Amazing.

Sure, I like that more, but vampire can have its uses for variety’s sake. Gotta be creative.

It’s well-documented that unsold product gets destroyed. Capitalism works on a cyclical process, the boom-bust cycle. Economic booms gradually accelerate with increased production and consumption, until too much is produced to possibly be consumed, causing mass layoffs and destruction of unsold commodities sitting on shelves, taking up space in warehouses. This is made even worse by the tendency for the rate of profit to fall.

The US Empire has never been a democracy, truly. Democracy means rule by the majority, but as a matter of fact the US Empire has, since its inception, been controlled by the capitalist class and landlords, slavers, etc. Candidates are pre-approved, or otherwise torn down. The government cannot be run in the interests of the working class, what needs to happen is the destruction of the capitalist state and replacement with a socialist state.

I’d argue it depends on how you use it. Calling Bezos a blood-sucking vampire of a man that lives more the more he feasts on others is pretty insulting, I’d say.

Deeply unserious usually works. They aren’t taking things seriously, or putting in any actual effort, just coasting along on their preconcieved notions.

Godspeed, comrade 🫡

Awesome! I’d love to learn it too for that reason, I just have other languages that are a higher priority for me.

There’s so much that was never translated, as you of course know.

This might be shocking to you, but when one side is winning a war, they get terms of surrender favorable to them, because otherwise they can usually press the attack and force the other side’s hand even more. That doesn’t make Trump a Russian agent by any stretch, he’s a typical Statesian doing Statesian things

Sycophant, rogue, reactionary, deeply userious, ghoul, vampire, all seem to be pretty good.

That’s misleading, first of all. “Luxuries,” as in Gucci, Prada, etc, aren’t the only way capitalists spend their money. They also consume greater quantities of other commoditied, and higher quality versions not deemed “luxuries.” More than that, thry buy land, companies, factories, etc in a large feedback loop of greater and greater money, pay off politicians, and more.

Secondly, your entire argument that the reason we can’t provide for everyone is because we don’t produce enough is thwarted by the simple fact that vast amounts of commodities go unsold or are even destroyed. I’m aware that there’s a finite amount that is produced, I’m also aware that we have more empty homes than homeless people and more.

Correct, none of them were part of a “ruling class,” administration is not a distinct class. The proletariat is in control in socialist countries.

That varies quite a bit by country. Capitalist systems have no problems with destroying the world, but socialist countries are better able to plan production and distribution. You can see this in action in the PRC right now, and its major shift towards renewables and electrification at an astounding scale.

They don’t actually disagree, though. Both operate under the direct control of the wealthiest in the country, the capitalist class, and work to ensure imperialism persists and that their private owners continue making immense amounts of money.

They were always for imperialist ambitions and genocide, from the outset.

You’re severely underselling the extensive wealth billionaires have, the lavish luxuries and pet projects they have. They build schools specifically for training their children, they hunt endangered species, they create survival bunkers and consume huge amounts of luxury commodities. Houses sit vacant, food is thrown away, and billions of people go without. The capital and money they own is significant, as money is used as a gatekeeper for consumption of goods and services. Taxing cannot fix this, nor can it stop the tendency for the rate of profit to fall. I don’t know if you realize just how big a problem for capitalism falling profit rates are.

Secondly, with respect to the Congo, you’re confusing the symptom for the cause. Imperialist interference in the Congo is what sets up compradors in power. They don’t need taxation, they need nationalization and protectionism, as well as to do more south-south trade such as with China. Kicking out the US and Europe would do wonders for their domestic development, but this is kept difficult by direct interference from imperialist countries. It’s why the US Empire has hundreds of millitary bases around the world. The Congo needs socialism.

We overproduce goods and services, and let them rot on shelves and destroy them when they aren’t sold. We do not underproduce, and anyone that is familiar with industrialization and manufacturing can tell that we can satisfy the needs of everyone on Earth already with a socialist economy.

I do want to eventually learn Russian, but I’m already learning a second language and Spanish will be my third. Maybe Mandarin as my fourth. Russian as fifth? Doubt I’ll get that far, sadly.

No worries. If you want more in-depth reading on the DPRK, I made a list over here you can check out.

Publicly run industry doesn’t normally function with the same circuit of turning money into a larger sum of money that I described, nor are administrators a “ruling class.” Inequality in distribution exists, but isn’t necessarily the problem, equalitarians that seek equal distribution for everyone are exceedingly rare. There’s a qualitative difference in outcomes for the working classes in socialist countries where public ownership is the principle aspect that manifests in dramatic uplifting of their material conditions, whereas the point of the capitalist system is said inequality. The sheer scale of inequality in capitalist systems far surpasses socialist countries.

In the USSR, for example, the gap between the wealthiest, ie professors and scientists at the top and the average factory worker towards the bottom, was about ten times. In capitalist countries, that number skyrockets to billions. In the PRC, which has a socialist market economy, the number of billionaires is going down while the GDP and GDP per capita of the PRC is growing dramatically year over year, alongside real wages.

No, this is entirely wrong. We produce well above what’s necessary for everyone to live decent lives, the distribution of what we produce is extremely uneven. Domestically, capitalists have incredible sums of wealth that they use for luxury goods, entire companies, etc. The money capitalists have comes from sale of commodities. Capital appreciation still comes from that original sale and circulation of commodities. There are some genuinely non-productive industries, such as landlording, but by and large we overproduce, which is what leads to economic crisis every decade or so.

Internationally, we have imperialism. Capitalists from the imperialist countries like the US export capital to the global south, and set up comprador regimes so as to keep wages low and prevent these countries from advancing industry. This lets the global north keep a monopoly on high tech production and allows the global north to consistently charge monopoly prices when trading with the global south, leading to unequal exchange and a continuous siphoning of wealth. It’s why the Congo keeps staying poor despite being rich in resources.

Capitalism cannot be fixed, period. It’s an unsustainable system, and cannot be regulated to fix its issues. The Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall is consistent, and the production of goods for the sake of profit rather than use leads to constant overproduction and even destruction of goods to keep prices higher. The state in capitalist systems is subservient to the capitalist class, not the people.

We overproduce, but because of how lopsided distribution is, a tiny handful gets the overwhelming share of what we produce to the point that the majority go without. This is even more extreme at a global level. Productivity has steadily gone up year over year, but as the tendency for the rate of profit to fall persists, so too has capitalism’s decline accelerated.

Those positions were still elected, though. That’s like saying George W. Bush inherited the role of president from his father. “Mysterious” deaths are also often fake, such as the often reported execution of his uncle by dogs, which never happened. He does live much better than the average person, but Marxism is not a vow of poverty, nor does that mean that his position isn’t an elected one.

The DPRK structures their elections and systems very differently from the west, yes, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have them. That’s why I recommended the earlier article.