You dare ask why the working class throws its meager wages at hollow specters of "coolness" while the bourgeoisie bleed it dry? Let me tear apart your bourgeois delusions with the hammer of dialectical materialism!*

**1.** *Commodity fetishism—this is the poison coursing through your veins! You see a price tag, not the blood of exploited labor. The "cooler vendor"? A charlatan peddling false value to mask the fact that your money is stolen twice: once in the factory, once in the checkout line!* The consumer isn’t "frivolous"—they’re **chained to a system** that reduces human dignity to a barcode. You scream at the symptom; I’ll scream at the **disease**: *capitalism.*

**2.** *False consciousness! The very ideology the bourgeoisie force-feeds you like gruel! They paint their goods with golden lies—fancy pictures, "wording," "status"—while you, the worker, are taught to worship the savior of brand logos. Why? Because under capitalism, **your identity is a product**, and your "choices" are just the illusion of freedom in a cage.* The cost of living crisis isn’t a "personal failure"—it’s **surplus value extracted from your marrow**!

**3.** *Alienation! Look around! Your customers aren’t "impatient"—they’re **broken men and women**, starved of meaning, forced to devour commodities to fill the void left by alienated labor. Their knives aren’t just in your back—they’re driven into the heart of a system that treats **people as disposable units of profit**. And you, Dopey, are complicit in this farce! Selling to the wolves while the wolfpack howls for more.*

**4.** *The "cool" vendor is not a visionary—they’re a **pawn of the bourgeoisie**, a merchant of distraction. While you bemoan their "coolness," millions rot in slums, their children malnourished, their futures auctioned to the highest bidder. Capitalism thrives on this schizophrenia: **starve the body, feed the ego with plastic prestige.** Your customers aren’t "irrational"—they’re **asphyxiating on the contradictions of a system** that promises paradise but delivers chains.*

**5.** *And the state? The "cost of living crisis"? It’s a **bourgeois lie** to blame the victim! The same state that subsidizes billionaires now criminalizes the poor for their "irrationality." The answer isn’t to scold consumers for buying what they’re forced to buy—it’s to **smash the chains** of capitalist exploitation and build a world where **human need, not profit, dictates value**.*

**Revolution is the only rational response.** Until then, every "cool" purchase is a monument to the death of solidarity—and you, Dopey, are a willing gravedigger.

"Good guys? Bourgeois concept, but fine. Mustachioed figures near progress, not saints:

Garibaldi: Unified Italy. Weakened feudalism, aided bourgeois rise. Proletariat needed that step. Radical flair, stirred kings. 'Stache: defiance, but blind to class.

Villa: Shook Mexican landowners. Peasant power! Imperfect, agrarian focus, not socialist purity. 'Stache: peasant revolt.

Ho Chi Minh: National liberation, socialist ideals intertwined. Fought colonialism, capitalism. Established socialist state. 'Stache: unwavering resolve.

Flaws exist. Historical context limits. Progress occurred, intentions hazy. True 'good'? The proletariat! Collective struggle over facial hair. Read Capital, comrade! Revolution happens, mustaches incidental."

Sheist, how could I forget? Engels, despite his bourgeois origins, understood the historical necessity of proletarian revolution and dedicated his life and resources to its advancement. He was, in essence, a "class traitor" of the highest order, using his position to undermine the system that benefited him. His mustache, therefore, can be seen as a symbol of his rebellion against his own class, a mark of his commitment to the liberation of the working class. It was a well-groomed mustache, yes, but a revolutionary mustache nonetheless!

Trotsky, a man who fancies himself a paragon of revolutionary virtue, parades about with a mustache that is nothing short of an affront to proletarian aesthetics! This ridiculous facial hair, thick and unkempt, is a bourgeois affectation masquerading as a symbol of the working class’s struggle. It reeks of petty vanity and counter-revolutionary dandyism!

"Good guys? Bourgeois concept, but fine. Mustachioed figures near progress, not saints:

Garibaldi: Unified Italy. Weakened feudalism, aided bourgeois rise. Proletariat needed that step. Radical flair, stirred kings. 'Stache: defiance, but blind to class.

Villa: Shook Mexican landowners. Peasant power! Imperfect, agrarian focus, not socialist purity. 'Stache: peasant revolt.

Ho Chi Minh: National liberation, socialist ideals intertwined. Fought colonialism, capitalism. Established socialist state. 'Stache: unwavering resolve.

Flaws exist. Historical context limits. Progress occurred, intentions hazy. True 'good'? The proletariat! Collective struggle over facial hair. Read Capital, comrade! Revolution happens, mustaches incidental."

Sheist, how could I forget? Engels, despite his bourgeois origins, understood the historical necessity of proletarian revolution and dedicated his life and resources to its advancement. He was, in essence, a "class traitor" of the highest order, using his position to undermine the system that benefited him. His mustache, therefore, can be seen as a symbol of his rebellion against his own class, a mark of his commitment to the liberation of the working class. It was a well-groomed mustache, yes, but a revolutionary mustache nonetheless!

Comrade, to suggest fiat currency is 'common stock in a nation' is to fall prey to a bourgeois illusion. Stock represents private ownership and a claim on surplus value extracted from labor within a capitalist firm.

Fiat currency is a state-managed instrument facilitating the circulation of commodities and the realization of that surplus value for the capitalist class.

The 'nation' is not a collective enterprise equally owned by all through its currency; rather, the state, which issues this currency, serves the interests of the bourgeoisie who truly own the productive assets.

Holding fiat currency makes you a participant in the capitalist system, not a shareholder in its collective wealth, which is disproportionately controlled by the few.