>>17832710
Yes i do

No it doesn't

You can learn something you don't already know, you can't know them before learning them

Contradictions absolutely state falsehood and you have to correct at least on proposition to actually advance any argument, there is objective truth

Marx is a Hegelian

I'm arguing no one can truly know and group people correctly, your margin of error rises with the size of the group

You know your ideology is based on falsehood right?

Definitions depend on the thing, not not the thing

Proles are a sociologically meaningless term, the term underclass was and is better at its job even though it itself falls for the same pitfalls any stereotyping does. Sociology isn't an empirical science, you have to adhere to logic fully. who would have thunk.

The people who invented the term proletariat in the modern world are specifically using proletariat and labor nonsense because they believe in the bunk labor theory of value and dialectics.
Since you have to already actually know the result in dialectics(LTV) to be able to do it, they simply reframe their argument for gibs(natural result of LTV) in a more "inclusive" manner. This is Hegel's fault and is retarded