Why would you want to be an animator in Japan? It seems like you can make more working at a hobby store or something

>This is capitalism in action though.
yeah and it's shit
>Animators are a dime a dozen.
Shouldn't be relevant to pay. They are not being paid accordingly to their work which is what makes capitalism ridiculous and ultimately leads to the economic crises like the one we're headed for now. Over saturation of equally skilled workers in a particular role is an artificial issue which is just another reason the market is inefficient -- they can all be employed and reduce the workload for everyone in their role ultimately enabling them to produce much more. Unemployment is a meme.
>In the west, we have sports heroes making vastly more money than janitors, even though both work in the same building.
and that's a bad thing kek
the west throws a ridiculous amount at athletes for no reason

Attached: 1563570929094.png (1496x1042, 560K)

The problem is there's no model that is both more efficient and works with humans.

FUCK THAT SHIT.

Everyone should unionize so they can get as paid and as respected as the A-list voice acting people.

Motherfuckers wanna outsource that shit to save money, the shit they make won't be as much value as it should. So fuck them in hindsight.

Cg is the future

>>This is capitalism in action though.
>yeah and it's shit
Were you lying when you said you were no communist?

Working at a bank is more awesome than being an animator.

How the fuck do these people even eat and live? Series director is barely making enough to not be destitute. The executive producer is the only one who makes an OKAY wage if he's single.

TOEI do that

Where does the efficiency of capitalism go though?
We are generating landfills of sizes that are difficult to imagine because our system has specialized in replacing our households on a regular schedule. We have created an industrial complex that is incredibly efficient at producing things that are destined to be thrown away.
The technology to produce lasting things is there. We could run our machines at a tiny fraction of their current output if our economical model didn't require for us to produce so much garbage.

Efficiency is a joke at this point.
Yes, there are a few things that will break because they are fragile by nature rather than design. I am not talking of these things.

why do they pay them so little? I do not understand

Because they will work for so little.

are they dumb? We have a saying here that has remained since commie times, you cannot pay me as little as a little work I can make. Pay me a dollar per hour and I'll spend hour in toiler or drinking coffee

Slave owners, kings, and lords all said the same thing. Look into Cockshott and the cybernetic planned economy.

Attached: 1563593093159.gif (500x625, 1.78M)

Then you get fired and hired by one of the many other aspiring animators.

quoted wrong post
>

These incomes are utter horseshit.

No wonder why many people prefer to work on western animation, they pay way better.

Action should be taken for this crime.

>inequality
should be equality
i need to stop drinking

Socialist countries generally offer people the right to work and have little oversight. So you can get hired easily and won't lose your job unless it's for political reasons.
In the modern capitalist society, we have created a culture where you are supposed to be thankful to be offered the opportunity to be exploited. Unions are dead and employers are referred to as job creators.

Also, I think that most studios offer subsidized housing for their employees.

>Look into Cockshott and the cybernetic planned economy.
That and Richard Wolff. USSR-style didn't work because the planned economy was too efficient for itself -- its record keeping couldn't keep up with the rate of production growth and eventually it imploded. A single modern computer could handle the economy of an entire country today, easily solving that problem.

Attached: 1562486142514.jpg (1680x1036, 205K)

Then you would no longer be a commie though.

>USSR-style didn't work because the planned economy was too efficient for itself
Not to mention that Marx himself saw capitalism as a necessary step toward socialism. You need the infrastructure that only capitalism can create before trying your hands at a more humane society.

>commubism is income equality !! haha !!
i remember being a silly redpilled pol-user before i took the crimsonpill
the entire point of marxism is to reject unearned income and pay people exclusively for their usefulness
very this, transitioning from semi-feudalism over a couple decades caused too many issues for a country which had to play the role it did in two world wars

Attached: 1554882249341.png (300x300, 113K)

>>commubism is income equality !! haha !!
What?
No. I was making a joke about your drinking habit. Stop typing like a child and try to relax a little.

>i remember being a silly redpilled pol-user before i took the crimsonpill

So you're genetically inferior and now want to utilize another system that will murder millions.

>pay people exclusively for their usefulness
>communism
I guess you don't live in former commie country. It doesn't work that way

>pay people exclusively for their usefulness
>marxism
Do you not know the Marx's formula of exploitation?

oh shit, sorry
I've been desensitized on here to actual conversation when talking about anything to do with leftism
gomen user-kun

Attached: 1490773283790.gif (380x300, 489K)

>$9400 a year to be an animator
surprised anime even gets made at all.

Attached: 1515942530918.jpg (420x673, 34K)

There are plenty of people who do it >for free.

but what if i end up running the animation studio, I don't want employee wages eating into my ferrari fund!

>One in a million talent whos entire life has been spent honing a specific skill
>makes millions
>Dime a dozen menial laborer whos entire life has been spent honing a specific skill
>makes minimum
WTF people are paying more money for rare things capitalism is broken. Yes, it is the fault of the system that this individual has chosen to forgo financial security in the hopes of achieving an incredibly unlikely dream. We should also ban the lottery, gambling in general, expensive cars, diamonds, and so on because people might make a dumb decision and spend more than they can afford but it's not their fault its capitalism forcing them to consume or literally drop dead.
I mean I don't disagree that the materialistic aspect of our culture is way over the top and loathe planned obsolescence but to deny capitalism on these grounds is to deny individual free will and reduce man to the level of a beast incapable of making decisions in rational self-interest; just a slave to culture and society.
Also,
The efficiency goes in to iteration and advancement. Don't fix what ain't broke is always excellent advice, but there's also the saying about building a better mousetrap. Maybe the advancements aren't things you personally care for, i.e. I really don't give a shit about adding 10% more megapixels to my selfie stick, but it's undeniably there. The problem is we don't know what kind of advancements we will make so we can't prove or disprove the value of objects lasting a long time. Think old cars vs refrigerators.
Furthermore, if you'd read a bit of NN Taleb you would see that antifragility is built into the essence of functional capitalism. All those machines producing more things than you like work as backups and failsafes just like healthy competition (see: not monopolies) might be detrimental to every business individually, but works only to strengthen the field they service.
Despite this, I would still support some a c c e l e r a t i o n. Mite b kewl

Attached: 35356441_218683762193057_5218221347213148160_o.jpg (984x848, 91K)

That you would post that retarded meme garbage with a facebook filename ruins your credibility before people even start reading your post.

Yeah, that's part of why Kyoani is/was such a remarkable studio. Their animators got actual living wages, while most in the industry are still paid per frame.

Attached: 1564206673484.jpg (1200x900, 188K)

>voice acting is a one in a million talent

Attached: D0J1RveWsAAoQP2.jpg (912x1024, 71K)

>Voice acting, 1/1 000 000
Look at him and laugh

>there's also the saying about building a better mousetrap.
That is an argument until you understand how progress works. It slows down. We have had an explosion of progress, but that has largely to do with new technologies having been added to the tool kit, and with an enormous increase in energy expenditure. We cannot expect a similar breakthrough in the (near) future.
A fridge 5 years from now will not be significantly more advanced than a fridge today. But the production cost and the waste will be very real, at 100% extra.
That is not efficiency. At all.

I'm curious to hear what you think "Marx's formula of exploitation" is, but if you mean formulae then that makes more sense.
Marx was an advocate of people being paid according to the value of their labour, i.e being paid for their usefulness. Marx argued that under capitalism they are exploited as they are not and instead the capitalist takes a portion of the value they produce as profit.
this, but i'll reply anyway
>WTF people are paying more money for rare things capitalism is broken.
their talent has been massively over exaggerated by agencies for profit you dunce. they are not being paid accordingly for what they put in. they should be paid for whatever they are worth and whatever they put in -- if that's $500k that's fine -- but they're not worth that much.
>We should also ban the lottery, gambling in general, expensive cars, diamonds, and so on because people might make a dumb decision and spend more than they can afford but it's not their fault its capitalism forcing them to consume or literally drop dead.
what
>I mean I don't disagree that the materialistic aspect of our culture is way over the top and loathe planned obsolescence but to deny capitalism on these grounds is to deny individual free will and reduce man to the level of a beast incapable of making decisions in rational self-interest; just a slave to culture and society.
A man is a slave to culture and society when he is trapped into a set role and class and deceived into thinking he will be one of the very few who move up to the position they are sold as being better in which they merely become the exploiter. They relentlessly chase capital because their exploiters deprive them of humanity and tell them chasing capital is good, forcing them to lust for a position in which they are finally in control -- i.e, becoming the exploiter
You completely miss the grounds on which I, or any other marxist, is denying capitalism.

Attached: 97ec720df57244301c500431fa3de53fe66068af.jpg (1085x1700, 743K)

>We should also ban the lottery, gambling in general, expensive cars, diamonds, and so on
100 percent unironically agree

Why would you want to be a NEET anywhere? It seems like you can make more working anywhere or something.

cont.
>Maybe the advancements aren't things you personally care for, i.e. I really don't give a shit about adding 10% more megapixels to my selfie stick, but it's undeniably there.
But why should we settle for advancements we don't want? A planned economy, accountable to the public beyond marketing and selling to the public what they think they want, undeniably produces better advancements. All of the technology, for an example, used and sold by American corporations were state-funded and at least in part developed. Take cell-phones and every ounce of technology in them. Once they are left up to private companies and the "free" market for development, the only advancements we get are small and ultimately useless, simple upgrades to make a consumer think they want to buy them. We would have much better technology if things were left solely up to a planned economy rather than this mixed approach, even when it comes to appealing to customers. A planned economy which makes a project improving technology for the use of a regular person will do so infinitely quicker than that of any private economy.
>The problem is we don't know what kind of advancements we will make so we can't prove or disprove the value of objects lasting a long time.
Then let's plan the advancements we want to make and leave the advancements in the hand of the consumer. Give those who both produce and consume the control of development.

all of this is sobering me up i need another drink

Attached: snake sake.gif (500x618, 832K)

Exactly. Applying as a writefag is the best in this industry, you can at least be like Mari Okada or Gen Urobotchi

much like
I agree, however

>people might make a dumb decision and spend more than they can afford but it's not their fault its capitalism forcing them to consume or literally drop dead
Its people's own fucking fault if they are stupid enough to think the lottery is anything but a losing game.

>Animators are a dime a dozen
>dime a dozen
FFS, it's "diamond dozen."

Like, there's only 12 good ones who get paid a lot.

Why do people always get this wrong?

>the three dudes are normal, chubby people
>all females are plumb animus
I don't know why this upsets me, maybe its my autism but all females in the industry aren't all super slim, fit and cute like this. More than the lesser part of them are chubby, don't know how to style themselves and lack social interaction skills, much like the men in the industry.
Source: my ass (personal experiences)

The only one accurate would be the A-list VA since they need to look good in order to sell. That and maybe the part-timer and college student because I assume they are just there for comparison and not part of the industry.
>bruh its just anime ofc the girls are gonna be set up as waifu material
ya i no

Meme all you want about "I can make silly voices too" it really is. You need to be born with the right genetics, immediately disqualifying a large majority of the population. Then you need to actually want to be a voice actor (or does your ideal system involve government mandated voice work for qualified individuals?) and there you have it, one in a million. Mind you, there are more than 7 billion people on earth now so maybe one in a million isn't really as rare as you'd think.

That's my point exactly, the beauty of improvement, especially in a capitalist framework, is that you stand a lot to personally gain if you do so, and we don't know what the improvement will be until it happens. What you're saying is correct in a sense, but my point is not only we may invent a fridge with Netflix streaming, but we could invent a cooling solution so advanced in the process of trying to create a better fridge we can apply it across disciplines, to cool PCs or grocery stores or replace air conditioning. The point being that nothing is discrete, it's all interconnected and since we don't know what we will know in the future we can not definitely rule fridge research useless waste.

>A man is a slave to culture and society when he is trapped into a set role and class and deceived into thinking...
Well unfortunately I can't solidly refute that since it falls more in the domain of philosophy, but I can disagree with it and say that I believe humans are much more capable of caring about themselves than people think and a trend that tends to pop up in Marxist thinkers is the misguided notion that "all these poor people don't even understand how exploited they are because they're such brainwashed sheep". Man, anytime people are oppressed they rise up eventually, that's human nature. Slaves revolt, peasants revolt, and to be fair, maybe the apparent resurgence of socialist thought is our modern day revolt. Can't really say for sure.

Attached: 1548410353196.jpg (800x600, 109K)

>Why is anime better than reality? This sucks!

Attached: 1544647155827.png (500x500, 252K)

It hasn't and that's the biggest problem
Doesn't mean it can't and won't when the dialectics are right. Here's a relevant quote from former commie countries:
>years of capitalism has taught us one thing socialism couldn't: to love socialism
acknowledge the positive parts, hate the negative parts, and tear apart and analyze so as not to repeat the mistakes. don't reject communist theory because of history without first understanding the theory and what contributed to the history and what can be done to never let it happen again.

Attached: 1555772419660.jpg (708x1000, 449K)

I find more remarkable that all the male characters are fairly distinct design wise while with the females they all have the same K-On! monotooth face.

>we could invent a cooling solution so advanced in the process of trying to create a better fridge we can apply it across disciplines
No. Because for one, that would come out of state funded research, and for another, as I just said, progress is not about sudden and surprising leaps (any more).
A while ago, a single person could get a Nobel prize for their scientific achievement. Nowadays, it's only cultural inertia which makes it difficult for us to grant the prize to hundreds of people at once - because that's how many people it takes nowadays.
>we can not definitely rule fridge research useless waste.
No one did that though.
Don't confuse research with production, and don't confuse useless with inefficient.

Damn user, I think you're a commie who doesn't know it yet
>Man, anytime people are oppressed they rise up eventually, that's human nature. Slaves revolt, peasants revolt, and to be fair, maybe the apparent resurgence of socialist thought is our modern day revolt. Can't really say for sure.
This is marxist dialectical theory 101, which at this point is a hell of a lot more than theory now that so many of Marx's predictions have come true.
>but I can disagree with it and say that I believe humans are much more capable of caring about themselves than people think and a trend that tends to pop up in Marxist thinkers is the misguided notion that "all these poor people don't even understand how exploited they are because they're such brainwashed sheep".
I agree with you, but I would assert the importance of taking the position of a realist here. The capitalist class effectively controls the governments of nearly every country internationally and a quick look at American education proves a massive effort to turn people away from class consciousness. From a purely objective standpoint, economically, even if they are good people, employers exploit their employees. The attitude the developed world has to regard them as gods is proof of brainwash to a certain extent.
At the same time I reject the idea of "these poor workers -- we, the enlightened communists, need to lead them." It's popular among marxists and as you said is misguided. The reason Socialism in the 20th century didn't work to its full potential is because of this and your earlier comment. The people need to revolt, their agency and ability needs to be recognized inherently by the self-serving and self-lead nature of that rebellion, and then socialism will replace capitalism. That's what marx argued at least, and now that we can see the rate of profit falling and many of marx's other predictions coming true, I feel inclined to agree.

Attached: 1451781777254.jpg (1440x1080, 230K)

who is she posing for? no one would stick their ass out like that for no reason

She's riding on an invisible bike.

I don't know man. Just looking at the rate of voice actors that "training centers" (there are now schools just for teaching voice actors) produced nowadays and the marketing tricks that they employ to promote a select few of them, I am not really sure that voice actors are really such a rare breed.

I like everything that you're saying here, the problem is
>planned economy
(I have several different ways I wanted to react to this so read each point like you just read the sentence above)
1. Which is all well and good as long as you are doing the planning
2. The very concept of planning something as complex as the economy would definitely be an AI job at the very minimum, if the economy even exists to be planned
3. In Notes From the Underground our eponoymous protagonist writes something to the effect of "is it not true, that in a time of universal goodwill and happiness, some individuals would not stand and say, 'come, let us use our freedom to throw all this to the devil, just so that we may be entertained'" and that's pretty much how I feel about something anti-human like trying to plan out an ideal Utopia.

>No one did that though.
Yeah, actually that would go back to the point I made regarding anti-fragility, but there would be no advancing in anything without profit. 4am and all that.

>a commie who doesn't know it yet
Could be, I'm far more concerned with doing what is right than defending something I personally like just so I won't have to adapt and learn new things. Plus I do feel that communism is inevitable, just more on the scale of centuries rather than decades.
What makes me nervous is
>The people need to revolt, their agency and ability needs to be recognized inherently by the self-serving and self-lead nature of that rebellion,
The very nature of revolting I would say is more tied to being human than being correct. I said earlier that wherever people are mistreated you get Revolution, but you'll get revolution no matter what, as a teenager inevitably rebels against his parents and society. So the capital R Revolutions are typically a manifestation of mass collective disgruntlement (and they tend to be bloody) the "socialist revolution" up until now has more of the teenage reactionary flavor. I could be wrong.

Attached: 1550347352839.jpg (640x480, 29K)

They are not. Success in acting in general is about getting your name out, not about becoming the best actor. Without having hard numbers I can only guess when I say that it's 70% luck and 30% talent/appearance.

>2. The very concept of planning something as complex as the economy would definitely be an AI job at the very minimum,
I think people exaggerate this point. Centralization has led to incredible efficiency improvements elsewhere, and most socialist countries had notoriously bad starting conditions (which is why they opted for socialism at all).
But that is not a real argument. Feel free to ignore it or to mock me with cute anime girls for bringing up such a baseless feeling.

>actually that would go back to the point I made regarding anti-fragility,
I wanted to bring up climate change the last time you mentioned that. I will do it now.
>there would be no advancing in anything without profit
And yet the great wars were both incredible money burners and the periods of greatest scientific achievement.

>go on Yea Forums
>everything is discussing marxism

Attached: 1561159801228.png (747x422, 120K)

>they skipped that part in the anime
FUCK

Explain the difference between manga and Marx in 20 words or less. Don't use the following words: hitherto, egregious, martyr, axiomatic, Steve.

The issue isn't centralization, it's having a human control all of it. We can never be sure of the full ramifications of our actions because we're not complicated enough to think on so many layers. Look at the countless times in history someone came up with a simple eloquent solution and promptly fucked absolutely everything up after instating it. (Cane Toads in Australia comes to mind, but there's a thousand examples of this in every field imaginable)
What is the economy anyway? Is it really something that can be regulated? Wouldn't people just establish their own side economy a top down approach removes their freedom?
What I found most interesting about the 4 months I recently spent in the Balkans is that there was a general agreement amongst the older population that communism was the greatest thing ever, until it wasn't. You'll find people who loved Tito for his leadership and strength, who regret the disassembly, but things began going downhill before Tito's death and before capitalism. But it's undeniable that the time they spent under communism was great at the beginning. Well besides Enver Hoxha, that guy was just nuts.

>climate change
Companies made a huge profit while fucking up the environment, evidence of it comes to light, the government steps in and says "you guys stop that or we will take a lot of your money", they invest the money they made into solutions for how to continue making money while also not fucking up the environment as much, the hole in the ozone layer is closing up last I heard. Now let's say they said fuck that, we want to keep polluting, what happens? In our system they would be sued to death and we'd have dozens of other companies ready to fill that niche in a better way. That's what I mean about anti-fragility, survival of the fittest essentially, but no chance of an "extinction".
Profit is not just money; social status, land ownership, not being annexed by Germany, not having your people die, all profit.

Attached: 1553439313630.gif (500x485, 1.6M)

>evidence of it comes to light, the government steps in and says "you guys stop that or we will take a lot of your money",
What world do you live in?
>In our system they would be sued to death
VW is getting sued in the US because it's a German company.
It is not getting sued in Germany because it's a German company.

>communism was the greatest thing ever, until it wasn't
Wow, it's almost as if everyone agrees that communism is good in theory but it's unsustainable and breaks down in practice.
You can't just say "let's keep it in the good state at the beginning and not have it go downhill", that's not how it works you little shit.

I can see you're getting quite sick of this but I'd just like one last effortpost from you outlining in a quick way where and why we disagree because I don't really understand what the point you're trying to make here is.

But it's the same story everywhere, including the former Soviet satellites (from what I've been told). Maybe Marx got it all wrong, and rather than an endpoint of industrial capitalism, communism is actually a method of industrializing and unifying your country? At least for a few decades until it collapses. I guess we'll never know, but at the moment I'd rather be in the formerly communist Balkans than the never communist Africa.
Actually now I want a communist revolution in Namibia or something just to test my theory.

Attached: 1562414577454m.jpg (1024x1024, 220K)

>communism is good in theory

Communism fucking sucks in theory too.

>outlining in a quick way where and why we disagree because I don't really understand what the point you're trying to make here is.
The scientific community basically agrees on climate change. And yet the governments don't do what you are describing.
The USA have left the Paris agreement. Other countries are mocking them while failing to even try to meet their self-set goals. As a German I am mostly familiar with what's going in this country. The Germans keep mocking the Americans for things like Trump's idea of "clean coal", but we have lately made major investments into coal energy ourselves, even though we promised that we would leave that tech behind.
When the kids marched up in Fridays For Future to protest the lack of action against climate change, the politicians mocked them because they didn't know what they were talking about. So there were 10s of thousands of signatures from German scientists on a document saying that the kids are completely right. And so... nothing happened.

Capitalism has made big corporations too powerful for puny governments to go against their interests.

Ah, the cyberpunk future. Yes, I'm not a fan of it either and it's absolutely not something I would ever defend. I was speaking of capitalism as a system, not the mess we've gotten ourselves into now. It could very well be that every system we try is doomed to fail, and while communism failing manifests as a big old implosion, capitalism failing manifests itself as companies taking over the government. Actually if that's the case, I would unironically prefer communism since people tend to pick up pieces of their lives after the implosion but in a corporate hell hole future we have only serfdom and insurgency to look forward to. Fact of the matter is, there is just so much we don't know about everything in life it would be foolish to think you have an answer to anything. All we can do is our best and hope it works out.
But since you clearly care about the environment, we're not dead yet and we've still got time. Sometimes we can do good, even in a remorseless profit centered system. newsweek.com/nasa-hole-earths-ozone-layer-finally-closing-humans-did-something-771922

Oh this same picture that just won't go away.
That animator pay listed there, that's entry level. They don't much raise but they do get them. And they also eventually move on to higher level positions.
And that "A-list Voice Actor", probably applies to only one person, namely Mizuki Nana. And the reason she earns so much money is because she's also a pop star.
Although this picture didn't say it, it often mislead people into thinking most of budget for anime went to the voice actors. Which is false.

I'm guessing "animator" in this pic is meant to be in-betweener. They're like interns of animation industry. You're expected to move up from that position after a few years. If you can't, you should seek a different profession.

Fuck off

I earn more in my 2nd world eastern EU shithole.
So much for 4th largest world economy

Just so you know, I'm the one you replied to.
>1. Which is all well and good as long as you are doing the planning
I'd point to Cockshott for that. We have tangible models, not theory, but models, worked out by active Computer Scientists which focus on a directly democratic cybernetic planned economy, i.e, the economy is ran very quickly and efficiently, much more so than a market economy, and individuals vote directly from their phones or another medium on various aspects of the economy. It is hyper efficient and we have the model developed already.
>2. The very concept of planning something as complex as the economy would definitely be an AI job at the very minimum, if the economy even exists to be planned
Basic AI can help, but it comes down to public participation (which is a given) and computers capable of big data and communicating with each other. A small array of Yea Forums users' computers could power this economy.
>3. In Notes From the Underground our eponoymous protagonist writes something to the effect of "is it not true, that in a time of universal goodwill and happiness, some individuals would not stand and say, 'come, let us use our freedom to throw all this to the devil, just so that we may be entertained'" and that's pretty much how I feel about something anti-human like trying to plan out an ideal Utopia.
First of all, I'd prefer a Utopia be attacked by a few mean spirited individuals over the dystopia ran by a lot of said mean spirited individuals which rewards said individuals.
Regardless, Marx never asked for a Utopia. All we Marxists want is worker ownership of the means of production. I'm not sure how someone could fuck that up, to be honest, especially when the implementation is through a planned economy where the public has direct control over everything. It's almost like a decentralized centralized market, in a sense, if that makes any sense.
...

Attached: 1550378966804.jpg (650x996, 99K)

cont.
>Could be, I'm far more concerned with doing what is right than defending something I personally like just so I won't have to adapt and learn new things. Plus I do feel that communism is inevitable, just more on the scale of centuries rather than decades.
That's fair and I agree. Socialism needs to come first, and although I feel it's possible we'll see that in our lifetimes, I'm not sure. What I do know is we are seeing the economy deteriorate at a rapid pace and climate change will likely accelerate that further. Marx's predictions are coming true.
>The very nature of revolting I would say is more tied to being human than being correct. I said earlier that wherever people are mistreated you get Revolution, but you'll get revolution no matter what, as a teenager inevitably rebels against his parents and society. So the capital R Revolutions are typically a manifestation of mass collective disgruntlement (and they tend to be bloody) the "socialist revolution" up until now has more of the teenage reactionary flavor. I could be wrong.
I'm a bit confused as to whether you mean that last bit literally or if you're forming an analogy, but I'll work with the latter because that makes more sense to me. I agree to an extent; however, capitalism pushed itself to the limit with the first and second world war bringing about many of the prerequisites Marx spoke of. In the USSR, for an example, many of them were fulfilled, whether in a somewhat artificial manner by the bolsheviks or completely. It was a legitimate revolution that came close to bringing a global socialist movement in its own rite. I do agree, however, it failed because the dialectics weren't in place and things just practically couldn't work out for them. What they needed was a global working class and ultimately they didn't have that, but we're starting to see that now, so perhaps this is the beginning of the mature revolution to accompany the adolescent one of the 20th century.

Attached: 1550336445506.jpg (321x454, 25K)