Name a worse argument

Nonsense that's not what Stirner said or nonsense you haven't read Stirner?

Either way it's clear you haven't, btw.

People are just people. I'm not invoking the Mankind thing as a greater than me spook, I am promoting the idea that they all ought to seize their power. That's what "all power to the people" means.

but they probably believed their system actually worked. Their concept of death was different from the rest of the world. The idea in the picture makes sense, it's just in the wrong context.

DIE BOOMER

Can you explain what you mean by power?

You're in the wrong context

Gen-X, zoomer.

>whataboutism whatabouts my free speech
Kill yourself /his/.

Chomsky has repeatedly destroyed that line of argument. See below (skip to 1:15)

youtube.com/watch?v=JyAVqzOW5OI

*The* people. Sorry but that's an incredibly spooky phrase. It carries with the connotation of a monolithic entity. The vast majority of its usages are indeed a reference to Mankind, or at least Mankind minus the Elite. But perhaps this particular disagreement can be chalked up to the ambiguity of language.

So taking your clarification at face value, you are saying that each person must seize their power. Well, what does this actually mean? What is "their" power, vs. someone else's? What degree of power are they entitled to? Stirner would say they are entitled to whatever they can take. So when you say, "all power to the people", you are failing to describe very much of anything at all. You are say it should be taken away from the Elite, but you haven't described how it is to be distributed amongst everyone else. This makes it very hard for me to believe that you are not, in fact, referring to a spook, because you seem to be talking as if an entity titled "the people" can hold power.

It is difficult to care about someone who claims to be an authority worth listening to on contemporary political matters who accepts the official mainstream story of 9/11 with little to no skepticism or interest even though much of his work displays thinking that would lead to such questioning at the very least.

>dude if we just train the commoner retatd to be better he will

>not real communism
It was real and glorious. If few kulaks end up dead and revisionist purged so be it.

Attached: unclejoe.jpg (691x1000, 182K)

>muh planned demolition

Cognative dissonance

>Name a worse argument.
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

Stop not being a pseud, user.

Cringe

Power to the people

That's not even an argument. But as somebody who actually lived under Communism I can tell you he's right. As will most other people who lived under it (with exception of the fat cats at the top).

Attached: ceausescu.jpg (308x407, 57K)

K.

>green text what you can't refute through appeal to /his/
>repeat everything he said in frogvoice
>put in Yea Forums instead of /pol/

There you go.

You said power to the 'people' as if the people was some sort of greater idea worth giving power to

(You) looking to rally anti JP support on Yea Forums as a cope as if it means anything.

Him being a midwit catering to NPCs doesnt make (You) batrachian user.

Best system fucking spics have ever made

To give any sort of inherent social importance the category of humanity which privileges it over other categories of that denote human organizations, is to make "humanity" nothing more than a spook.