The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Sun Jun 20, 2021 4:56 am

perpetualburn wrote:
Parodites wrote:what happens when the stores run out of groceries, but they never re-stock again? Less than five years. That's what you have left.


Less than five years... don't think so... There are too many wolves left... You you think these fucks are just going to gift us chaos on the streets?



Fear not, revolution will come my brother.

Lol.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Sun Jun 20, 2021 4:59 am

Parodites wrote:I explained the inevitable logical progression that led to the two world wars in the OP- you will know your defeat when what I said of the third and final one comes to pass, the last eventuality of the one logic driving both communism and capitalism toward the same globalist nightmare. (Communism is not, as you claimed, 'not liking capitalism.' Seriously, just fuck off. Is that philosophy now?) And when the last war comes, you will long to be as doped up as I am: I live in that future, I draw it on my eyelids every single night I go to sleep. Because I wish we could all find the meaning of life in writing books and in loving one woman like I did: in that very simple reality. But no. Your world is ash. And you will feel that ash before it's done. I swear to God Almighty- the third war I suggested is coming with as much certainty as I explained the other two. I swear on everything I am, that you will admit to yourself that I am right. I swear it to you. Do you hear that? I swear to the God of Gods that you will admit I was right. I swear it to you, to Fixed, to Thrasy, to every fucking douchebag on this forum. I swear it to you.

I swear it to you motherfucker. And I swear you're going to know what the word pain means, even if you don't know what the word 'communism' means.

And the only consolation I take is in knowing I won't be around to hear your bullshit anymore. God just take this away from me. Just take these peons away. Can't argue a single point I make but ohh, there're so mad. Dipshit: I defined both communism and capitalism. I explained how I subscribe to neither logic. I am alone, I am another world. I am the solution to the problem that is coming to you in the form of another holocaust. Go ahead and live in yours, in your world, and when this last war comes, die with that world- useless, bankrupt, and fucking stupid as it is.

You've no idea how fucked you actually are. Buddy- what happens when the stores run out of groceries, but they never re-stock again? Less than five years. That's what you have left.

Fuck I am getting hard just thinking about it. You know you're gonna die, right? When it happens. You know what dying means? I've died twice (ODs) and almost died 10 times, It's scary. The world is gonna get really scary my little buddy. When the stores stop re-stocking, the crowd is gonna split your skull for a block of cheese. And I want you to know: if only in spirit, I am going to be hovering there wondering- why were you so fucking stupid? This could have been avoided... all of it.



tldr my man.

But listen, communism is the disapproval of capitalism. I laid it out, you did not refute, and I skimmed over this garbled message to know you still did not.

Your ranting and raging, here, is a fine example.

All communists deny being communists. But that is only because they are cowards.

Lol, 'esoterically linked.'

You should esoterically put your mind back together, cuz.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Parodites » Sun Jun 20, 2021 5:28 am

All you said was: I am a communist because I refuse capitalism. I just explained to you how both communism and capitalism are incorporated within the logic of globalism, which I call tertiary capitalism. I explained to you that communism is merely a political application of Marx's materialist dialectic of history, and I have systematically deconstructed that formulation of the dialectic, therefor I cannot, by definition, be a communist, since I reject the very first-principle of all communist philosophy. That's like calling someone a creationist who not only isn't a Christian, but doesn't believe in God. There's a limit to how nice I can be, and when your attempt at arguing with me is that stupid, I've about run my gamut. I re-asserted the founding constitutional rights and defended them, whereas a basic premise of communism is that property rights should be abolished and... all capital should be communally owned and apportioned- the modes of production... How can I be a communist while defending concepts like property rights? This doesn't even make sense man, just stop.

You don't get to define words on your own. Communism is not "rejecting capitalism." Communism is the political realization of Marx's dialectical-materialist reading of history. I not only rejected that reading; I deconstructed the dialectic out of which it grew. Therefore I cannot, by definition, be a communist.

I don't think you've ever read either Marx, Smith, or Hegel. Which is why you're sitting here baselessly throwing the word communist around at a guy who single-handedly dismantled the very first-principle of all Marxist/communist thought. I don't see anyone else dismantling the vision of dialectical historical materialism and univocal metaphysics. You know what? I don't even see anyone talking about it, let alone arguing against it.

This is the reason I don't spend much time here. This really is a waste of time. Your entire 'argument' amounts to calling someone who systematically deconstructed every aspect of communist/Marxist thought, a communist. This is stupid.

I've literally spent 500 pages on this forum taking on every argument ventured by Marx, and all I get, when refusing capitalism for my own economics, is being called a communist... even though every single point of communist thought, I have argued against. Can someone tell me what I am supposed to do here? Honestly. What am I supposed to say? You can't even define the word communism. This really is stupid.

And if that is too long to read, how TF did you get through any of my posts? You haven't read Marx, Smith, me, Hegel, or anything about the subjects I am attempting to talk to you about. You can't even define the words "implicit right", "property right", "capital", "communism", "materialist history", etc. etc. Why is a subject you know literally nothing about (you HAVE to know nothing about any of this to seriously claim I am a communist) so meaningful to you- why do you care about something you know nothing about? Seriously, I don't get it.

And no, revolution isn't coming- not unless this globalizing logic, the logic of Capital and techne, is understood and overcome,- the tertiary mechanism I have very clearly articulated. As I write in the 11th volume of my works, on the subject of automatism:

" Automatism; an unpredictable long-term feedback cycle appears, to borrow the Landian term, fusing the two functions specified above and
thus subverting mimesis itself. The hypomnemata, (the instruments by which a culture or age records its history, from the oral traditions of a
Socrates or Homer, each invested with their own topological proscriptions, to the written word, to the blog post and financial ledger, insofar as
such compositional functions imply equally, certain modifications to that subjectivity deploying them in tandem with processes of its own
reflective cognition in the construction of identity) or external regulative form by which modernity affirms its own history, amounts to the
self-perpetuating instrumentality embodied by auto-poiesis, (the automatism about which we are now speaking) that is, by endless technological
progress, [Or embodied, more precisely, by those external subsystems of our material-economic infrastructure through which one machinic
signet or technological innovation reproduces itself as the inertial telos or 'hypermnemata' of another and therefor accomplishes the semiotic
linkage (a connexion otherwise referred to in my work as semasiosyntax) designated by the term 'capital', until, at the height of this process,
capital reproduces itself as the teleological catalyst for its own creation,- that is, a 'pure emergence' projected from the vantage of a more planar
or Euclidean geometry upon the unseen 'curve of the series' in a new complex Riemannian-time, or, in Bloom's phrase, a 'revisionary calculus',-
reinscribing the predicative logic of contingent microscale or 'tychogenetic' descriptors,- like those called 'idiographs' in the Kantian
framework,- as a higher-order or nomothetic logic, thereby subverting the causal linkages (that is, semasiokinesis) implicit in our asymmetrically
temporalized ontology for purely semiotic ones, and closes the basic chiasmatic gap through which all such predication generates 'meaning' (as
a phenomenologically grounded dis-closure of Being to a temporal horizon, in Heideggerian terms) on one side or another of the
'phenomenological closure' (on one side or another of Bloom's ratio, or the 'ground of emergence') and thus restrains the otherwise unchecked,
negentropic inflationary semiosis. In this final stage, the regulative form grounded on the logic of capital,- now grown omnipresent and
completely metastasized by all external systems, will be capable of recapitulating within its own structure all previous regulative mnematic
forms, by which ages past had recorded their own histories, such that all of the human past will be consolidated and serialized within the
narrative of modernity. The acceleration of our apparent cultural transformation, which most compelled Steigler's critique, and the exponential
'quickening' of technological progress toward some occluded artificial intelligence or cybernetic transcendence, which it seems everyone is
certain about on all sides of the debate, then reveal themselves as illusions generated by an entirely inverse phenomenon, whereby the past is
fractally compressed, converted from analogue to serial data and ultimately 'digitized'. On the one side of this inversion, which we can read as
the last vestigial remainder of the chiasm, we have a singularity-point machine intelligence at the end of history, while on the other, we have the
Marxist species-essence absorbed by a residual subjectivity,- by a man who woke by Homeric trials, sported with Elizabethan libertines and took
to sleep under the stars of the Romantics, etc. therefor representing, unlike Nietzsche's last man, a kind of 'humanist fatalism' beyond the
evolutionary trajectory of any selective mechanism. The un-intuitable Grund of History was, for Schelling, neither eschatological terminus, but
simply this impermeable chiasm, chronostatically stretched beyond the epistemological saccade of the Event between what, in a more reductive
economic vocabulary, we might call the means of production and the ends of production, for which no predication could be made at all.] and
implied, following Bloch, by the myth of Progress more generally conceived,- a kind of malignant ontology and fatal obreptition of the nested
hierarchy, such that it is only possible to record modernity,- that is, to communicate its mimeses to our potential descendants,- in that historical
form capacitated by the very instrumental technology constituting modernity. (Computers, machine intelligence, etc.) In order to map the
modern, and therefor trace its labyrinth in search for an escape-route, we must record it; to record it we must utilize, and therefor empower, the
instruments by which it perpetuates itself, and through whose domain it solely exists; having empowered it, we have closed the door to one more
possible route back toward reality, surrendering ourselves all the more completely, in an apparent Freudo-thanatological nullification of all
potential psychodynamicism, to the automatism of Capital.

There is a 'lag' between the processes of individuation and hierarchialization, with this lag representing the pre-individual, which Simondon
describes as a kind of permeable field that influences both processes in tandem,- enough so that the hierarchy can be modified and shaped by
individuating processes, (such that it is not so imposing as to be slavery) while the individual can in turn still be compelled and modified,
reciprocally, by the hierarchy, that is, incentivized or de-incentivized toward certain behaviors conducive or inconducive to the needs of that
hierarchy, as well as provided an inheritance of culture to work with by the greater society, since man is not a tabula rasa and requires that as
much as anything in order to sustain his individuation-process and enter into the great Western project at self-discovery, the gnothic auton. This
lag is created by the underlying economic-material infrastructure, and the logic of capital is, as I have detailed, causing it to shrink more and
more, approaching a fatal asymptotic declination until the two processes eventually fuse, thereby subverting mimesis. In a post-scarcity economy,
or, if one prefers a mythological corollary, in a Marxist-communist Utopia, we can extrapolate from the preview given to us by the internet, in
which semiotic-coupling has detached all ideographic gestures from their objects and inverted the function of value-exchange: people don't
become more differentiated,- despite a short-term manifestation of apparent differentiation or 'valence' through tribalist fragmentation, which of
course recoils back to a minimal population following a single rapidly exploded distribution of its members- (eg. the singularity of Youtube and
Google versus the multiplicity of the early internet) they become more similar, more like-minded, more enculturated, as ideology propagates to
the point of homogenizing culture entirely. Thus the pre-individual field has to be salvaged and to do that, one must 'think beyond capitalism',
perhaps replacing its economic-material foundation with some new substrate entirely."

Yeah, TLDR? Well I take it Marx was as well, which is probably why you can't even define the word "communist" which you are accusing me, nonsensically, as being. When I have systematically refuted every single first-principle of communist philosophy, it makes as much sense calling me a communist as calling someone who not only isn't a Christian, but doesn't believe in god,- a creationist.
Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat.

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.
-- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.

ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ,
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum;
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata.

Measure the breaking of the Flesh in the flesh that is broken.
[ The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
the First.]
User avatar
Parodites
Thinker
 
Posts: 769
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:03 pm

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Jun 20, 2021 7:09 am

I think using the current economic models - capitalism is the antithesis of communism. But I think the OP is suggesting that neither of those are necessary (and I have to agree). So a person can be against both.

As to the OP itself - I found that I could agree to most of it - disagree with some of it - and some - too ambiguous to assess. But since the author has declared war on me (along with everyone) and I don't feel the urge to engage in a futile war of words - I can dismiss the curiosity I had about a few things and leave it be. :D
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
    It's just same Satanism as always -
    • separate the bottom from the top,
    • the left from the right,
    • the light from the dark, and
    • blame each for the sins of the other
    • - until they beg you to take charge.
    • -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3141
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Sun Jun 20, 2021 10:20 am

Dudes, fellas, gays (in Parodites's case),

The term 'capitalism' didn't even exist before communist theorists. That doesn't say anything to you?

Parodites wrote: I explained to you that communism is merely a political application of Marx's materialist dialectic of history


Yeah you stupid crackhead, but you right after said communism existed before Marx.

Why is it so hard to admit you are a communist? This is what kills me most about communists. The utter lack of pride.

Which is it?
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun Jun 20, 2021 9:42 pm

Aventador is right that the term Capitalism was introduced by a Socialist. So to speak of Capitalism itself is a Socialistic act.

Aventador when he says that Communism is opposing Capitalism, poses as a Socialist. Parodites is a globalist, as he admits.

None of the people here other than me have read Marx, that is also clear.
It makes no sense at all to compare Marx to Hegel. Maybe no one aside from the Fixed Cross here has read Hegel either.

Hegels mistaktes are admissible considering the time he grew up in, considering Schopenhauer hadn't yet pulverized Plato at that point. Marx' mistakes are so extremely stupid that I have very little doubt that he knew that he was writing pertinent nonsense but figured that no one would find out. He was in such a case at least clever enough to know how dumb people are. As someone noted, this reliability of the moronity of our species is the basis of Socialism.

A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.
I would explain why but people will prefer to act like morons in any case at the moment some actual philosophy is produced. So let's refrain from that.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11611
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Sun Jun 20, 2021 11:55 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.


Well, again, you can try to get by by such esoterisms.

It suffices anybody with the patience and, admittedly, good will to think that a "critique of capitalism" isn't even possible without the creation of the term, itself is a communist act, is the name of the Magnus Opus of its main founding fathers (the first to academizise it).

Hegel was simply what was in vogue at the time, that's whay they used Hegel.

You can't critique markets itself as a concept, or business, or the economy. These are just obvious byproducts of humanity. The "-ism," the separation, that is itself communism.

Yes communism.

Parodites can say this, he can say that, I can say I'm a Formula 1 driver, you can say you studied astrophysics.

But history is pretty simple.

Disapproval of capitalism is communism.

And only a communist, of all people, would want to hide that.

Even though it's what he is.

Because he is a worm, with no self-respect.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Sun Jun 20, 2021 11:59 pm

Aventador wrote:
perpetualburn wrote:
Parodites wrote:what happens when the stores run out of groceries, but they never re-stock again? Less than five years. That's what you have left.


Less than five years... don't think so... There are too many wolves left... You you think these fucks are just going to gift us chaos on the streets?



Fear not, revolution will come my brother.

Lol.


It does not get much more orthodox than this.

You ken?
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby promethean75 » Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:48 am

"A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.
I would explain why but people will prefer to act like morons in any case at the moment some actual philosophy is produced. So let's refrain from that."

You'd not even need to go that far, because anyone with any sense would know that socialism is also 'simply nature', and expect only a moron to argue otherwise.

A false premise never stopped a muhfucka before from trying to write a whole book to defend it. Lotta morons out there ya know.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:02 am

promethean75 wrote:"A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.
I would explain why but people will prefer to act like morons in any case at the moment some actual philosophy is produced. So let's refrain from that."

You'd not even need to go that far, because anyone with any sense would know that socialism is also 'simply nature', and expect only a moron to argue otherwise.

A false premise never stopped a muhfucka before from trying to write a whole book to defend it. Lotta morons out there ya know.


Well, to be fair, Nietzsche would agree with you. To say that either is particularly illuminating, specially in contrast to the other, would be nonsense. Nietzsche pointed it out for very high level philosophical reasons that are beyond the scope of any of these pamphleteers, in any case.

Anyway, nothing isn't nature.

But, certainly, what communism is is the disapproval of capitalism.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby promethean75 » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:03 am

The three stages of the 'defenda capitalist' dialectic of history.

First it was the will of 'god' who granted the chosen to rule over and control property and kingdoms and shit.

The age of enlightenment hits, and now it isn't 'god', but nature, evolution, the power of the strong over the weak via Darwin and Co.

Finally that notion is abandoned (it's aethical, amoral) and the capitalists actually begin believing that it's neither 'god' nor nature, but by rational man's design (cue all the economists, philosophers and psychologists behind it) and something that produces and provides at least the 'opportunity' for individuals to amass personal wealth and property... something they'd not be able to do otherwise (in another system).

So there are the stages, and all three are bullshit.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby promethean75 » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:05 am

Avent, N's critique of socialism and anarchism is entirely too short, dubious and crude to be taken seriously. Great guy tho.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:06 am

Well, here is where you fuck up, suggesting that one is a "system" just like the other.

As you rather shoddily explained, one sprang up from millennia of evolution, with no one planning it.

Communism is in its essence an idea, a plan. That doesn't make it not natural. It's still animals having that idea.

But the markets are not a system or an idea like communism is.

Just try to work the word "marketism" or "businessism." They are on their face absurd.

They had to invent a word, the cocksuckers.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:06 am

promethean75 wrote:Avent, N's critique of socialism and anarchism is entirely too short, dubious and crude to be taken seriously. Great guy tho.


No, I didn't mean when he mentioned them directly. Which was mercifully short.

You don't want to see Babe Ruth washing dishes.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby promethean75 » Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:30 am

You're over complicating it. By 'system' we mean the way society is structured; its laws, customs, citizen rights, processes of production, distribution and consumption, etc.

And systems of communism on small scales have existed before, just as capitalism at some point was only a brewing idea (in the head of a merchant who was critical of feudalism, for example).

"But the markets are not a system or an idea like communism is."

... or like capitalism is, either. The market itself is just an exchange of labor and goods/services. It's the rules regulating those exchanges that constitute the system (along with its processes) and organize how it functions.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:21 am

promethean75 wrote:It's the rules regulating those exchanges that constitute the system (along with its processes) and organize how it functions.


Fine, OK, if you want to word it like that,

The rules of one sprang up from thousands of years of evolution, with no one directing it, the rules of the other sprang up in the heads of communists.

promethean75 wrote:in the head of a merchant who was critical of feudalism,


Nobody was critical of feudalism, they just sold shit. You misunderstand.


If you find a cave, carved into the wall of a coast out of innumerable waves through innumerable years, and then you say "I'm gonna carve one just like it," it doesn't make both caves equivalent.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:22 am

promethean75 wrote:... or like capitalism is, either.


Well, the funny thing is that you're right, capitalism is an idea...

In the head of the communist.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:25 am

Aventador wrote:it doesn't make both caves equivalent.


It doesn't even make them both caves.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:39 pm

Aventador wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.


Well, again, you can try to get by by such esoterisms.[

It suffices anybody with the patience and, admittedly, good will to think that a "critique of capitalism" isn't even possible without the creation of the term, itself is a communist act, is the name of the Magnus Opus of its main founding fathers (the first to academizise it).

Hegel was simply what was in vogue at the time, that's whay they used Hegel.

You can't critique markets itself as a concept, or business, or the economy. These are just obvious byproducts of humanity.

Yes nature, value increase through spontaneous value exchange.
It all comes down to the dynamics of value, like any kind of physics, nature.
Astrophysics is a bit of a god for you, I can see that, it must remain inscrutable, which is a good boyish sentiment; you did manage to understand some of the mathematical theory I created, so you can in theory fathom some of what I did with astrophysics.

The "-ism," the separation, that is itself communism.

Yes communism.

You mean the notion of it as something separate from simple nature.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11611
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:46 pm

promethean75 wrote:"A sensible term for what Socialism has denoted "capitalism" is simply nature.
I would explain why but people will prefer to act like morons in any case at the moment some actual philosophy is produced. So let's refrain from that."

You'd not even need to go that far, because anyone with any sense would know that socialism is also 'simply nature', and expect only a moron to argue otherwise.

Not to worry, I dont expect you to understand the distinction. You after all admire writers precisely when you have not read their work, as you intimated to Parodites; similarly you admire Marx precisely because you don't feel like reading him. Which is what Marx, and Parodites, count on.

A false premise never stopped a muhfucka before from trying to write a whole book to defend it. Lotta morons out there ya know.

Yeah but it's not something I respect.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11611
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:10 pm

A note on the Americas, it is an ominous sign that the whole continent has not a single native language in official use. This speaks to why it can produce music but not philosophy.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11611
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:13 pm

Alright Parodites.
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:17 pm

It's actually a fact as you well know, Pedro. All American countries have their colonial language in use. They aren't nations, but colonies, they have no spiritual autonomy, no roots, thus they have no conception of philosophy.

But they sure can bang the drum.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11611
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:34 pm

So why don't you reply as Parodites and defend the actual points?
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

Re: The 'Third Stage' of Capitalism.

Postby Aventador » Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:36 pm

And hopefully spare us the gay imagery and ranting and raging?
Aventador
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]