People calling themselves consumers and begging for consumer rights without a hint of shame

So is suffering.

He's still happy, you retard.

>I agree OP, how dare the mediocre have their happiness. It's a revolting sight to see mediocre people not miserable.
youtube.com/watch?v=7sKz8RHYOI8

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 83K)

It really is pure ideology. Commodity fetishism par excellence.

>Who buys more iphones, grande moccachinos, expensive clothing and beauty products than commies?
Literally every normie middle class family and all rich people. It's ironic that you call people oversocialized when you clearly have no social life at all.

middle-class lifestylists are not communists

>Will people really look back fondly on every experience they've ever had with a video game or some such?
Do the memories of playing Halo on Legendary as a kid with my friends count?

Better than being a serf

What's the difference. Oh, I know - the serfs actually had day-offs every Church holiday, which happens to be like every third day of the year. So they didn't have to gorge on things to pacify at least their lowest urges from the horror of their slavery.

I guess freedom really isn't free...

What’s wrong with this?
t. Didn’t watch the video and am fan of Digibro

They couldn't move out of the feud and had to lend their wives to the Feudal lord. Also all powers were concentrated on the lord so you could never win.

What's the alternative?

But literally none of that is true. What books have you read that would give you such ideas?

>says the retard using the internet on an anonymous indian papyrus scroll forum

Shut the fuck up and hand over your shekels.

Yes, you are a consumer when you buy things. Yes people want to not get completely fucked over when they buy things so they can have the right to it. Stop getting triggered by a word. Youre a "consumer" in any econ system

Id rather take the chance that my lord is honest and wants what is best for his subjects than to be given a democratic choice consisting of nothing but wolves in sheeps clothing, godless hedonists, and controlled opposition

>t. local (((vassal)))

boomer tier post

Oh, yes they are. And always have been.

>consumer rights

If I buy an expensive product like a laptop I expect it to be of sufficient quality not to break in a few years and if it does to receive a replacement free of charge.

What’s the problem exactly?

Say that to the boomer who owns three houses, a boat, huge SUVs, decorates their house with magazine shit, thinks going to expensive restaurants is quality time and buys new TV sets the minute they get bigger and brighter. Yes, there is a large swathe of people who are lifestylists and support stuff like gay marriage and abortion, but these are the same people who constantly try to turn the conversation into lifestyle and not economics. The minute you mention proletariat bloodshed these guys will join forces with the boomers.

90 IQ post. Buying stuff doesn't equal someone being a consumer. A roman pleb buying a sack of flour is not the same as a 25yo buying capuccinos in a local café or a 60yo talking about buying a car from the 70s to make a restoration.

What must be faced is that ultimately and practically speaking there are no "consumers", since the word obviously should have the opposite of "producer", a someone which often lies unnamed and forgotten. Seeing that every man and woman to some degree participates in producing the something of the everything, the consumer and the producer are generally speaking one and the same. This state of affairs renders both terms useless in describing any actual group of people in larger society, beyond loose statistics.
In some sense the idea of the "consumer" could be seen to exist only to alienate the labourer from his produce. In this context the rarely imagined "producer" reappears as a counter, but is only materialized a corporation or a business, not the people themselves (beyond token PR appearances).
Under these conditions the actual people have only the task of working to earn themselves a living, and to consume. After all, what would happen if they realized they alone are both sides of the coin, and could just stop buying back from their masters the things they themselves make?

Attached: dv.png (447x378, 11K)

What the fuck is wrong with buying cappucinos? You think ancient Romans never bought food from a local gyro salesman?

Your modern American democracy is two dukes playing pretend at whom the serfs will choose as their current president. The other duke basically becomes vice-president.
At least the dukes weren't pretending you had a choice.
And even then there were freemen, yeomen, whatever, sometimes up to 20% of local population, who paid no taxes whatsoever. How many people now are effectively freemen paying no taxes, in full possession of their own land and owning service only to some king two weeks away once a generation or so?
>They couldn't move out of the feud
Can you without your papers? Hey, even serfs got their Holy Day they could freely change their feudal lord at least once a year, and any serf than ran away for X months became freemen even if he returned back to his village. Imagine not paying taxes for 3 years made it legal for you not to pay them ever more.
>and had to lend their wives to the Feudal lord
Undocumented late XVIII century fantasies.

Attached: march_of_tyranny1.jpg (640x491, 215K)