Esperanto ĝenerala

Ĝi plaĉas al mi. Tre bela.

...

holy shit mi amas vin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Libcom-o havas aliajn tekstojn:
libcom.org/tags/esperanto

la plej bona lingvo

lasta bumpo

You do realize that this is an English website, right? Particularly an English board. Go to /argentina/, they'll probably understand you

This is not an English website you fucking faggot

This isn't spanish

Esperanza is Spanish for "hope". I'm not stupid

It's Esperanto, not esperanza.

It's derived from Esperanza though. That's like saying "hoping" isn't the same word as "hope"

Are you fucking retarded.

first of all, the Spanish word for "hope" is "esperanza" and not "Esperanto".

Second, that's just the name. We are not speaking Spanish but Esperanto.

It's derived from esperi (to hope) which comes from the French espérer. Esperanto means "one who hopes."

Which in turn, is derived directly from Spanish and sounds almost exactly like it. Basically, it's glorified hispanola.

/argentina/ is that way

ITT: user discovers that the Romance Languages have shared vocabulary, and thus a Constructed Language with vocabulary derived from the romance languages is going to - *shock, horror!* - share some of this vocabulary

holy shit esperanto btfo it's just spanish lololol kill yourself l l zamenhof

I bet he is an anglo

give him a break Anglos are retarded

You're better off learning chinese or something tbh.

Actually both the French and the Spanish are from Latin.

why did you post an empty picture

your browser is broken tovarish

Yes, but Esperanto isn't derived from Latin, but from Spanish. And there isn't a word called "Esperanto" in Latin, unlike in Spanish where there most certainly is.

nope

get a load of this fucking nerd getting meme'd on kek

No you retard, esperanto = esper + -ant- + -o. It's not derived from Spanish, it's constructed from esperi, which is from French.

What?

The only word for "Esperanto" in Spanish is "Esperanto" which is just the same name for the language.

Youre still fucking retarded for thinking that tax by a socialist state-not-state is the same as porky.

...

this is pretty basic shit matey

Implying what?
What is the difference between producing commodities because proky orders you and when the Central Authorities order you?

a dank buzzword, whats next a market-not-market?

there are different form of organizations, some are socialism (like market socialism) and other are not (like planned production)

The central authority would be democratic in socialism. Otherwise it isnt socialism. As such you are ordered by society as a whole to make products. If you don't, you also dont get access to the stuff they made for you.

What is the difference between making a product because the state asked you to or because the market asked you to? If you don't, you wont eat, in both cases.

Can you please do this in an other thread or at least do it in Esperanto?

I would but the mods removed it for no good reason

this

I don't see the point of such central authority when society can simply come to my co-op and ask me to produce what they need

so I need to exchange my products for theirs?

see why its still a market?

there is no big noticeable difference whatsoever, however if you analyze the suituation you can see there is one big difference

the central auhtorities will ask me to produce commodities that will have no use-value for me, If I make glasses, and I don't use glasses I will be producing commodities solely for their exchange value in the market I simply cannot keep the fruits of my labour, because they have no use-value for me

If I instead produce commodities that do have use-value for me, let's say I produce sunglasses, I can get to keep my fruits of labour without having to engage in any form of market exchange, because sunglass do have use value for me

my god, how exactly are you people not seeing the contradiction in your ideology

But you HAVE to work for market exchange, unless you are going to be 100% self sufficient, which is pretty much impossible. And if you really wanted to, there wouldnt be anyone stopping you from going to the wilderness.

But since you have to get commodities you do not produce, you have to produce for market exchange. You require resources for your sunglasses, and the glass and metal co-ops wont want pay in containers of sunglasses, because its unwieldy. Therefore, you need to sell them for money, which would mean that you would at most get to make ~13% of your "fruit of labour" for yourself.

But all that aside, at no point did ANYONE mean that you litterally are paid out in the products you make, this is simply impossible for the next reasons:

1. Statistically speaking, you most certainly work with at least one other person, which would mean that you must devy up the products in some way, which is possible, but impractical. If you follow your line of thought to the end however, if you screw in the pegs for the glasses, you should get paid in glasses with pegs, not finished ones, because thats the labour of others, and you should buy un-pegged ones to peg.
2. Lots of people work in service industry, such as mechanics, cleaners etc etc. You cannot be paid in clean floors of office buildings, you cannot be paid in the action of fixing cars.
The fruit of your labour is the value you added to a product, measured in labour time, expressed in exchange value or labour vouchers

Seriously, read a bit of marx before posting badly informed stuff, coupled with memes from a marxist who would not agree with you in the slightest.

Also
Nobody is going to stop you from producing stuff you like and use if it is viable to produce on a large scale.

I replied on the DJ Khaled thread so that we don't need to derail this one further