Lmao, what?? WWII ended 81 years ago. The only Germans who have living memory of it would be like 90. That’s nowhere remotely close to “half of Germans.”
So living memory is now a property of people who have direct experience of something? Living with the aftershocks of WWII doesn't count? What in the direct realism is this?
“Irrationality?” So you think these ideas just magically sprung out of nothing? How on earth is this a “materialist” explanation?
No I am saying irrationality is a type of noise, noise can about from material processes. For you everything has to have an explanation that makes sense. You work from phenomena to the relevant objects instead of considering the concrete objects for themselves and then see how the concrete interactions turn into something bigger.
No. Based on what you’ve said, there’s exactly one explanation you can use here, which is that there’s some property of some particular object that turns people fascist or communist. Some kind of orb, perhaps, that all the Germans touched and it suddenly turned them into fascists.
Yes, the particular material objects here are brains, the tools humans use, the environment, etc. You don't understand my argument on a fundamental level and you think of objects as being cars or spoons, which is ridiculous. Idealism, and much of language, ideas, are downstream phenomena that don't mean that much outside of being shorthands for organisation and strategy. For example: try becoming a structured writer without the tools of notetaking, paper, pens, etc., it"s close to impossible. Or a good orator without ever facing a crowd.
You don't comprehend anything I'm saying, nor do you make an effort to.
I’m allowed to have an opinion on which accomplishment
I don't care + same is true for me then, I can have an opinion about your opinion. I can say it's shit. What are you going to do? I give feedback and you can't even be assed to consider what I'm saying. I attack you because you wrong and annoying.
No, I equate mysticism with being wrong. Because I’m a materialist.
Foolish and eliminativist, and not what Marx or any relevant thinker meant with mysticism.
When I talk about the first responsibity of the state, I am talking about what it ought to do, not how it acts in practice. So all of this is irrelevant.
Moralist. So what have states done in history? Has there ever been a state which wasn't atop major antagonisms? Your oughts don't mean anything, when historically no state ever did jack squat in regards to fulfilling needs of commoners. None. And most would send their citizens into !!!death!!!, i.e. going against the interest of the worker/commoner/what have you, if it meant securing the continued existence of the state apparatus. Let me guess, you are also part of the "real democracy has never been tried"-crowd.
Ok, so do it then. What’s stopping you? Seems like under the current conditions, we still have antivaxxers and they’re growing instead of shrinking.
I don't need to do much except for keep doing what I've always did. What a disingenuous way to appeal to constructive criticism.