it produces". Hopefully that makes sense

>>15954535
Economic privilege is actually a privilege though

>>15954552
>do what will produce the best system for the consumer
What is the best system for the consumer?

Is it having all his dopamine needs be met?
Is it keeping him utterly safe and secure and without want?
or is it forcing him to grow and be something more than he is.

For me, I wish I could be an immortal God.
That's my wish as a consumer

>>15954535
Perhaps, but it's a concept that informs much sociological thinking and historical analysis. If everyone believes in a given spook, acts on it, passes laws about it, and bases legal decisions on it, is it really a spook? It has operative existence.

>>15954539
>And now that marxism has won
Whatever do you mean? The Frankfurt school stuff isn't marxism. At all. And we live in a corporate state, marxism hasn't won by any stretch.

>>15952570
Fuck no. Marxism was hijacked by middle-class liberals with an edge in love with idealists who propose everything but Marxism. COINTELPRO, the failures of the socialist states and western communist's shortsighted attempts at being inclusive to liberals are all to blame.
Now we have a consumer-friendly marxless Marxism soaked with identity politics and controlled by capital. Add to that that right-wingers, in their heroic struggle against non-existent commies, schizoid women and stickman LARPing homos, have adopted liberal idpol all the same.

>>15954578
The Frankfurt school was Marxist, but only lives on in critical theorists like Christopher Lasch. Today's liberalism operates primarily by its own, unique rules.

>>15954570
If you give a man enough to keep him safe and secure and without want, do you think he will wither away and die or do you think he will seek a challenge for himself? For me, I think culture has a lot to play in this, and currently there are tons of people who are so resentful of the current system they will take a hand out and do drugs or slut around or other socially detrimental actions. But I think there is strong evidence that if children are raised in two parent households not in poverty, they are much more likely to strive for a better life regardless of whether the minimum for sustenance is provided for them or not

I don't pretend to know for sure, but this is fertile ground for discussion and exploration

>>15954528
>postmodern neo-marxists
This term has always amused me because it is so nonsensical. It's a straight up oxymoron. Marxism is nothing if not modernist in its assumptions. At least to its creators, it had pretenses of a science. It posits a rigid, cause and effect deterministic progression of history that unfolds objectively regardless of cultural differences or what people think and believe. It's about factories and machines and the price of wheat. It's diametrically opposite what people think of as marxism today, with its pozzed relativism and id pol fluff.

>>15954625
It's just used to try to pin the blame for modern liberalism on another, now dead ideology. It's just the cultural Marxism stuff repackaged.

>>15954597
The rich man's retard and the poor man's genius
Humans always fall back to the mean.
Even with ideal conditions, genetics is just as important as environment.
There are always those who are born simply to destroy and decay.

Eugenics is the only optimal way to further a society in the right direction

>Oh your brain pattern looks a little fucky kid, sorry into the grinder you go.

>>15954625
>It's a straight up oxymoron.
That's the point. The jig was up after the fall of the Soviet Union, so they had to sneak it in through the back door ("theory", pomo, etc.).

>>15954625
>>15954644
It makes sense turning Marxism into tranny shit needs a label that differentiates it from the original Marxism, but a lot of unironic Marxists take issue with that for some reason.

>>15953961
We kinda are. How does Denmark become the largest welfare state and promoter of organized unions in the world without the influences of socialism (thereby communism)?

>>15954728
Because social safety nets aren't socialism, and they're too cold for niggers to move there, making them a white ethnostate.

>>15954764
"Safety net" is a socialistic metaphor

>>15954903
Having somewhat similar logic does not make x the same thing as y.

>>15954903
No, they aren't.
Places like Denmark are capitalistic as fuck.
Owners of businesses have compete control over their businesses. They're not some faggy worker controlled co-ops. The reason they can afford such generous safety nets is because they're a white ethnostate where everyone who can work does work, because they take pride in their people and their country.

Was Marx a freemason?