My wife and I agreed that we both didn't want a big ceremony or anything fancy. I told her I was fine with eloping to a beautiful location for the wedding. She didn't think that would work for her family. The small ceremony with just a few people quickly turned into a reception with just over 100 guests. Whatever. She was happy so I was happy.
I'm surprised chi chi takes interest in being a wedding planner. What would Marx say? Does chi chi even know who Marx is? A true Socialist would find it bourgeois being a middle-man, planning weddings for the rich with the incentive of making a profit. How does that contribute to the good of the state and one's fellow workers. How does that contribute to a Socialist revolution? What does being a middle-man working for the rich do to produce anything for the good of the state or fellow workers? Is anything being produced at all? A real Socialist believes in contributing to the state through their labor. How does collecting assistance from the state and stating that the state has an obligation to take care of him and provide him the means to live the Capitalist, materialistic lifestyle his wishes while professing that he has no obligation to make any contribution at all to the state constitute a Socialist? A real Socialist believes in equal division of labor, not kicking back and buying designer label clothes while his fellow Socialists do all the work. A real Socialist certainly doesn't believe in the concept of private property, or actually own not one, but two private properties. A real Socialist wouldn't preach about the benefits of Socialism while living his life as a materialistic consumer in Capitalist countries, but would be living in a Socialist country working side by side with his fellow Socialists for the good of the state, not for his own benefit as an individual hoping to make a profit by planning lavish events for the rich. Quelle bourgeois!
chi chi has more in common with a Capitalist property owning, profit seeking, Richard Branson than he does to an actual Socialist. Or perhaps to the party elite who live large while the workers do the actual work. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it seems there's a difference between the words and actions. It's easy to talk the talk, but I don't see him walking the walk. Unless of course the words used to describe living a life of owning multiple properties, buying designer clothes, desire to make a profit, traveling the world, etc., are just as empty as the words on Socialism.
Marx (Karl, not Groucho) would be turning in his grave if he knew this is what his movement has become.