Katy Perry in the aftermath of Manchester

[kandrathe]

That is still a shit ton of people living in misery, and that only takes into account the most extreme of poverty. Further, the decline of people in poverty has nothing to do with capitalism becoming more benevolent as a system, and everything to do with increases in technological level/capacity, education and improved standards medical care - things we can obtain WITHOUT capitalism. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, poverty is far from being the only of capitalisms problems.

Except, no where did "not capitalism" ever advance people's standard of living. Most of the former Soviets are now better off in the EU. After the fall of the Soviet Union, and the end of central planning did people there begin to get prosperous.

How would you and your comrades rule the world then?

You see, this question itself is very telling of the bourgeois thought process. The answer is, we wouldn't need (or desire) to rule at all. Humans are largely a cooperative rather than competitive species. Only under capitalism do people get divided into classes where someone has to be ruled and exploited, where goods/services are produced on a market as commodities rather than as things for human need. And such a system of course, can only be upheld by means of violence and State force.

It was not a serious question, and sorry for being a bit facetious. But, seriously, some people cannot drive a car without making asshat moves. I just don't see anarchy is being viable. Empowering police gives them authority, and soon enough you're back to authoritarianism.

If you switch -isms from Islamism to Communism your goals seem similar to ISIS.

Yep, you got us all figured out. Our goals align with those of ISIS. Spread the word comrades, its time to join ISIS! Therein lies the secret to finally overthrowing the capitalist oligarchs!

Maybe not goals. But, dichotomic, violence infused, hyperbolic rhetoric leading to worldwide adoption of your ideology.