@NewPerspectives Thats because anarchism doesnt have any structure and invites counterrevolution. So technically anarchists are the ones who backstab first.
@boguswaves1@charybdeez Thatโs a hypothetical event, not a material analysis. Also numerous revolutions and the statistics of workers plight provide plenty evidence of revolutionary potential. Your argument that theyโre not revolutionary because capitalism is still in perpetuity is idealist
@boguswaves1@charybdeez You implied that by arguing proles arenโt revolutionary because they havenโt โdug capitalisms graveโ yet. You canโt argue whether an analysis is material on the grounds of a hypothetical. Also your claim that proles just โhappily continue workingโ is quite obviously wrong
@boguswaves1@charybdeez Communism isnt inevitable in the sense it would emerge spontaneously, its inevitable in that it is the only response to capitalism that can provide substantial progress. Youโre misunderstanding the Marxist position, your critique of it as idealism doesnt hold any weight
@Ds_is_i@GraphixArtiste That wasnt really an opinion the french revolution was a bourgeois revolution, and the majority of people guillotined were commoners, not nobles
@andregunts@Forever_noir_@MIKEFRMQNZ @LiberalsQuiet This is the reality of the system, the core of the issue has never been white vs black its class war thats always been at the root of it all