You are making a direct comparison. I am challenging it. This is like if you all put your money into diamond toothbrushes that have microchips that are backed by the U.S. government. What the cartoon guy on Twitter is failing to elucidate is that yes, Americans like your parents do need to be decoupled from the global asset market. That is a form of expropriation, that doesn’t mean make them homeless, and you’re reading it uncharitably. It seems like you people have no idea where you even are. The Communist Manifesto has nothing to do with you.
I am not. I literally said I was not in the comment you are replying to. I am only saying that ownership exists/existed in socialist states (regardless that it wasn’t identical to ownership in America, it was there), therefore the Twitter user is wrong on the facts.
What the cartoon guy on Twitter is failing to elucidate is that
What the cartoon guy on Twitter did is express themselves in an intentionally confrontational and engagement-baiting way instead of just constructively saying what they meant. The result is that if they did have a serious point, it was lost in the controversy because their original comment (in the OP) could easily be interpreted as “evict everyone who owns a house”.
that doesn’t mean make them homeless, and you’re reading it uncharitably
It was written on purpose to be read uncharitably. We are in a thread replying to a second screenshot where the user doubled down and said no one was allowed to own land in any socialist state, which is simply not true. In the very same comment as that screenshot, Alaskaball posted a screenshot of the constitution of the USSR affirming the right to ownership of one’s dwelling as personal property. Whether the nature of that ownership was identical to the ownership a resident has of their home in America is irrelevant, the point is that the Twitter user’s statement is factually incorrect.
It seems like you people have no idea where you even are. The Communist Manifesto has nothing to do with you.
This type of tone is a similar form of engagement-farming to what you see on Twitter. It’s counterproductive to having a good conversation.
Okay, feel free to ignore it then. I know some people who would love to hang out with you and talk about how Marx said the American Revolution was based.
Not beating the “talks like a pedophile” accusations by throwing the roleplay-speak into the pot. Do you have any substantive critiques or are you purely tone policing because you have nothing to add whatsoever? Which is, by the way, what I just directed back at you, tone policing, because you added absolutely nothing.
Yeah, I think it is pretty enlightening that Westerners reply with jokes and GIFs when the subject shifts from wage and rent stabilization to land reform. I guess you haven’t really got the marks 'o capital all over your body like you once thought.
You are making a direct comparison. I am challenging it. This is like if you all put your money into diamond toothbrushes that have microchips that are backed by the U.S. government. What the cartoon guy on Twitter is failing to elucidate is that yes, Americans like your parents do need to be decoupled from the global asset market. That is a form of expropriation, that doesn’t mean make them homeless, and you’re reading it uncharitably. It seems like you people have no idea where you even are. The Communist Manifesto has nothing to do with you.
I am not. I literally said I was not in the comment you are replying to. I am only saying that ownership exists/existed in socialist states (regardless that it wasn’t identical to ownership in America, it was there), therefore the Twitter user is wrong on the facts.
What the cartoon guy on Twitter did is express themselves in an intentionally confrontational and engagement-baiting way instead of just constructively saying what they meant. The result is that if they did have a serious point, it was lost in the controversy because their original comment (in the OP) could easily be interpreted as “evict everyone who owns a house”.
It was written on purpose to be read uncharitably. We are in a thread replying to a second screenshot where the user doubled down and said no one was allowed to own land in any socialist state, which is simply not true. In the very same comment as that screenshot, Alaskaball posted a screenshot of the constitution of the USSR affirming the right to ownership of one’s dwelling as personal property. Whether the nature of that ownership was identical to the ownership a resident has of their home in America is irrelevant, the point is that the Twitter user’s statement is factually incorrect.
This type of tone is a similar form of engagement-farming to what you see on Twitter. It’s counterproductive to having a good conversation.
ugh, leave reddit behind dawg. this distracts the reader, reducing your comments impact.
Okay, feel free to ignore it then. I know some people who would love to hang out with you and talk about how Marx said the American Revolution was based.
youre welcome. i look forward to witnessing your maturity
Is talking like a pedophile to me supposed to prove something?
looks up wistfully
“one day”
Not beating the “talks like a pedophile” accusations by throwing the roleplay-speak into the pot. Do you have any substantive critiques or are you purely tone policing because you have nothing to add whatsoever? Which is, by the way, what I just directed back at you, tone policing, because you added absolutely nothing.
nothing? are you sure? i feel like this back-and-forth was pretty enlightening.
Yeah, I think it is pretty enlightening that Westerners reply with jokes and GIFs when the subject shifts from wage and rent stabilization to land reform. I guess you haven’t really got the marks 'o capital all over your body like you once thought.