Comments by "Piccalilli Pit" (@piccalillipit9211) on "Rebel HQ" channel.

  1. 179
  2. 27
  3. 25
  4. 24
  5. 23
  6. 20
  7. 19
  8. 19
  9. 18
  10. 17
  11. 17
  12. 17
  13. 17
  14. 16
  15. 16
  16. 15
  17. 15
  18. 14
  19. 14
  20. 14
  21. 14
  22. 14
  23. 14
  24. 14
  25. 13
  26. 13
  27. 13
  28. 12
  29. 11
  30. 11
  31. 11
  32. 11
  33. 11
  34. 11
  35. 11
  36. 10
  37. 10
  38. 10
  39. 10
  40. 10
  41. 10
  42. 10
  43. 10
  44. 10
  45. 9
  46. 9
  47. 9
  48. 9
  49. 9
  50. 9
  51. 9
  52. 9
  53. 9
  54. 9
  55. 8
  56. 8
  57. 8
  58. 8
  59. 8
  60. 8
  61. 8
  62. 8
  63. 8
  64. 8
  65. 8
  66. 7
  67. 7
  68. 7
  69. 7
  70. 7
  71. 7
  72. 7
  73. 7
  74. 7
  75. 7
  76. 7
  77. 7
  78. 7
  79. 7
  80. 7
  81. 7
  82. 7
  83. 7
  84. 7
  85. 7
  86. 7
  87. 6
  88. 6
  89. 6
  90. 6
  91. 6
  92. 6
  93. 6
  94. 6
  95. 6
  96. 6
  97. 6
  98. 6
  99. 6
  100. 6
  101. 6
  102. 6
  103. 6
  104. 6
  105. 6
  106. 5
  107. 5
  108. 5
  109. 5
  110. 5
  111. 5
  112. 5
  113. 5
  114. 5
  115. 5
  116. 5
  117. 5
  118. 5
  119. 5
  120. 5
  121. 5
  122. 5
  123. 5
  124. 5
  125. 5
  126. 5
  127. 5
  128. 5
  129. 5
  130. 4
  131. 4
  132. 4
  133. 4
  134. 4
  135. 4
  136. 4
  137. 4
  138. 4
  139. 4
  140. 4
  141. 4
  142. 4
  143. 4
  144. 4
  145. 4
  146. 4
  147. 4
  148. 4
  149. 4
  150. 4
  151. 4
  152. 4
  153. 4
  154. 4
  155. 4
  156. 4
  157. 4
  158. 4
  159. 4
  160. 4
  161. 4
  162. 4
  163. 4
  164. 3
  165. 3
  166. 3
  167. 3
  168. 3
  169. 3
  170. 3
  171. 3
  172. 3
  173. 3
  174. 3
  175. 3
  176. 3
  177. 3
  178. 3
  179. 3
  180. 3
  181. 3
  182. 3
  183. 3
  184. 3
  185. 3
  186. 3
  187. 3
  188. 3
  189. 3
  190. 3
  191. 3
  192. 3
  193. 3
  194. 3
  195. I AM AN AUTHOR and I have just finished a chapter called "THE UNREASONABLE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROPAGANDA" here is an excerpt: The other way is to literally change the definition of something. Karl Marx was for the abolition of “Private Property”, the definition today of private property is: “Private property is a legal designation for the ownership of property by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state entity.” So that's everything right? You are not allowed a car, a toothbrush, a watch, a house, a TV, a computer literally everything you own is private property and these dam commies want to take it off you! Only when Marx wrote this all of these things were “Personal Property”. “Private Property” was widely understood by everyone at the time to mean houses for rent, factories, factory machinery, farmland, drug patents, brand names, industrial units, etc. What we now call “Capital Assets”. Karl Marx was not against you owing a toothbrush, but the unreasonable effectiveness of propaganda for 150 years has literally changed the definition for the purposes of demonising communism and Marxism. Now you may not agree with Marx that capital assets should be owned by the public for the public good and not the private wealth accumulation of already rich people. That's fine. But I think we can all agree that not wanting Bezos to own Am-zon warhorses where employees have to pee in bottles and step over the dead bodies of coworkers to keep fulfilling orders, is not the same as wanting to confiscate your toothbrush. It leaves Marxists having to explain ”that's not what he actually meant when he said…” which is a very weak position to be starting a discussion form and it is the exact position the media wanted “the left” to be in when they started redefining Private Property. So even the things we think we know, we are often wrong because the literal definitions of words have been changed by decades of propaganda.
    3
  196. 3
  197. 3
  198. 3
  199. 3
  200. 3
  201. 3
  202. 3
  203. 3
  204. 3
  205. 3
  206. 3
  207. 3
  208. 3
  209. 2
  210. 2
  211. 2
  212. 2
  213. 2
  214. 2
  215. 2
  216. 2
  217. 2
  218. 2
  219. 2
  220. 2
  221. 2
  222. 2
  223. 2
  224. 2
  225. 2
  226. 2
  227. 2
  228. 2
  229. 2
  230. 2
  231. 2
  232. 2
  233. 2
  234. 2
  235. 2
  236. 2
  237. 2
  238. 2
  239. 2
  240. 2
  241. 2
  242. 2
  243. 2
  244. 2
  245. 2
  246. 2
  247. 2
  248. 2
  249. 2
  250. 2
  251. 2
  252. 2
  253. 2
  254. 2
  255. 2
  256. 2
  257. 2
  258. 2
  259. 2
  260. 2
  261. 2
  262. 2
  263. 2
  264. 2
  265. 2
  266. 2
  267. 2
  268. 2
  269. 2
  270. 2
  271. 2
  272. 2
  273. 2
  274. 2
  275. 2
  276. 2
  277. 2
  278. 2
  279. 2
  280. 2
  281. 2
  282. 2
  283. 2
  284. 2
  285. i wrote this about 2 years ago COMMUNISM IN 50 YEARS Well like it or hate it you WILL live in some form of communist state in the next 50 years. Capitalism is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed, I dont mean it has its problems. I mean the very basic concept is self cannibalising. Problem No1. Capitalism is a funnel. It funnels wealth from the bottom to the top - it also funnels power from the bottom to the top cos money = power. For capitalism to be stable you have to TAX the top heavily and move the money back down to the bottom JUST to keep the system functioning. Rich powerful people DO NOT like being taxed. And as capitalism INEVITABLY produces rich powerful people who control media and politicians they get their way. This hoovers all the money out of the working class, then you give them credit - they sell their future work, and then they are EMPTY. But for capitalism to continue it NEEDS MONEY - so the middle class are the next to go - and you can see this in the USA and the UK - it is eating the middle class. It also starts to eat the state, private prisons, private education etc etc... Ultimately there is NO MONEY left in the system - that has already happened the FED in America si literally printing money to keep the system working. So capitalism HAS TO COLLAPSE. It is 100% inevitable from the very start of the system. And people predicted this 150 and 200 years ago. Problem 2. Capitalism HAS to GROW to exist. it is NOT a static model. It has to grow by about 3% each year to continue. That is a DOUBLING of the world economy every 27 years. The earth is at 130% of capacity now. WE CAN NOT extract 260% per year of the earth capacity in another 27 years - its not possible to live on that planet. SO. A static zero growth economic model is required, a model that removes the profit motive is required [to long to explain why] is required and due to AI a UBI is required - the only economic model we have that allows the earth to survive and people to eat is a communism based model. It wont be Stalin's Russia, it will be some hybrid modernised version. But YOU WILL LIVE under a communist economic model if you live another 50 years.
    2
  286. 2
  287. 2
  288. 2
  289. 2
  290. 2
  291. 2
  292. 2
  293. 2
  294. 2
  295. 2
  296. 2
  297. 2
  298. 2
  299. 2
  300. 2
  301. 2
  302. 2
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413.  @LagrangePoint901  - Yeah - fat people in America are fat cos of the unbelievably VAST quantities of sugar in every single food product. Your bread has sugar in it. Your fries have sugar on them. Lets be clear here is am NOT blaming anyone in America for being fat, your diet is utterly appalling and its the only diet available. What I am saying is in normalising fat people nad being fat you are doing the work of the food companies. Coke spend billions telling people they are fat cos they don't exercise enough. The entire "low fat" move of the last 30 years was paid for and promoted by food companies to make you think you are fat cos of fat. NO - humans do not get fat from eating fat. they get fat from eating sugar cos that is how mammals survive winter - they eat fruit etc with sugar and store it as fat over winter. You can argue what I am doing is stereotyping all fat people - well what you are doing if the work of the food companies that are selling you sugar instead of food. Why? Cos sugar is addictive and sugar suppressed the cessation reflex and keeps you eating more... Who do you think pays for all the "body positivity" advertising in America??? Why do you think your Govt does nothing about the vast amount of sugar in your diet? Cos there is no money in healthy people, fat people eat more, they go the gym to get slim, they use for profit hospitals, etc etc etc. Obesity is a multi billion $ business in America If you moved 100 fat people from America to Europe 75 of them would be normal-sized in 5 years - why? COS OUR FOOD is way way more regulated re sugar than yours.
    1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1