>>5525410absolute meme-tier understanding of dialectics lmao
>dialectics basically means the opposition between two groups/powersa tension between two interconnected social forces that presuppose each other, such as the proletariat-bourgeoisie dichotomy you mentioned, or the material-base/ideal-superstructure model of society
>do not believe that there can ever be a mutually beneficial between worker and employer because the latter by default exploits the former by alienating his laborthis sort of take is the exact opposite of dialectical thinking, which is fundamentally a tool to analyse complicated social phenomena and social change
the idea is to capture also all the contradictory elements that influence these tensions, such as the mutually beneficial agreements you mentioned
that mutually beneficial agreements are possible under many circumstances does not change the reality that the interests of the proletariat *as a class* and bourgeoisie *as a class* are diametrically opposed
>exploits the former by alienating his laborwrong, alienation is to do with the nature of wage labour, exploitation is the appropriation of surplus value
>Marx himself, who in the Communist Manifesto describes marriage as the Bourgeois male using his wife as an instrument of production.No he doesn't, he describes the mentality of bourgies in relation to marriage:
Marx in the manifesto you kindly linked:
>The bourgeois sees his wife as a mere instrument of production.>He has not even a suspicion that the real point aimed at is to do away with the status of women as mere instruments of production.this is a reply to retarded liberals/reactionaries who claim out of either stupidity or malice that common ownership of means of production means that monogamy is banned or some other stupid shit
I don't want to turn this into a gay politics/philosophy debate thread but your take is godawful
