The ideas that domination is the goal are correct. The domination goes beyond social issues. Owing someone rent puts them in a position to dominate me. Saying the rent is the people’s rent doesn’t rationalize the domination.

I like how your post addresses the anti-intellectualism of the original post. I also like the acknowledgment of cherry picking sources. The critique validly states the meme creator is ignoring scholarly sources on the right. The best part is, even with scholarly sources involved, humans are still silly. Humans sometimes consume content, TV show or book, to feel superior to other humans.

I have found delving into the views of others has helped me create better arguments. For example, I read “Anarchy, State and Utopia” by Robert Nozick, to better understand the anarcho-capitalist minimal state position. Even if I can form a better argument, I realize I can “proceed to say the most stupid shit”. Keep it stupid comrades.

You fuckin’ dorks ain’t a source of the art You can’t be cooler than the corners Where you source all your parts

• Dorks by Ian Bavitz (Aesop Rock)

Lenin had contemporary critiques.

When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called “the People’s Stick”.

• Statism and Anarchy by Mikhail Bakunin

A concern is the vanguard party ruling over the prolitariate thereby exchanging capital ownership from one minority to another.

Engels argued the imbalance of ownership is natural because a mill is subject to the authority of the water to operate. There is a lack of imagination in justifying a ruling minority after the revolution by saying that’s how capitalist technology works.

What good are my electric tools if I am unable to get electricity from the centralized power plant of the vanguard party? I will need to subject myself to the minority and pay rents. How does Lenin’s vanguard party differ from capitalism in terms of ownership? Does it only work if the vanguard party are benevolent towards the prolitariat?