Why do commies talk this way? Do they think it makes them look smart?

I was listening to the local Portland community radio station today and commenting to myself about how they talk like they are in grade school.

Most of these terms come from Marx and later theorists. They aren't devoid of meaning but are generally left-coded. Like other political terminology, it's as much about signalling their influences and greater worldview as it is communicating a particular position.

You could swap these words with language from ancap theorists and just ask yourself.

What the hell does communism have to do with the humanities? I think you just successfully pointed out that academia is counterproductive poison that has nothing to do with getting an education in relevant topic matter.

What else do you call neo-liberals?

>why do educated people use big words I cant understand

You forgot "problematic."

If you can't express your political ideology without using any of the usual commie buzzwords (and all communists I have ever talked to couldn't) you are peak NPC

If you’re going to make a useful meme, why don’t you check your spelling before you use it? What the fuck?

I understand the conversation you're trying to have, and I think it's full of shit.

that's more leftbook than hard communist, but yeah, that too

I am going to be honest and admit I often don't understand what "means of production" is. I understand it tends to refer to tools used to produce like factories and supplies and mines. But in the modern age it seems that is a very blurred definition, can you really define the means of production in a corporate office?

That's how Communist mind control works.

Communism is alive and evolving.

Computers, Crackberries, photocopiers, etc

Every object in existance fits the definition of means of production

It means "private property." So when you "rise up and seize the means of production" that means you go collectively take everything away from the people you're jealous of so you can build your utopian kibbitz with it.

if you fully understand historical materialism and disagree with it then you dont fully understand historical materialism.

land
labor
capital
entrepreneurship (intellectual property)

there is a distinction between private property, a factory or land with natural resources, and personal property which is your house, your car, your anime body pillow, etc.

Most commie rhetoric is vaguely worded so they can pick and choose the meaning in whatever argument they have
Google the motte and bailey argument

Why is hollywood hell bent on destroying classic heroes by feminizing them (by giving feelings) or replacing them with women?

They just want to ride on the previous success waves which is low effort (instead of creating a super hero woman from ground).

In a same way, they just demonize the opposition by comparing them to past villains. Low effort, but seems to be working.

Explaining simple terms in difficult terms is intellectual jerk off. If what you saying implicates everybody but it's not understood by everybody, why would anyone in their right mind support? Complex language has its uses, but it's been overused as a way of confusion but no practical.

you can't avoid using these terms unless you've taken up postmodern dance or w/e.

>getting an education in relevant topic matter
and what would that be?

obviously some terms are gonna be used more often than others. you can't talk about communism without mentioning the means of production, capital or proleteriat.

on the other hand one should always take stock of the person they're talking to. I'm sure Lenin would talk a certain way to Russian peasants and workers and another way if he, say, met Marx.

what the hell does that mean?

>can you really define the means of production in a corporate office?
capital, ROI and dividends. anything that can be used to add additional value can be considered means of production.

commie rhetoric is extremely specific and you will get ripped to shreds by fucking up terminology because of all the difference sects of socialism and left wing ideologies.

the left doesnt work in vagueness and sweeping generalizations, the right does that shit.

theyre not really simple terms. theyre adequate terms for ideas that need specific words to convey meaning

>there's a difference between private property and personal property
The intelligensia, everybody.

>Do they think it makes them look smart?
Yes that's exactly why they do it.

Attached: 1513633442603.png (616x617, 122K)

What's wrong with any of those terms?

>if you fully understand historical materialism and disagree with it then you dont fully understand historical materialism.
"If you don't agree with me it means you're not indoctrinated enough"
>there is a distinction between private property
no there isn't. Most businesses start in garages and any object can be used to produce something

Humanities doesn't mean history alone. History, or perhaps polysci, are the only fields where studying an aberrant relic like communism has any use.

>mad at words
>mad at dictionaries

>there is a difference between private and personal property
>NO THERE ISNT!!!!
cope

To let you know who you are talking to. Unfortunately the meaning of some more common words has been twisted by us politics, liberals, and talkshow hosts. By using communist words you are signaling to people who are not idiots to interpret things using traditional marxist definitions and not boomer ones.

Oh, wow, you can't define the difference and school everybody with your sophisticated education so you just say we're mad at words and dictionaries.

>you can't talk about my ideology without using newspeak invented to make it seem good

>Meme flag

Saged.

Dialectics are older than the Greek classics. You uninformed worm. Besides, those that are buzzwords are only the "late-stage' and "surplus value" bullshit. Neoliberal is not communist, and and proletariat and bourgeoisie aren't, either, the former is Roman, and ancient, and the latter is French, you ninny.

Before people went to colleges to become educated. Now people go to colleges so they can think that they are educated.

They're fucking pseuds. You're right, they want you to think they're smart, but notice how it's impossible to get them to engage in intelligent conversation. It always boils down to MUH RICH PEEPOO DUH WUN PUHCENT REEEEEEE

>you cant convey complex ideas without specific use of language to dispel misunderstandings
yes thank you, i agree

I did explain the difference. You just didnt read it or ignored it to suit your narrative that im dodging questions.

Dialectics is what commies call "dialectical materialism" retard

You're going to arbitrarily call anything you want a buzzword though.
You should be familiarizing yourself with these terms anyway, ant self respecting an-cap should know about right-accelerationism and how it came out of marxist thought.

Attached: Updated for Reality.jpg (2048x1152, 583K)

You didn't define a damn thing. I sure hope you're not even in high school yet or else you're going to have a bad time when it comes to giving presentations and writing papers.

Now that is some commie crap. While it's origins do not derive from it, it's certainly a buzz word. Obrazovanshchina had to be invented just to point out the word's irreverent nature. Some "new intelligence" among the shit-class is not beyond reproach, in fact, it's wholly idiotic.

what is this then I thought the right only deals in facts and doesnt get emotional and pissy

>explains why there is no difference
>"YOU JUST SAID THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE WITHOUT PRESENTING AN ARGUMENT"

Epic. Sounds like Marx created the new bible.

>bourgeoisie
>proletariat
>dialectics
>commie speak
user you're fucking retarded
Kapital should be read by everyone on Jow Forums
T. nazi

pilpul. Leftists do not believe in Logos, they know only power.

No, there's no difference. In both cases, those things are both owned privately.

"complex ideas"
To use leftbook lingo, sounds like you're trying to mask doublething with big words but okay

Reactionaries and Marxists are dumb?

Communism isn't about stopping dudes making things in their garages man, in a proper communal environment that sort of behaviour is exactly what is encouraged.
Please learn about this stuff before posting, you make the rest of us look like idiots.

this is why leftist terminology is so specific
you cant just fucking lump together private and personal property or go "nuh uh thats wrong"

What about sociology, anthropology, economy, law? Some authors like Erich Fromm fused sociology and psychology which could be considered a separate field of study.

I'd also argue that communism isn't a relic of the past. The idea is still there, though the awareness of the difficulties of its implementation has been heightened.

you could, but it would be pretty annoying having to explain what capital is every time you talk about it, wouldn't you agree?

>no there isn't. Most businesses start in garages and any object can be used to produce something
all socialist systems had tons of exceptions for individual tradesmen, service providers, store owners, etc. their property was considered private property. the issue at hand were always big businesses that enjoyed government support, not small time garage shops and whatnot.

>it's impossible to get them to engage in intelligent conversation.
how so?

That would mean their garages are factories and the tools are capital.

production and capital are not communist buzzwords
proletariat is the working class
bourgeoisie the middle class and above or well situated people
dialectic is logic or analysis
there you have it no need for your fancy ass words
its nothing but smoke and mirrors

Exactly, and that they're OWNED by the WORKER producing the product.

Are you actually retarded?

Because they're the same thing. You want to know another cool thing? Most governments are corporations. You can either use accepted legal terminology or you can make up bullshit that has no particular difference beyond your imagination and that you are incapable of deliniating.

This is the typical approach of the luciferians: they make up new meanings for existing words because the whole thing is about destroying the existing and being the gods of creating something entirely new out of the ashes.

So what? It's still capital. Does everything change if I give my friend a portion of the profits for helping me out?

the only people that have a problem with left wing terminology are Americans because mccarthyism convinced all of them that public education was a communist plot to destroy american culture like mcdonalds and cable news.

>T. nazi

t. Democrat who realized he doesn't like niggers

Attached: 1506628324625.jpg (1280x720, 162K)

Did you learn that in school?

>suplus

theyre not the same thing. theyre different concepts

>governments are corporations
theyre not

Just because you dont want to use words or have some reactionary anti-intellectualism ideology doesnt mean those words and terminology are made up

You literally learn that in the 10th grade, retard

It's funny because it's true

I’m not sure which pretentious pseudo intellectual it is (Noam Chomsky or some other pleb) that uses language like this and these edgy retards repeat whatever they hear

Not in my 10th grade you don't. That's pure communist propaganda. You're supposed to learn what it was actually about.

>>governments are corporations
>theyre not
You have a lot, lot, lot to learn. At least in the US. Get ready for a hell of a rabbit hole.

You're a teacher?

You can just spew any garbage and just munch on it, can't you? The term dialectics means more than just Hegalian or Marxian, you impudent cuntflap. Holy shit, it makes one wonder, how retarded can an-caps be?

No, I just passed 10th grade a long time ago.

>yeah small business is totally cool under communism, kulaks deserved it tho

>So what? It's still capital
And? Communism isnt about destroying capital its about putting it and the means of production in the hands of the workers.

>if I give my friend a portion of the profits for helping me out?
Depends on how you do so, is through private contract where you pay him a wage and are taking his surplus production value as profit or are you sharing the produced value in way of joint ownership like a cooperative.

You should already know all this before making a comment on this sight my dude, like i said you brainlets make serious capitalists look like morons.

imagine being confident enough in your own dunning kruger imaginary land that you call other people using proper political ideology terminology "pseudo-intellectuals"

Government is not a corporation.

>tfw proving me right

Attached: ANC.jpg (970x766, 36K)

Logos, oops, a Greek term, and that's unintelligible ancient gibberish, just like Proletariat.

Well, it's better than the monosyllabic grunts and MAGA mooing you get out of the right for damn sure.

>w-why aren't my buzzwords working?

The way you typed, "not in my 10th grade", made it sound like you meant your classroom as an educator. I gave you too much credit, huh? Regardless, you must've had some fag handwave you through the motions, real educators are meant to actually teach about what really went down. McCarthy fucked a whole generation of American minds.

>And? Communism isnt about destroying capital its about putting it and the means of production in the hands of the workers.
Whose hands are the means of production in if not the workers? What are you even talking about? Or you're saying you can't have communal ownership? You know corporations are not individuals (even though in the US almost every individual has a shadow corporation).

>Depends on how you do so, is through private contract where you pay him a wage and are taking his surplus production value as profit or are you sharing the produced value in way of joint ownership like a cooperative
Is one kind of contract illegal?

>Government is not a corporation.
Most of our governments are incorporated.

They really are.

Didn't say that. Are you a lefty psyop to make ancaps look like idiots?

>production and capital are not communist buzzwords
agree

>proletariat is the working class
>bourgeoisie the middle class and above or well situated people
easier to use one word to give exact meaning and context than a word salad every time. especially when same terms can mean different things.

for example, for communists bourgeoisie carries with it a negative connotation - well off people who are against the socialist/communist system. within socialist systems though, you had people who were better situated than others but weren't against the socialist/communist system. how could you tell the two groups apart? a lengthy disclaimer each time or giving a specific word specific context.

>dialectic is logic or analysis
this is objectively false.

Ah yes, inconceivable propaganda buzzwords like "capital", "property", and "proletariat".

Money and their markets, the individual and game theory, all exist in various states of equilibrium. No longer playing, but being played, no longer spending, but being spent; the thresholds are subtle, the diversions extreme, unrelenting. Competitive equilibrium is nonpersonal. The theory of the core dictates markets which depend on individual actions. Core analysis is the determination of a set of possible outcomes, these outcomes are compatible with their dealers; competition is not regulated from the outside. Price stability must be actively pursued if it is to effect the market. Dealers and traders participate in this regulation themselves; money is assumed, value is transitive, fluid; metal poured through open chutes. Core theory solves problems involving increased returns, indivisibilities, lump funded projects. The collision of active interest capacity forces imputations into the core; the markets are traced within closer and tighter circuits. Trading tackles new limits of multi-unitary dimension, relations between traders and dealers are here complex convex-works; such convexity has the implication of sealing off the relations between markets into sets which satisfy core constraints. Nonempty cores are therefore necessary to address game models of market forces. Common unit values have to be pursued, these values are potentially pro-active, and independent. Money can set up on its own.

I had an irony deficiency but after reading that second line I believe I should be fine for the rest of my life

Attached: 1534687068861.png (1200x1696, 2.76M)

I wasn't alive during that era, so it didn't fuck my mind. They hand waved a bunch of stuff about McCarthy being a nutter, so it wasn't until I actually did my own research that I found out how right he really was.

Public schools, even good ones like the one I went to, are badly lacking. You should look up a book by the name of, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" by Charlotte Iserbyt.

Argueing with leftists is utterly pointless because they see the world fundamentally different from the right.
They go by completely different definitions of words like exploitation for example.
Personal responsibility is a foreign concept to them.
Additionally leftists are materialistic and right wingers idealistic usually.

Attached: 1488991888655.gif (600x600, 178K)

>Are you a lefty psyop to make ancaps look like idiots?
Perhaps, nice way to deflect