Kenny Klipz has the goods. This is the real thing, most likely.
BTW it’s not behind paywall so do our guy some good and give him some traffic for the scoop.
Kenny Klipz has the goods. This is the real thing, most likely.
BTW it’s not behind paywall so do our guy some good and give him some traffic for the scoop.
Good post, though I think we should remain critical of his tactics. Mercin CEO’s might get people to recognize each other, but it’s never going to lead to systemic change that can only be achieved by organizing. I don’t want dead CEO’s, I want a different system that obviates them entirely.
No matter how much you organize, you’re gonna have to off the CEOs at some point. They’re not gonna hand over the reins peacefully and they are actively fighting against all materially significant “organising”. Had Jeff Bezos been shot while Amazon was trying to crush unions, I am sure organising would become easier.
this
As an after effect, sure my Bureaucrats. I never said anything about nonviolence.
It’s not the the end we desire. I think the distinction between ends and means is useful here (even if it’s often stupid). Our goal is not to kill CEO’s, and as a counterfactual (that would probably never happen), a CEO willing to surrender their company/wealth to employees or liquidate their for-profit insurance should not be killed, since they would not stand between us and our real goal/end.
I wish to live in a just and righteous society and as such part of my goal is that certain people see justice. A CEO giving up their company makes them no longer a CEO and thus out of the discussion. I do not believe in turning the other cheek. I won’t say more because it’s gonna amount to fedposting and that’s bad.
You do not have to say the specific words to communicate their intent.
I think my posting makes it pretty clear I believe violence will be necessary in the ultimate transformation of society from the current mode of production to a more just one.
I just think that violence should be wielded strategically and by a mass movement, not by individual actors. I think even in a communistic state, violence should only be exercised in a collective fashion, never by an individual.
It is due to this commitment to violence exercised by many wills acting in concert that I reject the killing of individual CEO’s by assassins. Because violence (not mere murder) and the authority to wield it stems from collective will.
Anything else arguing the individual authorized to murder is simply Nietzschean ubermensch shit, and we should generally reject it. Self-defense presents edge cases, and one might argue there’s a kind of “self-defense” in this circumstance if one were so inclined, but an individual acting in self-defense won’t ever change the system, so I think a point still stands here.
Ok, but, you can’t deny the screaming voices of the proletariat right now in the wake of “the killing of individual CEO’s by assassins”. I mean, hell, we’ve got boomer white guys in Texas holding up DDD signs.
I don’t deny that voice and Lenin doesn’t either (he speaks of the “revolutionary ardor” of the proletaritat). But we should always keep our eyes on the real prize - the transformation of society. I want a world where United doesn’t exist, and until that proletariat is organized to actually dismantle the insurance system then killing CEO’s might feel good but will not serve the actual end of transforming the system.
Fair point
We cant transform shit until the CEOs are done. The proletariat doesn’t need to be organized they need to be angry. We are at the agitation phase of the game. Phase one is revolution phase two is forming a communist government. Both the Bolsheviks and the Communist party of China only came into being after a ideological split of the revolutionary parties they were part of.
Not to spoil the fun but that sign guy was holding up Kamala Harris/anti-trump/anti-putin signs before the election. He’s like a super deranged lib in Texas who went crazy and became a sign guy. I guess his posts weren’t getting enough traction online…
I think in a communist society it should without a doubt be wielded in a collective fashion.
We don’t live in a time where many wills are able to act in concert, for many reasons. The individual liquidation of CEOs is a net benefit, propaganda of the deed and all that.
Like a wise man once said, “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”
exactlyyy
Those who would do this already have. Unless it’s at gunpoint. We do not have the capacity to demand it at gunpoint without being absolutely crushed at this point. There is no surrender option until leftist movements get much, MUCH stronger. Until then, there’s no point crying over the deaths of the people who are slaughtering us from the boardrooms. This was an act of community defense.
yea he should be in indonesia rn
MF had five days. He could have gone out into the woods and set everything used in the killing on fire, then went home and been like “I’ve been CAMPING for the past week what did I miss?” and lived his whole life free and clear.
Among many other things.
he should have debated the CEO on reddit if he wanted to change hearts and minds. violence solves nothing. the CEO will live forever in our hearts.
I think if it happened enough you’d get either gun control or healthcare. Assuming people are doing it with homemade weapons then it’d have to be a healthcare reform solution but I’d guess they’d try gun control first (then someone gets shot over it and they realise they can’t).
Not system change though, you’re correct there.
I was thinking about that too, and it’s fucking hilarious that now it’s a fully republican-led system and they’re faced with either doing gun control or doing healthcare
Oh yeah, we might get some reactionary (in the quite literal sense) legislation that might be “good” in certain respects.
However, we would likely not abolish the profit motive through CEO assassinations.
I sure hope they ban firearms. Dude was a stem student, if not a 3d printed glock it would have been a :the-doohickey:
To say otherwise, of course, would be illegal 🤐
Porque no los dos?
If the one happens during the course of the other, everyone can have a little treat.
Depends how many, to be fair. Of course it should be zero because murder is bad and wrong.
Opening
“On Violence.”
Yeah, I think murder is wrong. I think that there’s a better way. It’s called Violence.
he didn’t get systemic change, but if you asked me if i’d rather this CEO be dead or alive after what he’s done it’s not even a question, i want him dead just like he killed all those other people. him being gone alone is a good deed done. will it change anything? no. he’s gonna be replaced if he hasn’t already been. did he get what he deserved? we all agree he did, so that’s a good thing.
The tactic of (essentially?) turning himself in (if accurate, of course) was certainly pretty stupid and worth criticizing.
But propaganda of the deed is good. Dead CEOs is a way to move toward that different system. Cut away the pretense that this is not a violent system, or that the opposition to it cannot be violent.
Maybe if we just vote a little harder