Prunebutt

Because that's what you're implying.

So, amassing of power can't be limited in your opinion?

I disagree.

Well, you're wrong.

You believe there have been "a ton" of human societies with no exploitation? You have no idea what you're talking about.

There have been a ton of societies which limited the amount of power individuals could amass.

Oh I see! Distinct differences! LOL

Yeah. Feudal property relations are totally the same as capitalistic property relations. No difference whatsoever. Pretty much everyone is still a subsistence farmer. /s

I haven't done that

Yes, you have

gaining power over others

That's what monopolisation of power means.

But not prevent the acquisition of power over others, or prevent exploitation.

Yes, exactly that. That's what democracy's supposed to handle.

To me it seems like feudalism never ended.

There are distinct differences of capitalism and feudalism.

I don't know what that means.

It means claiming that someone "uses a word wrong", referring to a supposed authority on language, rather than acknowledging that a word's usage determines its' meaning

The moral judgement is irrelevant here.

I've not made any moral judgement. I've extrapolated your view of the world and said that I don't want that.

"We" cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot.

That's simply wrong. There's a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent monopolisation of power. Notice that there are way less kings around than a few hundred years ago?

Your assumptions are unfounded.

I'm claiming the same things of yours.

So not actually a traitor then, I see.

Linguistics prescriptivism is bullshit.

I've simply pointed out the reality of the siuation

(x) doubt.

Nice to see your bets so hedged. /s

But even if you were correct: Shouldn't we as a society remove the system which enables people to monopolize power, if it's "human nature" to exploit others?

A class traitor is someone who acts counter to their class-interests. No allegiance required.

That's ridiculous, nobody wants that.

Yet you defend a system which fucks you and the rest of the working class over.

Oh no. It's an ancap =.=

Preach, comrade!

Plus, it would likely lead to violence, which many are not a fan of, I'd prefer not, myself.

You're ignoring the inherent violence that's already prevalent in the current trajectory things are heading towards.

Both are made up. The second one to legitimize the first one.

I get the motivational part. It's just the "earth will move on, lol" part that's unnecessarily cruel and pisses me off.