Sybil @ federatingIsTooHard @lemmy.world

About

---

Read more

Posts

5

Comments

993

Joined

2 yr. ago

I wouldn't oppose them. You're making that up.

I'm saying they can't know the future.

I don't have any interest in debating.

are you suggesting that Marxist revolutionary theory is a science like meteorology? it's not.

it is. since you seem opposed to learning anywhere but Lemmy, I'll help you out. equivocation is an informal fallacy where you use one word in a certain context with a particular meaning, and then you use the same word in a different context with a different meaning, and then you claim that they're the same thing. The authority of the boot maker is different from the authority of the cop. The authority of the doctor is different from the authority of the insurance company.

you know I dwelt on this a bit, and the revolution was thrown by the people and it wasn't thrown for mercantilism. it was just against the feudal system. but what followed was mercantilism. merchants didn't throw the revolution. I don't know how you got the conclusion that the French revolution was a mercantilist revolution. I honestly can't think of a single mercantilist revolution. The closest thing I can imagine are the American revolution and possibly the piracy of the 18th century.

this is some equivocation. it's an informal fallacy you might want to look up.

I'm the authority on what I want. there's no evidence that you could produce that would undercut my claim.

You're starting to sound like the liberals that tell me to vote for Biden.

do I want to bet that you don't know the future? absolutely. here's a proof.

        knowledge is defined as a justified true belief.
    you can't have evidence about the future because it hasn't happened.
    truth claims about the future have no value because it hasn't happened.
    there is no justification that can produce knowledge about the future.

    you don't know the future.


  

qed

edit: oh fuck. I was supposed to bet something. how about a loaf of bread?

implying that I don't want to change the status quo doesn't change whether I do.

you don't know the future anymore than I. you don't know what the next revolution will look like or what would start it.

if we're working together I'm going to say how I think we should work.

oh fuck. forgot one.

no. words have meanings.

this is just posturing.

that makes no sense. mercantilism threw no revolution.

it's tautological

a lot of the meetings that I go to are pretty much organized as do-ocracies. someone says they are willing to do the work of taking notes or do the work of facilitating, and everybody's relieved that they didn't have to step up.

I think that many small interconnected communities is what we should be aiming for anyway, so any small community to me is evidence that it can work. The fact that all of these communities are surrounded by imperialists or capitalist societies doesn't preclude more people from forming egalitarian communities and communicating and working with those that are existant. I have no desire to build a system capable of oppressing people, because I don't want to be responsible for people's oppression.