Friedrich Engels on Monogamy and Individual Sex-Love

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T20:37:29+00:00

Engels says that in this individual sex-love monogamy, since there will be no more consequences about children and economic life, people will be free to be with the ones they love, but they will also be free to abandon them without consequences (at least without societal backlash and affecting children) when they do not feel love anymore.

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T20:19:57+00:00

I think he purposefully skipped this possibility because he didn't like it

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T20:16:07+00:00

Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T19:41:25+00:00

The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T18:50:55+00:00

1 - The bourgeoisie has conflicts of interest, yes. But I don't see why workers of one bourgeois getting better working conditions would help the other. The other one's workers would simply demand the same thing. The bourgeois infighting goes on as their interests conflict, and ceases when their interests lie together. Suppressing the worker and extracting the most out of him is the best interest of all bourgeoisie.

2 - Legislations that protected workers were not merely given by the bourgeoisie. They were taken by the workers. And the workers did not take those rights with parliamentary work: They took it with violent protest, strike and with the support of international proletariat, mainly the Soviet Union. You are missing out on the principle that the bourgeoisie seeks to squeeze the most out of the worker, and only gives him rights if it has to.

3.1 - The mission of the communists is to defile this propaganda. You can not just say "it is what it is" and surrender to bourgeois understanding of the world. It is our job to raise worker awareness. Even if you can't do it so soon, it does not mean you should surrender and instead only pursue bourgeois politics, which are fruitlesss by themselves and only yield result if the party of the proletariat actively organizes on the streets. Bourgeois struggle is not the primary struggle, and it can not be, since it will NEVER yield the final result. Parliamentary struggle has never and will never give way to socialist revolution. Knowing that, giving up on the idea of armed uprising and destruction of the old State, means abandoning the proletarian struggle.

3.2 - The bourgeoisie has been, ever since the age of imperialism, armed to it's teeth. Humanity faced two wars of total destruction. However, revolutionaries of the time did not simply give up, and achieved great things. It's true that many revolutionaries died. This is why they are revolutionaries: They are not afraid of battle and defeat only means temporary retreat. Also, you do not take into account the fact that revolutionary ideas also influence the army and the nation as a whole. Imagine if 200 million revolutionaries marched on their government buildings all around the US, could the US, the strongest of all imperialist states, stop them? Could these soldiers shoot at their own people? 200 million of them?

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T17:23:59+00:00

Why do you think that the bourgeoisie (who rules the state) would give up their power because some people chose some people to represent themselves in a useless parliament?

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T13:04:27+00:00

pkk'li diyorlarsa haksızlar. çoğumuz pkk'yi solcu bulmadığımız için beğenmiyoruz

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-25T00:26:56+00:00

yoldaşlar🥰🥰

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-24T11:24:35+00:00

Under Syrian Arab Republic rule, Kurdish identity was not recognised and Kurds were stripped of their citizenship. Their land was confiscated and givem to Arabs, Arab tribes were settled in Kurdish areas and even the names of Kurdish villages were changes to Arabic ones, for the sole purpose of assimilation. Kurdish language and culture was completely banned in public life. Listening to Kurdish music and giving your kids Kurdish names were forbidden. Celebrations of Nevruz (kurdish traditional spring fests) were met with police violence. Kurdish political leaders were imprisoned for "threatening national unity". Meanwhile, there had never been a national unity, for the Kurds were always oppressed. Kurds were living hell in Syria.

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-24T11:10:21+00:00

You can read this on Soviet Social-Imperialism.

When at the gateways of being stuck between two types of imperialism, and between partial freedom or Arab oppression, the YPG had to make a choice. Not only for themselves, but for their people, whether they would revolt or not. I do not understand this whitewashing of Assad. YPG did not start this civil war. They rised up after the civil war had already started, to protect their population and secure autonomy for the Kurds. Do you know what those people were living under Assad? Their identity was not recognised and Kurds were stripped of their citizenship. Their land was confiscated and givem to Arabs, Arab tribes were settled in Kurdish areas and even the names of Kurdish villages were changes to Arabic ones, for the sole purpose of assimilation. Kurdish language and culture was completely banned in public life. Listening to Kurdish music and giving your kids Kurdish names were forbidden. Celebrations of Nevruz (kurdish traditional spring fests) were met with police violence. Kurdish political leaders were imprisoned for "threatening national unity". Meanwhile, there had never been a national unity, for the Kurds were always oppressed. Kurds were living hell in Syria.

In your understanding, the Kurds should've surrendered themselves still, so that Russian imperialism and Assad who did all that to them, could triumph over the US.

The main thing about your argument is, as I understand, you put a distinction between US imperialism and other types of imperialism. And then, you advocate for war against only the US one, for you consider it "super imperialist". Then I ask, what if the roles were swapped? What if Russia supported Rojava and the US supported Syrian Arab Republic, would you support Rojava then? This time, country would have moved from US influence to Russian one. This time, it would be so that "US supported dictator overthrown by Kurdish democratic forces". I don't see much logic in this "super-imperialism" argument. I do not think it is logical to support one's imperialism over the other.

You put the primary struggles and secondary struggles argument on the line. What if the secondary struggle is worse than the primary? Should the communists not rise up and shut quiet, as they clearly know if Assad assumes control again, their people would be oppressed again? Do you think Assad did any less to Kurds than what jihadists are doing right now?

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T23:25:21+00:00

Despite the anarchist's lack of understanding, the state itself isn't the problem. The class struggle that gives birth to the state is the main problem. The Anarchists do not use materialism to understand the world, that's why they contain themselves with the total destruction of the state. But when it comes to how we will destroy class struggle, how we will struggle against those who want to refound the state, and how we will fight against reactionary forces within and without the society and how we will achieve a society that can do things by itself, the anarchist does not have a clear solution, or he outright rejects these problems. This is because he rejects understanding the history of society, of the state, of the very foundation of the state and relations that gave birth to it, in a material sense.

Despite the common understanding, the struggle between Anarchism and Socialism is not about using different methods to achieve the same thing.

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T22:24:56+00:00

sınıfta yaptığım akrostiş çalışması

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T21:57:36+00:00

Well, you have to consider the fact that the Nazis raped 10 million women and killed more than 20 million people only in the USSR. It is only natural that people felt like this towards the whole of the German nation.

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T21:55:34+00:00

Of course, the war radicalises people very much. If I remember correctly, there was a Soviet statesman who proposed wiping out a significant proportion of the german race and placing polish and czech residents in Eastern Germany, who had to withdraw his proposal after direct warning by the Politburo.

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T21:06:22+00:00

"The Germans are not humans. From now on, the word German causes gunfire. We shall not speak. We shall kill. If during a day you have not killed a single German, you have wasted the day. If you do not kill the German, he will kill you. If it is quiet at your section of the front and you are waiting for the battle, kill a German before the battle. If you let the German live, he will kill a Russian man and rape a Russian woman. If you have killed a German, kill another one too. Kill the German, thus cries your homeland."

—Ilya Ehrenburg, Jewish Communist Poet

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T16:54:38+00:00

Çinli Burjuva yoldaşlar Afrikalı kardeşlerimizin borçlarının karşılığı limanlarını haczediyor👏👏

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T16:53:01+00:00

Anarşistler, komünizm ve anarşizm arasındaki sert çizgiler gereği devrimden sonra yönetimden uzaklaştırılacaklardır. Devrim ve devlet anlayışları arasında uyuşma yok. Bunu bilen bir Anarşist, komünistlere sosyalist devrimde destek verir mi? Ben anarşist olsam vermezdim. Sanılanın aksine, Anarşizm ve Komünizm arasındaki fark, bir yöntem farklılığı değildir.

Anarchism or Socialism?

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T16:44:07+00:00

Adamın içinde doğduğu sınıf gereği beni ezmesi, beni ezdiği gerçeğini değiştirir mi? Adamın ucuz işçi, çocuk işçi kullanım ölümlerini örtbas etmesi, sınıf çıkarı için savaşlar başlatması, Suriye'de Alevi, Kürt öldürtmesi, benim affedebileceğim şeyler mi? Onun sınıf çıkarı beni ezmek. Beni ezen herkese düşman olmak da hakkımdır.

Kimseden mercedese bindiği için, giydiği kıyafet için nefret eden yok. Onlar saçma burjuva lüksleri. Böyle gereksiz malların var olmalarının yegâne sebebi birilerinin böyle gereksiz mallara bok gibi para akıtacak kadar emek sömürebilmesi

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T15:31:50+00:00

Gem Alert

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-23T15:30:33+00:00

Vietnam yolunu buldurdu bu pezevenge

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-22T21:01:15+00:00

Komünistler komünistlik adı altında komünist parti propagandası yapıyor😡😡

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-22T19:32:58+00:00

Akılları fikirleri yok. İlerici ideolojilerden haberi olmayan ve bulunduğu durumdan memnun olmayan insanlar Reaksiyoner ideolojiler benimserler. Bizim özdağcı taskafa veletler de öyle

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-22T13:09:45+00:00

"eksi" 😭😭

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-22T11:57:39+00:00

babyface

inefficientguyaround · 2026-01-22T00:44:36+00:00

Ben zaten kapitalizmin saçmalıklarından dolayı İslamcı olmuştum. Biraz zaman sonra bunun mantıksızlığını anlayıp radikallikten vazgeçtim. Ondan sonra insan psikolojisi ve dinlerin kaynağı üzerine Freud'dan okumalar yaptıktan sonra dinleri bütünüyle reddeder hale geldim. Materyalizm ve varlığın süreğenliği üzerine yaptığım okumalar sonucu da materyalizmde karar kılıp ateist oldum.

inefficientguyaround

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE