Der Große Iskandar

There was once an anti-imperialist Germany, supplying weapons, training, and material support to movements fighting imperialism worldwide.

@RadicalModerad2 @RTSG_Main Wealth is Wealth

@IskanderML @RTSG_Main WTF is communist wealth in this context?

This picture is what Communism is all about. In the age in which most jobs are fake, why should we apologize for free time? The photo demonstrates what Communist wealth is. Free time, and nothing else!

@RadicalModerad2 @RTSG_Main Wealth ≠ Money retard

@RTSG_Main WTF is communist wealth in this context? The photo demonstrates what? Was their money acquired though communism? Was this yatch hired in a communist system? What are you talking about, truly it doesn't make any sense!

Those who did this now lecture the world about Human rights

"If Hoxha realized he was a bektashi sufi Albania could have been preserved." - Haz al Din

@roger_s_84 @BigFritz1917 Kuffar

@BigFritz1917 This is a total rejection of Marxism.

@BigFritz1917 @Volksfrontultra 👆👆👆 "Based" heißt vor allem Anti-Imperialistisch.

DIE DEUTSCHE REPUBLIK Es ist unglaublich wie cucked Deutschland eigentlich ist. Wir hatten zwar einige großartige patriotische Bewegungen, die Bauernkriege, die Befreiungskriege, 1848 etc. Aber die deutsche Republik wurde NIE souverän in Deutschland selbst errichtet. Weimar war von USA-Frankreich-England (vorrangig US) nach dem 1. Weltkrieg eingeführt. BRD ebenso durch USA nach dem 2. WK. DDR auf sowjetischer Basis ist noch das authentischste, was wir hatten, weil sie die ganzen vorhergehenden Bewegungen integriert hatte, konnte aber auch nicht allein bestehen. Deshalb ist die BRD auch so unbased. Die US-Republik und die Französische z.B. waren beides authentische Massenbewegungen, da mussten die einen basierten Kern haben, auf den sich der neue Staat formal mitberuft, auf den man sich rückbesinnen kann. Aber die BRD muss sich nichtmal formal auf 1848 berufen, sondern einfach nur auf Besatzer & Co. von denen sie die Demokratie "empfangen hat". Daher auch der ewige Boogeyman von Nazis, ewiger richterlicher Formalismus. Eine wirklich republikanische Bewegung muss erst tiefe Wurzeln schlagen und auf eigene Faust siegen. Sie kann kein Erlass von außen sein, sondern muss "auf eigenem Mist" wachsen. Unter den Formalien muss ein unerschöpflicher materieller Kern einer Massenbewegung liegen, der über diese Formalien hinausgeht, ihr Grund und Kontext und Interpretationsraum ist. Nur so ist ein Land nicht nur formal, sondern auch vom Inhalt her eine Republik.

Being "based" is not a subsitute for being correct.

Literally HIGH FREQUENCY activities. Communists are High Frequency people. Anyone hating on this is a LOW FREQUENCY individual

@israeliens1 First of all its "After the economists have shown us so beautifully that barter, in which sale and purchase coincide.." So its not Marx, but the ECONONISTS who he is polemisizing AGAINST saying this. VolkVulture you are either a Liar or you really don't know shit about Marx.

@IskanderML archive.org/details/MarxEn… pg. 132

Clout Kulaks who don't read Capital have highjacked the spark that made infrared unique and so great in 2021

@israeliens1 I cannot find "barter, in which sale and purchase coincide" i looked through all chapters of critique of Political economy in Marxists.org in english, looked for the citation and couldnt find it. Please give me the page number.

@IskanderML Outline of the Critique of Political Economy, Chapter on Money

@israeliens1 Why dont you cite your source?

@IskanderML When you get proven wrong on your position with a quote directly addressing what you claimed from Marx, that's 'quote mining?' How convenient, you can just pretend that not reading or taking Marx seriously is the same thing as reading him or representing him You got destroyed

@israeliens1 You refuse to adress the point I made VERY clearly. You provide nothing of substance and instead quote mine without even citing your sources. How can you call someone "retard" when your main thing is using some Quote Mining AI instead of reading?

@IskanderML You didn't make any point, actually Why are you ignoring that Marx directly says barter is when purchase & sale coincide? this proves you wrong, retard

@israeliens1 I DID make a point. The point being that W - W is ONE Change of Form, not two that coincide but ONE. You can quote mine for 2 Billion more years its not gonna change the truth

@IskanderML Except, you never made any point, and Marx directly says that: "barter, in which sale and purchase coincide" is separated from exchanged mediated by money, which separated sale & purchase So Marx proves you wrong, dumbass Saying two things coincide means the two things exist

@israeliens1 You are NOT responding to the point but only deflecting. You say that somehow barter is buying and selling at the same time, which is some fantastical interpretation that YOU came up with, when its just one Act W - W, its one act at the same time.

@IskanderML Because as Marx says, "A merchant estate can arise even under conditions of mere barter" How can a "merchant estate" exist if buying & selling don't exist?

@israeliens1 Ok then let me correct myself and not use "definition". Now what does it change about the point that W - G and G - W are TWO acts and W - W is just ONE. "Buying and selling happening simultaneously" what is that supposed to mean? W - W is ONE Change of Form, W - G - W ist TWO.

@IskanderML You never made any point, and I am correct. You referred to "definition" but Lenin says Marx doesnt use definition buying & selling happening simultaneously, means buying & selling exist. Saying that buying & selling "separate" in time & space means they exist before separation

@israeliens1 Stop trying to deflect (to a point where I dont disagree neccesarily) and tell me how Bartering is the same as buying and selling when one is ONE Act and the other NECESSARILY TWO acts.

@IskanderML Marx doesn't use definitions at all&Lenin confirms this: "Marx does not at all give a definition of capitalism. He did not deal with definitions at all" Lenin 1894 Marx says buying & selling both exist in barter

@ACP__OK This is really cool. Communists are HIGH FREQUENCY people.

Why are Communists keeping bees? Because dual power isn't just a theory, it's something you build. Our hives produce honey, support local food production through pollination, and teach practical skills. Every project that helps working people become more self-sufficient strengthens our communities. The bees build their hive. We're building ours.

@israeliens1 "Marx doesn't use definitions" whatever you mean (sure he doesn't use definitions, not in the way others do) changes nothing about the fact that buying and selling are neccesarily TWO acts, while simple trade is ONE act.

@IskanderML Marx doesn't use definitions, so no... you're wrong. Exchange-value separates from use-value in barter, since production in not undertaken directly for use That's because commodities themselves exist before money. If commodities exist and are traded, this is buying and selling

@israeliens1 Bartering by definition is not the same as buying and selling. For something to be bought and sold it has to have a price. Which can only appear with money and be realised with money. Buying and selling are TWO acts, not ONE. W - G and G - W, not just W - W. Bartering is ONE act.

@IskanderML Marx says this isn't true, since barter has purchasing and selling Marx says separation of use-value & exchange-value occurs in barter