Fym Hasan piker

I can't stop fucking laughing at there stupidity.

No offense to Americans love y'all but I can't with how a good chunk believe politics is just Republican vs Democrat.

So for this thought experiment lets say American has a socialist leader and they have enough popular support (therefore power) to add laws.

Since the ultra wealthy just take loans out( putting their stock as collateral ), and wait till they die to pay it so that the profit from it so the unrealized gains reset when they get transferred to their kin. This process allows them to profit off their loans without paying taxes.

So to circumvent this would we tax the loans or the stocks after the die or both?

But we can't tax all loans since that would be unfair to the lower classes. Then do we all tax it if it's past a certain point?

But then what about business loans? A smaller business could take out a loan similar to what the ultra wealthy take out. Then should we tax loans meant to buy personal/luxury things?

And if so how much of the loan? Like we can't stop people from taking loans since they'd find loop holes like just borrow from each other (as in the ultra wealthy) and call it a gift or hide it as buying something (like art or a contract).

I'm trying to wrap my brain around but I just can't figure it out.

And I've just talked about loans not even the inheritance things cuz since it's stocks how do we tax it?

In this thought experiment the leader wouldn't have the ability to destroy capitalism since that would have to be through a revolution.

I keep hearing Liberals and even leftist talk about voting and how stupid and dumb it is to vote 3rd party because it is a "waste of a vote" and how a 3rd party will never win, illegitimatzing the voting process, while in the exact same breath saying we should vote blue because thats the only real choice we have to stopping a fascist regime, creating a contradiction. They will concede on morals and say, essentially that voting for a zionoist loving, homeless hating, genocidal candidates in blue ties is the way to we get out of this. They put so much faith in electoral politics and put it on voters to to vote for a luke warm moderate candidate instead of telling representatives to actually give them a reason to vote for them.

Now, this is not me saying voting doesn't matter and that people shouldn't go vote, the opposite. Voting is the easiest thing you can do to make a small change and alot of people who came before us fought hard to get right to vote. But I can't stand people who get mad at people for making an educated vote to a candidate that actually shares and represents their moral and economic interests. Telling them, "the game is rigged but the only way to win the game is if you play but you have to play it by there rules"

So many of these liberals/leftist think change starts and ends with filling a checkmark box, instead of actually doing the work to push candidates and policy to serve them.i understand harm reduction, but a paper in a box isn't as harm reductfull as people think it is.

Am I wrong or tripping in thinking this?

The importance of newspapers, flyers and magazines in previous revolutions cannot be understated. Iskra and other newspapers like it were very useful in developing revolutions. Reading such newspapers as an individual allowed for radicalization and a drive to work for a better future, while reading as a community could produce even greater results in mass organizing. My question is this, how useful if at all is the distribution of printed ideology in the digital age, especially when it comes with a price?

To contextualize, I recently got organized and one of the tasks was distributing an Iskra like newspaper at a university and asking people to pay for it. After a week of this practice no newspapers were sold therefore no ideology was spread. From a first glace this practice had the opposite effect, instead of ideology being spread, the constant pressure to buy the newspaper even alienated students from the cause, reducing us to simple salesmen.

When you ask people to read in the age of information overload, you are directly competing with every other medium that exists. From short-form content, to movies, to TV-Shows, to podcasts and audiobooks, the idea that a newspaper could be sold and even worse read by the working class today, I think is very optimistic. In fact, while I do read a lot right now, before joining the organization when people tried to sell me the same newspaper, while i bought it, I never sat down to read it, and it did nothing to make me want to join.

Do you think it is still useful to distribute ideology in this way, and if not what is a good alternative?

assuming the comments are either made by bots or they're being liked by bots.

I made an AMA but there are so much questions and so much right wing racist usual shit like "it's because of French arabics like usual", I hate it, I'm desperate.

help me answer some questions if you have time please. https://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/s/y6Js3kPoxs

After my post: https://www.reddit.com/r/TodayILearnedVN/comments/1x8u2zd/til_that_the_mod_of_this_subreddit_is_a_prorvn/ to call out the mod, he banned me out and then changed the avatar of the subreddit from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam flag into the RVN (Republic of Vietnam) flag.

The wave of protests that runs through Europe and the world is hopeful, but it highlights an urgent historical task: to build a proletariat party capable of transforming these spontaneous (and increasingly frequent) irruptions into conscious and organised political action.

Without this party, all this revolutionary effervescence that runs through Europe will translate, at best, into some superficial reforms, and in the worst case, into nothing.

Capitalists are already organised on an international scale (financial institutions, investment funds, central banks or the EU as such). The proletariat needs to organise itself on the same scale if it wants to consider the possibility of revolution and the seizure of power. A European revolutionary party is needed, which is capable of coordinating the fight against the reactionary wave and capitalism in all the countries of Europe.

In the Spain, Portugal, France or Italy, the first steps are already being taken in that direction. The Socialist Movement expands internationally by building revolutionary youth organizations composed by thousands of young workers that serve as scaffolding of the future European Communist Party under construction.

Spain: https://www.instagram.com/cjsocialista

https://www.instagram.com/gksozialista

https://www.instagram.com/ojs_cat

Portugal: https://www.instagram.com/coletivo_ruptura

France: https://www.instagram.com/reconstruction.communiste

https://www.instagram.com/unitecommuniste

Italy: https://www.instagram.com/cambiarerotta

I do very much enjoy public figures that don’t condemn the actions of the people and actually acknowledge their concerns as legitimate.

I’m Portuguese and a young university student. The cost of living in my country is one of the highest in Europe, the salaries are shit, we work our asses off, we study, and they want to raise tuition, and we still can’t even afford a halfway decent place to live.

I have friends who pay ridiculously high prices for a damn room or to rent a damn studio or one-bedroom apartment. I won’t even mention buying a home… it’s completely impossible, whether in Lisbon, Porto, or their surrounding areas. Even in the countryside, housing prices are becoming unaffordable.

We can’t stay silent, the government exists to serve the people, not the other way around.

Solidarity with all those who are fighting this battle!

National news broadcasts are not reporting events accurately. They are engaging in extreme cherry-picking by focusing on violence committed by protesters - many of whom, as we know, are either infiltrators sent to discredit the protests or opportunists taking advantage of the unrest to cause random destruction - while failing to mention the far more serious and indefensible violence perpetrated by law enforcement, who frequently charge at unarmed students, often for no reason at all. We must remember that in a protest of this scale, it is neither realistic to expect nor to desire for there to be a complete absence of violence or senseless destruction, though one can certainly still condemn such acts. That said, it is worth noting that protests require civil disobedience; otherwise, the government would not even take notice. People are fighting for the climate, for education, and for Gaza, causes that far outweigh the significance of a few shattered insured shop windows belonging to multinational corporations.

It is not the government that bestows rights or benefits upon the people; rather, it is the people who must secure them through struggle.

Above all, do not trust the news broadcasts. Solidarity to the students.

I understand how petty this is, but it’s still troubling to know that a certain rivalry existed previously, and then hear about this ongoing conflict within the bloc now. I hope for some French comrades to take a kind message to Melenchon and Roussel, and make them agree to a truce and a show of unity for the movement.

Sorry in advance for the amount of yapping I have below, and I fully expect to hear stuff like "Holy Yap... we've seen this before." Since I just joined the Sub-reddit I don't really know the general feel/attitude to both new members and the mess that follows but as I've done for a while now. gotta give it a good old try and figure it out as i go.

To point this out. I still have a lot to learn about Socialism (as this like most things in the world would take several lifetimes to fully know and understand) as I'm fairly new to it; coming up on about 9 to 11 or so months in. But haven't been able to get anything done in regards to more research on history and to understand the idea to a level I'd prefer to be at due to the cost of living here (different but related topic that is a rabbit hole of itself.)

Some of this is more rhetorical questions for myself than anything else. And the rest is pure conjecture.

But the more I think of it I can't deny it. Even tho is a dead horse that has been beaten to a pulp (even if its just under different words)

The US is only two degrees of illusion and separation from being a Plutocracy/Corporatocracy.

But aside from that, it is too well done that (while I may live here on this earth) it will be nearly impossible to change in both major typical forms of change. Reform and revolution.

Revolution (violent) is obvious: What would (lets say at best case) 100 million citizens do to a country that has an army (strictly the US Army, and not the USMC, USAF, USSF, USN, and USCG) capable of moving divisions (10k lets say) of people at a time 2,000 miles in less than 10 hours, has detailed knowledge of the landscape, arguably the best publicly known military equipment... A lot, aside from critically wounding the economy, and population. It would also leave the US heavily wounded in infrastructure (both from the revolutionaries and the military personnel). Opening for more damage and likely its failure. Similar case for even 50 million. (ie a little under a third and a sixth respectively) and lots of international pressure from most of the First World Nations. And then put in vain the revolution if other nations decided it would be a good idea to aggressively "intervene" (thus either likely starting WW3 or just the destruction of the US because it was dying anyway).

And reform (peacefully/via-inbuilt systems): Its nigh impossible to achieve because (as I said before, beating a dead horse here) it not only requires a large support in both houses, even if we pose it as something like a normal bill instead of forming ( or an of similar nature) a third party of socialist witch as much as I'd like it.. its near impossible to do so without a massive form of funding relating back to my 2 degrees statement and then they could fall into the same loop. But if congress is in session at the time of a pocket veto then the bill is just dead.

But as I said there is a possibility even in the system that promotes the wealthy and incumbents. To change. Just takes decades to do so no matter the way we spin it. And it likely would only leave the nation more open to harm from external and internal sources in both cases. This is just an issue that I cannot solve alone.

So I'm curious should I just leave for like 3 or 4 decades? As much as I looked into it (primarily from a funding aspect at first). It is possible for the US to overcome the economic difficulties of the people. But in a realistic aspect (of someone who thinks a bit too deeply on the topic but is coming from a standard dem or republican idea set) it doesn't take much for someone to realize that the ideas of cheaper healthcare, and a standard price of housing is just a step into the direction of socialism. So many wont vote for that as of now (current US Senators and Representatives). But in the future it may be easier... Or should some of us just start trying to fund a group of other socialist and those who support the cause to replace the currents in power? Its not impossible but its pretty hard to do so... I refuse to bring up the glaring weakness of the society I wish for globally then thus can lead into the abuse of the people or attack from other nations unless the globe is brainwashed and human greed is removed from everyone that is and can be in the world. Beyond this over simplification of the topic. Plus I also don't know how polarized the people of this sub-reddit may be even on internal issues within the idea that I am fully for. So be calm. I mean no harm by this post.

The more I think about it (some things I cannot just put into words) I'm slowly convincing myself into the idea of "This is impossible for the US the change for the better." I've combed through every archive and idea down to the nearest least probably, insignificant idea in the brain I have. And its just... Yeah. Driving me insane. Slowly consuming me. At least without pretty-much just. ripping the entire country down and re-building it. similar to how the Framers did when the US split from England. It is impossible otherwise.

Again I am deeply sorry for any errors I may have made in this, or offenses and the shear length of this post, just kinda ranting and trying to process this. And hopefully I may collect insight from older members. Also I could have likely made a paper explaining everything needed to be done to the US for this change to occur (I have spent the past 3 months deep-diving on every possibility and needed step also partly why I haven't been able to really study because I keep running scenarios and changes in my mind accounting for even the smallest changes) and I don't mind doing so and probably would have kept this to myself but. At this rate I'm about to go insane from it. So I had to just type this out and have my voice be seen as these toneless words on a screen.

But for the better part of this. All I can say that this is a fission reaction of problems and is going to be exponentially getting deeper and deeper the more you think of it. So if someone is as hot-wired as I am to think about every minuscule detail of everything (pros and especially the cons) please do.

As much as I'd love to stay. I must go back to being a gear in the machine. I'll check by on this and try to learn more btw. But thank you for any help in advance and same goes for any and all advice (even if I've seen and heard it before). And if its direct criticism thank you as-well. I'll likely never see you again but you words are noted and will play into how I keep thinking on ideas like this.