The Tip of the Iceberg
(media.conspiracies.win)
Comments (16)
sorted by:
Fuck off with your low quality boomer meme
r e e
cope and seethe and cry and shout NOOOOOOOOOOOO
I don’t think anyone cares about your shitty meme, sorry.
okay
I have actually read Marx (he was smart and quite delusional. a typical 19th-century philosopher who believed that just because he can imagine something, it is the truth) and I cannot remember anything he wrote that has anything to do with climate change.
Care to elaborate?
I agree.
Really, "marxism" is just used to describe things that have nothing to do with what really Marx meant. That NWO shit globalists pushing have nothing to do with Marx, his theory, communism and all that stuff.
Really, globalists want to biuld something like controlled elitist capitalism for choosen ones with trotskism for masses. It is close to neofeodalism or advaced indirect slavery. That have nothing close to all that "public ownership of means of production", "extermination of exploiter classes", "evolution of quantity to quality", even with Marx dialectic ("new", in Marx words) materialism points and so on.
Marxism is a delusional theory of inevitable evolution of society based on assumption that society is divided by concurrent classes on the relationship to means of production and driven by basic needs, that was never proven correct, except, may be his assumptions that workforce is economically accounted by upper class as commodity and valueing of so called "free time",
Marxism today is just like other labels - racism, fascism nazism, i.e. anything some group don't like.
One could not like marxism and globalist agenda, but that does not make globalist agenda marxism.
Climate hysteria is a tip of globalists neofeodalism.
Interesting, does that thing with using "marxism" as a description of globalists agenda intentional or occasional?
a) the meaning of every suggested -ism is being defined, redefined and contradicted by those suggesting it and for those consenting to it.
b) suggested meaning (modifiable) is utilized to tempt one to ignore perceivable predefined meaning (inherent).
c) the suggested idol "Marx" represents both the sales-pitch for the Marxism, as well as the cover for the choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law underneath. Without the cover...those consenting may suspect the authority of those suggesting.
What if all that was is inherent within all that is? What if the many ignore the ongoing, which allows the few to use the temporary (falling away through progression) as narratives to distract from ones need to sustain self (living) within ongoing (process of dying)?
a) ELITE, noun (French élite) - "selection, choice" represents the many consenting to the suggested choices of the few, hence selecting and thereby shaping them into the "chosen ones".
b) consenting to the suggested -ism gives control to those suggesting and ones ignorance of perceivable represents the CAPITAL (pertaining to the head) PUNISH (pain) MENT (mind/memory).
c) everything the many consented to is being stored within their memory, which allows the suggesting few to control their minds and utilize them as capital. All conflicts of reason represents head vs head among the many, while reasoning about the suggested information the few are shaping within the heads of the many. For example...it doesn't matter if the many reason over capitalism vs communism, since only the few can define both -isms.
Being (life) within direction (inception towards death) implies advancement.
Choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law represents slavery; while balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law implies "free" will of choice within the "dom" inance of balance aka free-dom.
In short...representing free will of choice within perceivable represents free-dom, consenting to suggested represents slavery to those suggesting it...by contractual agreement.
The few suggest "society" ( consensual togetherness) to tempt each one of the many to ignore perceivable apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying), hence suggested togetherness as the inversion of perceivable division.
The process of dying represents the only producer (generator), those living within represent the needed adaptation (reactor) while being generated (regeneration).
Loss (process of dying) generates growth (living)..growth needs to struggle to sustain self within loss, yet wields the choice of wanting to ignore need.
Ones consent to want or not want any suggested label (-ism)...shapes the want versus not want group (reason). If you ignore need (perceivable) for want (suggested), you'll attach yourself to the conflict of reason among all those who want vs not want the suggested.
In other words...if the singular choice consents to another singular choice, then there will be a plural conflict.
You agree? It’s barely even making a point.
There isn’t anything to agree with.
ree
Low quality boomer meme
Aww did the meme hurt your feelings?
triggered.
the truth