test

[istanbul]

Because we shouldn't be selfish little fucks and caring about the collective well being is le good and can help ourselves as well. Hot take but justice and equality is le good actually.

Justice and equality for YOUR kind.
This "equality for all" disney movie mindset is what is turning every western country into niggerhell.

 

[istanbul]

SLF react me all you want retard.
If europeans have had it better than the rest of the world that's a result of the diligent work of their own people.
The people pushing moral objectivity aren't morally objective themselves.

 

[Lism]

1. To think receding or trying to fix capitalism will solve cultural decline is false. I don't think capitalism is really that responsible for cultural decline, it's allowed more people to be interested in culture. Focusing on some abstract idea of cultural decline is dumb, most traditionalists end up rewriting culture and history through their obsession with it. I am grateful for the standards of living today, I don't why I wouldn't be.

2. The bourgeoisie have not always been a thing. You might be using bourgeoisie as a general term for the "upper classes" but even still it's not correct. The struggle between the current bourgeois and proletarian have only existed for 200 years. It's not the only class conflict that has existed in history. I just think it's important to understand fascism in it's historical context and the support behind it.

>I don't think capitalism is really that responsible for cultural decline, it's allowed more people to be interested in culture

That's not a good thing, most people are tasteless retards. The decline of culture is precisely because culture has gone from a thing generated for the sake of it to a commodity to be sold to the masses and subsequently democratized... Let me guess, do you also think (by this logic) that in a communist society there would be a lot of culture because all of the people working in factories with an IQ of 90 would be able to become Mozarts? NO!!! You get favela world when you try that.

>The bourgeoisie have not always been a thing. You might be using bourgeoisie as a general term for the "upper classes" but even still it's not correct.

No, the Bourgeoisie is present in very old societies, they just are dwarfed by the Aristocracy and Peasantry. Yeomen farmers of ancient Rome and medieval England were proto-Bourgeoisie. The proletariat is recent but the Bourgeoisie is just mercantile types who have assets which generate wealth and derive their power from said wealth (money) instead of, say, land or an army or social custom

 

[Lism]

Because we shouldn't be selfish little fucks and caring about the collective well being is le good and can help ourselves as well. Hot take but justice and equality is le good actually.

What would you do if 100 million aliens died in a massive supernova and undid all of the effective altruism points you worked for your whole life?

 

[JC Denton]

What would you do if 100 million aliens died in a massive supernova and undid all of the effective altruism points you worked for your whole life?

Helping and respecting others equals others helping and respecting you. I think humans would be better of being friendly to each other rather than hating based on what plot of land they were born on. A good life for my fellow human equals a good life for everyone else. It's also in our nature that we want to see each other happy and smiling. This all has nothing to do with aliens on the other side of the world and "altruism points".

 

[FrogKing]

No, the Bourgeoisie is present in very old societies, they just are dwarfed by the Aristocracy and Peasantry. Yeomen farmers of ancient Rome and medieval England were proto-Bourgeoisie. The proletariat is recent but the Bourgeoisie is just mercantile types who have assets which generate wealth and derive their power from said wealth (money) instead of, say, land or an army or social custom

what

 

[GuroGOD]

Wordswordswords left-wing cannot do proper /pol/ like threads

 

[tanzanite]

Would I be able to convince you that you aren't real?

 

[Lism]

Helping and respecting others equals others helping and respecting you. I think humans would be better of being friendly to each other rather than hating based on what plot of land they were born on. A good life for my fellow human equals a good life for everyone else. It's also in our nature that we want to see each other happy and smiling. This all has nothing to do with aliens on the other side of the world and "altruism points".

>Helping and respecting others equals others helping and respecting you
#SoFalse... We are hated today because our ancestors helped the entire world so much.

what

What do you mean "what?"... The distinction between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie is that the Aristocracy is power due to the land it owns. They own fiefs, they are entitled to peasants bound to those fiefs, their right to ownership of those fiefs is enforced with men at arms and not with monetary contracts. This is why the late aristocracy was often accused of being fake aristocrats with fake titles, like the Rothschilds. In the middle ages, money was actually used quite sparingly, it was only used by the aristocracy because they were paying the mercantile class who would become the Bourgeoisie.

The Bourgeoisie arose from the class of people who may incidentally own a great deal of land, but do not derive their wealth or power from land ownership. Many of them came from mercantile or artisan families, or academics, or finally from Yeoman farmers like many of the founding fathers. They derive it from money, from commerce. Yeomen like the American Planter "Aristocracy" may have been landowners with their own sort of "peasants" (except they were not peasants -- they were bought and sold, with money) but they only owned this land as a means of acquiring monetary wealth, via cash crops.

The Bourgeoisie derives power from money, and gets money from owning financial assets. Land is a financial asset but under the Bourgeoisie it is not literally controlled through violence, it is controlled through a social contract ensuring property rights. Ancient Rome had parallels to the "open market" yeoman economy which would lead in the North Sea area to Capitalism. It is no coincidence that they had large slave plantations as well, and adopted a republican form of government

 

[FrogKing]

>Helping and respecting others equals others helping and respecting you
#SoFalse... We are hated today because our ancestors helped the entire world so much.

What do you mean "what?"... The distinction between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie is that the Aristocracy is power due to the land it owns. They own fiefs, they are entitled to peasants bound to those fiefs, their right to ownership of those fiefs is enforced with men at arms and not with monetary contracts. This is why the late aristocracy was often accused of being fake aristocrats with fake titles, like the Rothschilds. In the middle ages, money was actually used quite sparingly, it was only used by the aristocracy because they were paying the mercantile class who would become the Bourgeoisie.

The Bourgeoisie arose from the class of people who may incidentally own a great deal of land, but do not derive their wealth or power from land ownership. Many of them came from mercantile or artisan families, or academics, or finally from Yeoman farmers like many of the founding fathers. They derive it from money, from commerce. Yeomen like the American Planter "Aristocracy" may have been landowners with their own sort of "peasants" (except they were not peasants -- they were bought and sold, with money) but they only owned this land as a means of acquiring monetary wealth, via cash crops.

The Bourgeoisie derives power from money, and gets money from owning financial assets. Land is a financial asset but under the Bourgeoisie it is not literally controlled through violence, it is controlled through a social contract ensuring property rights. Ancient Rome had parallels to the "open market" yeoman economy which would lead in the North Sea area to Capitalism. It is no coincidence that they had large slave plantations as well, and adopted a republican form of government

I'm pretty sure the bourgeoisie came from the end of the medieval period as the middle class of the feudal system. I just think you're just confusing the time periods at hand by claiming they existed far longer than they actually did