Men created the nuclear family and that's what destroyed society.

[Reckless Turtle]

0

 

[Pythagoras]

Weak post bro sorry.

 

[WontStopNorwooding]

True nuclear family sucks

Give me The Balkan Family Special where 10 family members live in the same house

@TsarTsar444 @BalkanPig

 

[Reckless Turtle]

Weak post bro sorry.

I'll try harder next time.

 

[TsarTsar444]

True nuclear family sucks

Give me The Balkan Family Special where 10 family members live in the same house

@TsarTsar444 @BalkanPig

Yeah i live together with my uncle, aunt and cousin in the same house ngl

 

[Pythagoras]

Yeah i live together with my uncle, aunt and cousin in the same house ngl

Your aunt is hot?

 

[TsarTsar444]

Your aunt is hot?

Idk

 

[Pythagoras]

Idk

Good enough...fuck mirin.

 

[AutisticBeaner]

average iq of fds is in the negatives

 

[TsarTsar444]

Good enough...fuck mirin.

Roman family tales

 

[Deleted member 2968]

True nuclear family sucks

Give me The Balkan Family Special where 10 family members live in the same house

@TsarTsar444 @BalkanPig

Sadly i live with mother and brother only,we respect each other tho i dont have problem with them

 

[Pythagoras]

Roman family tales

Cope. I'll fuck some of my cousins.

 

[turkproducer]

this post is so misinformed it’s actually sad to read jfl

men hardly leave their family for someone younger, who initiates divorce more

 

[Reckless Turtle]

average iq of fds is in the negatives

At least the rambling shizos here make sense and follow a logical thought process. Shoutout to @BigJimsWornOutTires.

 

[Deleted member 275]

 

[Uglybrazilian]

the nuclear family is already extinct, it was capitalism

 

[Reckless Turtle]

the nuclear family is already extinct, it was capitalism

The nuclear family was the downfall of the nuclear family. It was too efficient for societal progression.

 

[TsarTsar444]

View attachment 1352546

Lets do MDMA when i come in Netherlands with my girlfriend, we could meat up

 

[TsarTsar444]

the nuclear family is already extinct, it was capitalism

Capitalism one of the main causes, but also some others like technology and the internet

 

[Deleted member 275]

Lets do MDMA when i come in Netherlands with my girlfriend, we could meat up

 

[n0rthface]

the nuclear family is already extinct, it was capitalism

True, but marx and Engels advocated for the destruction of the traditional family as well.

 

[Reckless Turtle]

we could meat up

 

[Pythagoras]

huh? how food is related here?

 

[Uglybrazilian]

True, but marx and Engels advocated for the destruction of the traditional family as well.

the "traditional" family that exists in capitalism. In capitalism, the traditional family works as a reproducer of the system's ideology, because our parents socialize us in a manner to think that all the inequality we see is fair and natural, and thus all individuals of a society are since they are kids trained to reproduce those same morals.

Marx has never got into too much criticism in the biological aspects of the traditional family - Man, Wife and Kids and its societal roles.

 

[Deleted member 275]

my ideal is to have 4+ children to create a bigger family that works together tbh.

 

[n0rthface]

the "traditional" family that exists in capitalism. In capitalism, the traditional family works as a reproducer of the system's ideology, because our parents socialize us in a manner to think that all the inequality we see is fair and natural, and thus all individuals of a society are since they are kids trained to reproduce those same morals.

Marx has never got into too much criticism in the biological aspects of the traditional family - Man, Wife and Kids and its societal roles.

1. JFL Literally nobody is saying this in their families, I’ve literally never heard a single person in my life say “the world is a fair place”

2. Not all human beings are equal and they never can become equal because of biological reasons and naturally occurring hierarchies. Even if everyone were economically equal, other hierarchies will become more pronounced, Such as political power, looks and access to the ability to dish out violence (violence is the supreme authority)

@WannabeJock thoughts

 

[n0rthface]

Marx has never got into too much criticism in the biological aspects of the traditional family - Man, Wife and Kids and its societal roles.

And yes he did, him and engles state that before human society existed that humans were “free” from it and that the biological roles of the family uphold capitalism and the patriarchy.
(which is the most retarded thing I’ve ever heard in my life)

 

[Uglybrazilian]

1. JFL Literally nobody is saying this in their families, I’ve literally never heard a single person in my life say “the world is a fair place”

2. Not all human beings are equal and they never can become equal because of biological reasons and naturally occurring hierarchies. Even if everyone were economically equal, other hierarchies will become more pronounced, Such as political power, looks and access to the ability to dish out violence (violence is the supreme authority)

@WannabeJock thoughts

1 - you are takin the world "fair" quite literally, you are educated to believe that the morals of capitalism are natural and just how things are, thats what I meant, not your vulgar and simple interpretation.


2 - I dont get what do you mean with this since: Marx himself knew that hierarchies existed, he was against financial hierarchies, not against hierarchies by themselves. He even said he expected 1000 more hierarchies after the end of capitalism. I suggest you to watch Peterson x Zizek, Zizek goes in details about it.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

And yes he did, him and engles state that before human society existed that humans were “free” from it and that the biological roles of the family uphold capitalism and the patriarchy.
(which is the most retarded thing I’ve ever heard in my life)

Engels believed that before private property, families were different, which is mostly true if you read about hunter gatherers. He never stated that family didn't exist by that time, but it was organized in a different way(basically the truth). Is he wrong? Its just a fact.

 

[n0rthface]

1 - you are takin the world "fair" quite literally, you are educated to believe that the morals of capitalism are natural and just how things are, thats what I meant, not your vulgar and simple interpretation.


2 - I dont get what do you mean with this since: Marx himself knew that hierarchies existed, he was against financial hierarchies, not against hierarchies by themselves. He even said he expected 1000 more hierarchies after the end of capitalism. I suggest you to watch Peterson x Zizek, Zizek goes in details about it.

“You just is educated on believing dis shit he natural”


Yet nobody is brainwashing anyone, people just accept capitalism as natural because they are comfortable living under in and it works as an economic system. Currently the vast majority of working people in western countries can live comfortably, they have no reason to challenge “muh evil piggies”. If they didn’t revolt in the 19th century, when the working hours and standards were dog shit, why would they do it now? When conditions have vastly improved
(Remember when Marx said it would get worse??? )


As for your second point.

I can’t find a single source for what you said, it’s contradictory to a lot of marxs writings. And is 100% contradictory to what 99% of Marxists believe.
(Also ziezk believes capitalism needs regulation not dissolution)

What’s actually wrong with financial hierarchies?
As long as workers can feed themselves, their families and own a house, I see absolutely no problem with it.

Yes capitalism isn’t a perfect system and it does need a lot of state regulation, but it’s a whole lot better than socialism. The best example of this would be in China, where they have seen a large amount of growth, taken millions of people out of poverty and become a world super power with dengans corporateconomic polices. China has completely dropped the class struggle retardation in favour of class collaboration and promoting nationalism
(Sounds very familiar…….just can’t put my finger on it)

 

[n0rthface]

“You just is educated on believing dis shit he natural”
View attachment 1352732

Yet nobody is brainwashing anyone, people just accept capitalism as natural because they are comfortable living under in and it works as an economic system. Currently the vast majority of working people in western countries can live comfortably, they have no reason to challenge “muh evil piggies”. If they didn’t revolt in the 19th century, when the working hours and standards were dog shit, why would they do it now? When conditions have vastly improved
(Remember when Marx said it would get worse??? )


As for your second point.

I can’t find a single source for what you said, it’s contradictory to a lot of marxs writings. And is 100% contradictory to what 99% of Marxists believe.
(Also ziezk believes capitalism needs regulation not dissolution)

What’s actually wrong with financial hierarchies?
As long as workers can feed themselves, their families and own a house, I see absolutely no problem with it.

Yes capitalism isn’t a perfect system and it does need a lot of state regulation, but it’s a whole lot better than socialism. The best example of this would be in China, where they have seen a large amount of growth, taken millions of people out of poverty and become a world super power with dengans corporateconomic polices. China has completely dropped the class struggle retardation in favour of class collaboration and promoting nationalism
(Sounds very familiar…….just can’t put my finger on it)

Family structures in primitive societies would not of been drastically different from the traditional families of today. Why would they be? The biological structure of the family would be no different, the biggest chances is that they would be more close nitt. As the biological structure of societies is based in evolutionary Darwinism.

I hate how you commie subhumans always claim primitive societies were communist, the most retarded shit I’ve ever heard. It’s laughable how wrong engles and Marxs were.

primitive societies had privately owned tribal land, they had their own family huts, they would of had privately owned tools and it’s obvious that human slavery would of existed back then too.

Since the primitive societies did not have currency, they would of used a barter trade system. Knowing this we can conclude that tools, food, people etc were used as a form of wealth. And from that we can also conclude that there would of been wealth inequality in these primitive societies.
Therefore debunking “muh tribal communism”
A very good piece on this topic

Paleolithic People Were Not Primitive Communists | Mises Institute

Assuming that some groups of foragers indeed practiced "primitive communism," they would have died out because they had lost the fierce competition with the

mises.org

 

[Uglybrazilian]

“You just is educated on believing dis shit he natural”
View attachment 1352732

Yet nobody is brainwashing anyone, people just accept capitalism as natural because they are comfortable living under in and it works as an economic system. Currently the vast majority of working people in western countries can live comfortably, they have no reason to challenge “muh evil piggies”. If they didn’t revolt in the 19th century, when the working hours and standards were dog shit, why would they do it now? When conditions have vastly improved
(Remember when Marx said it would get worse??? )


As for your second point.

I can’t find a single source for what you said, it’s contradictory to a lot of marxs writings. And is 100% contradictory to what 99% of Marxists believe.
(Also ziezk believes capitalism needs regulation not dissolution)

What’s actually wrong with financial hierarchies?
As long as workers can feed themselves, their families and own a house, I see absolutely no problem with it.

Yes capitalism isn’t a perfect system and it does need a lot of state regulation, but it’s a whole lot better than socialism. The best example of this would be in China, where they have seen a large amount of growth, taken millions of people out of poverty and become a world super power with dengans corporateconomic polices. China has completely dropped the class struggle retardation in favour of class collaboration and promoting nationalism
(Sounds very familiar…….just can’t put my finger on it)

"Yet nobody is brainwashing anyone, people just accept capitalism as natural because they are comfortable living under in and it works as an economic system."

Not true, in Brazil there is people who have nothing to eat and still they spread the same morals as the rich. Cant you see? Do you really think those people like capitalism and are comfortable living in it? Plus thats not even the point, the point is what Marx has said, and you are wrong about it.

"Currently the vast majority of working people in western countries can live comfortably, they have no reason to challenge “muh evil piggies”. If they didn’t revolt in the 19th century, when the working hours and standards were dog shit, why would they do it now? When conditions have vastly improved"

Most people have many reasons to be against the elites, mostly because you ignore the fact that it is not about how you live but how you could live. Technology and science have evolved in a way the would allow humans to have much more free, liberating and fullfilling lives, still that wont happen under such system because profit rather than reason or the improvement of human lives is the main goal. A minority of poor people in the world can actually live comfortably; and even those who live comfortably could live much better considering what mankind can produce.



"
I can’t find a single source for what you said, it’s contradictory to a lot of marxs writings. And is 100% contradictory to what 99% of Marxists believe.
(Also ziezk believes capitalism needs regulation not dissolution)
"

Its not contradictory to Marx writings, actually how do you know since you have never read Marx jfl

"[...] the right of the producers is proportional to the labor they supply [...]. But, one man is superior to another physically or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only [...]. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal (MARX, 1970, p. 11)"

Marx has SOOO many writings in which he adresses this question and clearly states that humans are not equal in their capabilities, Marx wanted equality in the sense that everyone should be liberated to pursue their full, individual potentials - not literal equality in which everyone is literally equal. Thats just conservative non-sense. Also its not contradictory to what marxists believe, because if you dont believe in this you are simply unfamiliar with marx's works and thus not a real marxist. I wont discuss what you said about Zizek since it has no implications for what I said.

"
What’s actually wrong with financial hierarchies?
As long as workers can feed themselves, their families and own a house, I see absolutely no problem with it.
"

Thats a whole other subject, our discussion is about what Marx has said, not what you think about it.


"China has completely dropped the class struggle retardation in favour of class collaboration and promoting nationalism"

Nigga you are so wrong jfl, China is the only country in the planet in which the government can literally socialize any company they want whenever they want. They strictly control the upper class to avoid any type of conflict between their interests and the interests of the country. This type of conflict literally destroys all countries of the third world. You'd have to be delusional to unironically dont believe in class struggle.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

Family structures in primitive societies would not of been drastically different from the traditional families of today. Why would they be? The biological structure of the family would be no different, the biggest chances is that they would be more close nitt. As the biological structure of societies is based in evolutionary Darwinism.

I hate how you commie subhumans always claim primitive societies were communist, the most retarded shit I’ve ever heard. It’s laughable how wrong engles and Marxs were.

primitive societies had privately owned tribal land, they had their own family huts, they would of had privately owned tools and it’s obvious that human slavery would of existed back then too.

Since the primitive societies did not have currency, they would of used a barter trade system. Knowing this we can conclude that tools, food, people etc were used as a form of wealth. And from that we can also conclude that there would of been wealth inequality in these primitive societies.
Therefore debunking “muh tribal communism”
A very good piece on this topic

Paleolithic People Were Not Primitive Communists | Mises Institute

Assuming that some groups of foragers indeed practiced "primitive communism," they would have died out because they had lost the fierce competition with the

mises.org

They were indeed different as fuck and that is confirmed by lots of evidence just literally google it, family structure depends on society, just take a look around, family is changing because society is changing, plus obviouslly there were private huts and tools among hunters, this is NOT private property but personal property in Marxism, such things would still exist in a communist society, a simple trade system is not capitalism or anti-marxist. Why do libertarians/conservatives hate Marx when you niggas dont even know what he actually said it??? Its fucking tiring all you write is 90% strawman

 

[Deleted member 15338]

1. JFL Literally nobody is saying this in their families, I’ve literally never heard a single person in my life say “the world is a fair place”

2. Not all human beings are equal and they never can become equal because of biological reasons and naturally occurring hierarchies. Even if everyone were economically equal, other hierarchies will become more pronounced, Such as political power, looks and access to the ability to dish out violence (violence is the supreme authority)

@WannabeJock thoughts

Nothing else needed bit this Brazilian rat is low iq af jfl traditional family is the MOST natural thing in the world maybe even meaning of the life jfl.

 

[Deleted member 15338]

And yes he did, him and engles state that before human society existed that humans were “free” from it and that the biological roles of the family uphold capitalism and the patriarchy.
(which is the most retarded thing I’ve ever heard in my life)

Btw before the agriculture women being choosers is most retarded feminist take ever existed jfl women didnt choose shit they just got raped and gave birth. Family/Tribe were always natural it is NOT a social construct. Also patriarchy is natural too it is not about muh opressing women since women never had ANY rights in first place.

 

[n0rthface]

Nigga you are so wrong jfl, China is the only country in the planet in which the government can literally socialize any company they want whenever they want. They strictly control the upper class to avoid any type of conflict between their interests and the interests of the country. This type of conflict literally destroys all countries of the third world. You'd have to be delusional to unironically dont believe in class struggle.

I’ve read Marx you subhuman, JFL the massive Chinese middle class, the literal BILLIONAIRES that exist in Chinese societies and growing nationalism (which is considered bourgeoisie to you retards)

what you’ve just described sounds a lot like fascism

well you’re write, China is aesthetically communist, but economically and politically a fascist state. It’s hilarious that you freaks actually support it.

did not read single word of anything else that you wrote, because it’s you coping like a rat with your slave morality.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

I’ve read Marx you subhuman, JFL the massive Chinese middle class, the literal BILLIONAIRES that exist in Chinese societies and growing nationalism (which is considered bourgeoisie to you retards)

what you’ve just described sounds a lot like fascism

well you’re write, China is aesthetically communist, but economically and politically a fascist state. It’s hilarious that you freaks actually support it.

did not read single word of anything else that you wrote, because it’s you coping like a rat with your slave morality.

no you didnt read Marx you abortion, you were commiting basic mistakes on marxist theory such as confusing personal and private property(this difference is explained by Marx on the first chapters of Das Kapital) and the classic mistake that Marx was a simplistic egalitarian which you would know its a hoax if you have read one his most famous and basic writings: "The Critique of the Gotha Programme."(which I just quoted in the post above)

You have zero knowledge on what you talkin, nationalism is not considered bourgeoisie(?) by Marx. Thats another common mistake from people who never actually read what they are criticizing. Marx actually didnt say that nationalism is bourgeoisie, he said that the advancement of capitalism would gradually destroy the nations:

"National differences and antagonisms between peoples are already tending to disappear more and more, owing to the de-velopment of the bourgeoisie, the growth of free trade and a world market, and the increasing uniformity of industrial processes and of corresponding conditions of life."

he said that on the 19th century.

there is sooo many wrong things you have said in just one post, I could adress every single point with quotes of Marx and others but it would be a really long text, you should actually read about what you talk because I dont larp as Marxist on the internet, I literally read Marx

 

[n0rthface]

no you didnt read Marx you abortion, you were commiting basic mistakes on marxist theory such as confusing personal and private property(this difference is explained by Marx on the first chapters of Das Kapital) and the classic mistake that Marx was a simplistic egalitarian which you would know its a hoax if you have read one his most famous and basic writings: "The Critique of the Gotha Programme."(which I just quoted in the post above)

You have zero knowledge on what you talkin, nationalism is not considered bourgeoisie(?) by Marx. Thats another common mistake from people who never actually read what they are criticizing. Marx actually didnt say that nationalism is bourgeoisie, he said that the advancement of capitalism would gradually destroy the nations:

"National differences and antagonisms between peoples are already tending to disappear more and more, owing to the de-velopment of the bourgeoisie, the growth of free trade and a world market, and the increasing uniformity of industrial processes and of corresponding conditions of life."

he said that on the 19th century.

there is sooo many wrong things you have said in just one post, I could adress every single point with quotes of Marx and others but it would be a really long text, you should actually read about what you talk because I dont larp as Marxist on the internet, I literally read Marx

I’m not larping as a Marxist, you rat. I think you subhumans are mentally ill and blatantly wrong.

“In Marxism, nationalism is the practice by the ruling classes of deliberately dividing people by nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion, so as to distract them from initiating class warfare.”

Marxs and engles advocate for nations to dissolve after world communism is achieved. Therefore, they are completely ANTI-NATIONALIST.

 

[n0rthface]

“Marxism is when you support class collaboration are extremely nationalistic , have billionaires, millionaires and a growing middle class… oh yeah it’s socialist because da state play a role in da economy “

If you want to know more about China (since you are clearly uneducated on the matter)
Watch these two videos of communists getting dunked on

 

[Uglybrazilian]

I’m not larping as a Marxist, you rat. I think you subhumans are mentally ill and blatantly wrong.

“In Marxism, nationalism is the practice by the ruling classes of deliberately dividing people by nationality, race, ethnicity, or religion, so as to distract them from initiating class warfare.”

Marxs and engles advocate for nations to dissolve after world communism is achieved. Therefore, they are completely ANTI-NATIONALIST.

Marx was an anti-nationalist and rightfully so(because nationalism is a form of idolatry), I have never said otherwise, plus nations will dissolve on communism or capitalism, the only thing I said is that Marx didnt say that nationalism is "bourgeoisie" (whatever that means), he only said that the advancement of the rulling classes will dissolve the nations. You cant even properly read tbh. Most communist countries were nationalistic as fuck, but within a internationalist framework - in other words, class struggle on an international level. Not the western chauvinistic nationalism that tries to expand its rule and conquer other countries. Thats a form of nationalism that only benefits the rulling classes.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

“Marxism is when you support class collaboration are extremely nationalistic , have billionaires, millionaires and a growing middle class… oh yeah it’s socialist because da state play a role in da economy “
View attachment 1353162
If you want to know more about China (since you are clearly uneducated on the matter)
Watch these two videos of communists getting dunked on

You are completely confused, I have never said that China is socialist, I merely stated that they do not ignore class struggle - thats why the state strongly rules the upper classes. Again, it seems like you cant properly read, you misunderstand everything I say.

 

[n0rthface]

You are completely confused, I have never said that China is socialist, I merely stated that they do not ignore class struggle - thats why the state strongly rules the upper classes. Again, it seems like you cant properly read, you misunderstand everything I say.

Class collaboration = class struggle

imagine thinking that.

oh yeah, I hardly read of your faggot Marxist drivel.

 

[sensen]

0

unironically the nuclear family is shit.. not for the reasons this guy said, not that id know because tl;dr

but because it forced men away from other men. When men lose their masculine hierarchical competitive structure, they lose everything slowly.

 

[sensen]

“Marxism is when you support class collaboration are extremely nationalistic , have billionaires, millionaires and a growing middle class… oh yeah it’s socialist because da state play a role in da economy “
View attachment 1353162
If you want to know more about China (since you are clearly uneducated on the matter)
Watch these two videos of communists getting dunked on

Based Keith Woods posting.