Would you tolerate a bomb in your body, waiting to detonate if you deviated from the needs of society?
(media.communities.win)
💊 RED PILL 💊
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (117)
sorted by:
Why is this stickied? Because it's thought provoking, and I was wondering how long a sticky like this will last with our top researchers hunting things down.
Awesome, thanks! I think it will be greatly enriching for all to ponder the thoughts presented, so, to see you agreeing and helping them reach more of us seeking the truth is quite an encouraging sign!
Ever wonder why they want young blood?
It's a literal marxist argument. You all see that right?
It's saying that acting in the interests of the self is something that must be punished with death for the 'greater good'. Marxists lack morality and therby assume it's absent in all. They don't understand consentual exchange or that inequality of outcome can arrive from unequal contributions.
They want to frame you as a bomb to justify lining you up against a wall and shooting you.
It’s literally the polar opposite of Marxism you idiot.
Communism doesn’t line up and shoot those who don’t contribute, they allow them to keep leeching off of others.
I think the mark of a good question is that more than one side of the debate sees fervent truth, even if their expression of that truth is at odds with that of their debater’s
Are you saying communism allows bums? Are there lazy people who don’t work in China, and just suck up off the system? Legit question.
Yes.
Yes.
China has a 15% total unemployment rate and a welfare system for nationals.
Search keywords “unemployed” or “homeless” with “China”.
Communists absolutely line up and shoot the wealthy. The cell is one that has taken more than it 'deserves'. Anything that is in opposition to the organism's greater good is to be excised.
Rich? Up against the wall
Wrong politics? Up against the wall
This is what Marxists argue. This is an example they use. If it's good for the body, it's good for society.
Communist don’t even line up and shoot wealthy you idiot.
The cells are becoming destroyed because they are cancerous and stealing from others. Literally what communism allows.
Holy fuck you are dumb. I can’t believe how frustrating it is arguing with such retards. Keep pretending whatever is an argument for Marxist no matter how much of an idiot it makes you look like.
Everyone here hates marxism and all the degeneracy it spawns. You seem to be bringing a massive pair of vision-restricting glasses to your analysis here however.
It is a question posed to the reader, and almost every person I’ve got an answer from agreed with my own inclination that p53 is an agent of the Light. So the fact you read into this that the suppression of tumors is “bad” and that the analogy drawn to wider society such that human-analog “cancer suppressors” are deserving of being “lined up and shot” is rather absurd to me.
It’s not even a Marxist concept. Marxism and communism would allow the one feeding off of others to live, not destroy it once it stop contributing to society. It’s literally the polar opposite of Marxism.
It's because it's an actual argument that actual marxists use.
I almost envy the naive comfort you must live so far from them. But I'm surrounded by theire sort, and I'm giving you a heads up. Piss on it if you like, but you're agreeing with the marxist ideal that the selfish cell should be lined up and shot by p53 for failing to put the whole before the self.
You keep saying selfish, but every cell is “selfish”, like every gene and every person is - to a degree. The story is discussing cancerous cells. Cells SO selfish, that they not only cheat, but “capture the rules of the game” (which is to say, break the rules of the body, and metastasize into a tumor) such that their cheating can GROW unabated. This is not mere selfishness, this is the root of all evil.
p53, in a just society, would eliminate the oppressor, not the oppressed. Thus I hoped to evoke a more thought provoking discussion, along the lines of, how are these things determined beyond the “simple” scope of the network of cells we call a body?
your name is objective reality, but you refuse to look at the objective reality of how nature functions.
I'm not arguing nature, I am informing you that the above example is one that marxists use to justify marxism.
Violence proportional to success (???)
(Up against the wall)
^ "It is immoral to work for yourself rather than the state" - That's literal communism that's being argued in the picture. An actual Marxist image was stickied on GA and you all can't see it. It's framing you (an individual) as 'a bomb' if you ever deviate from 'the needs of the state' to justify lining you up against a wall and shooting you.
Now I know how Yuri Bezmenov felt. You're repeating a marxist argument and internalizing it without realizing. I'm trying to warn you. Someone stickied a marxist argument on GA.
yawn, dude. the p53 comparison is perfect for dealing with a global parasitic elite that absolutely is cheating and breaking what any normal society would consider basic human rights. That's what we're talking about here. Self interest is the prime purpose but as soon as a person begins cheating/murdering/stealing which is exactly what we're dealing with, there are universal karmic consequences. Sorry.
It's framed as a rhetorical question, which is an argument. And it's one Marxists make because they mistakenly think you can extrapolate mechanics necessary in absence of consciousness, to scales where that awareness is abundant.
It’s really not rhetorical, neither in the context I posted it, nor in the context it was written.
It is a Rorschach test in some ways. You have seen “rich people” in place of the blob that looks like a tumor. Do you harbor feelings of resentment or envy for “the rich”? Because most people I’ve talked to see the cancerous blob not as “the rich”, but the parasitic entity that feeds off the blind greed of their “rich” cattle.
If nothing else, just remember that everyone views things through their own lens of understanding.