would anyone disagree that all political ideologies are doomed to fail because of the inherent selfishness of man?
>>703585908
Yes
Can't say that I would. Your picture is misleading though. Nazism is a left wing political philosophy.
>>703586118
Ask me how I know you're retarded
>>703585908
Nazism and fascism are not "right wing." They are species of socialism.
"National socialists." Duh.
>We are Socialists, enemies, mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system... - Gregor Strasser, Nazi officer
>>703585908
No. Quit eating from the trashcan.
>>703586118
It's right wing but has used leftist policies before
>>703585908
your pic is shit
use the biaxial one
>>703586118
i just grabed a random pic off google images.
>>703586118
>>703586411
I can't tell if these people are for real anymore
>>703585908
Lmao in between the two American parties is freedom... op is a normal fag
>>703586586
stop throwing out half eaten/ rotten food.
>>703586411
Fascism is not leftist ideology. Fascism operates by co-opting left terms and symbols to attract support. Hitler himself admits this when describing why the Nazi's used red so prominently on their flags.
A four quadrant graph covers the possible ideologies best, but even this one isn't very accurate
>>703586696
Maybe you should go grab a random book instead...
>>703585908
>anarcism is left-wing
>National Socialism is right-wing
>freedom i right where the two major american parties are
holy shit, I think your pic gave me an aneurysm
>>703586626
see >>703586411
>>703586696
fair enough. but >>703586635
>>703585908
>retard obese americans actually believe this
>>703587020
>Fascism is not leftist ideology.
Forced unionization? Political domination of civil society? Mandatory wage minimums? Generous pensions and benefits? An authoritarian state? It literally is.
>Hitler himself admits this when describing why the Nazi's used red so prominently on their flags.
"The Nazis' principal symbol was the swastika flag. The black-white-red colour scheme is based upon the colours of the flag of the German Empire. The colour scheme was commonly associated with anti-Weimar Republic German nationalists following the fall of the German Empire.[9] "
Huh.
>>703587037
that's a whole hell of a lot of isms
>>703587652
I think everyone agrees with OP. Now that we're all here we're just shooting the shit.
>>703587560
Socialism, and by extension, communsim and anarchism, are all based on advancing the power of the working class. That is leftism.
National 'socialism' is about advancing the power of one race over the others.
>>703587037
Political compass thread maybe?
>>703587974
your pic is shit
>free markets
>national socialism
pick one you fucking cockgoblin
>>703588656
awww someone made the alty mad :'[
>>703588656
>implying fascism is anything but capitlaism in decay
>>703587974
>Communism is about empowering the working class
Pic related.
Nazism was about advancing the working class, too. They just focused on Germans. Hence, the "nationalist." There was also leftist fascist governments in Italy and Bulgaria.
>>703585908
No. We anarcho-capitalist build our ideology upon the said selfishness!
>>703588998
The fundamental goal of communsim (the endpoint of leftist movements) is to do away with classes, nationalities, states, and money, this was not a part of the Reich's aims.
>>703585908
Right wing and anarchism aren't mutually exclusive
>>703589066
>>703589256
>right wing "anarchism"
>>703585908
Your scale is completely wrong, retard.
Size of government, from large to small:
totalitarian, communist, socialist, liberal, moderate, conservative, libertarian, anarchist
Left = larger central government, right = smaller.
>>703589230
theory vs. actuality. Even Communist Russia still had classes and money.
>>703589466
Exactly why it was not communist.
Saying that the Nazi's were socialist because they called themselves national socialists, is like saying the DRPK is a democratic republic because they vall themselves that.
>>703589376
Tell me: Would you rather dance naked on stage, or go to war?
I know my pick.
>>703589230
>The fundamental goal of communsim (the endpoint of leftist movements) is to do away with classes
No, it isn't.
This is what they tell the morons. But what it really does is elevate the political masters into a new class that rules with more arbitrary power and oppression than the old ruling class did. A sort of new class. Maybe you could call it a Nomenklatura.
See China, Cambodia, Laos, USSR, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea.
You wanna know what they do to people caught trying to leave "classless" North Korea without permission? They cut a metal cable at an angle, so it's sharp. They shove the cable under the prisoner's collar bone, and back out around it, hooking them. Then they move onto the next person, and so on until they bind up the end, creating a human chain of maimed, bleeding prisoners all stuck together. Then they drag them away.
>>703589844
Burn the rich. Eat their flesh. Class war now.
>>703589895
Just like they tell morons that capitalism is the fair exchange of goods and services between informed and consenting parties, but that couldn't be further from the truth.
>>703589949
I dont know, man, why do you want to burn the rich? Dont you think that by cooperation we can both achieve more than by violence?
>>703590238
There can be no cooperation while a ruling class exploits and coerces a lower class.
>>703585908
yes but some will fail faster than others take communism for instance
>>703590127
Is it?
>>703589376
If your're a communist, you're not an Anarchist. Not sure why people think the two are compatible with each other. Communism is an ideological form of government. Government being the key word here. Anarchism is the lack of a government. Capitalism is an economic system and not a system of government.
Hence.
You cannot be a communist that truly supports Anarchist values.
If you are an anarchist then you DO support a 100% free and open market, if you don't and instead think a government should regulate the market then you're not an Anarchist, you're a Statist.
>>703585908
Someone would, yes. I would disagree.
>>703585908
Ultimately Fascism leads to freedom
>>703590631
>>703590127
Really? Because I engage in the fair exchange of goods and services (using the medium of currency) every week.
>>703590351
I agree. But for some reason i think "ruling class" more as police and government than millionaires.
MIllionaries gives me work. Government takes my money and freedom.
>>703590447
Yes, capitalism can only function so long as there is a class that does not own private property and capital. The boirgeoisie are dependant on the workers to work and mantian the factories they own. If the workers resist they are supressed by state sanctioned violence.
>>703590480
Anarchists have the same goal as communists, destruction of class, state and money.
>>703590748
>>703590127
How on earth did you come to that conclusion? If voluntary exchange doesn't benefit both parties involved then it wouldn't happen in the first place.
>>703590351
You just want to be the new ruling class. Stalin and Mao murdered more people than the Tzar and Qing emperors ever dreamed of.
>>703590830
>>703590891
>>703590924
>>703590978
>>703591010
>>703590801
Millonaires employ the police that are attack you. The state is the instrument they use to express their will.
And they do not provide work, all they do is move the capital produced by other workers into the hands of their workers to create a product to be sold for profit.
>>703591083
>>703586586
i'm slave to food i can't stop eating from trashcan that is impossible task.
>>703591127
>>703590480
I once arguesdwith left-side anarchist and he told me anarchism isnt about an-archy (statelessness), but rather it have certain traditions that made it what it is today. Reducing anarchism to forght for statelessness is ignoring large part of it.
>>703591198
>>703589842
You're arguing off of the ideal definition of communism. Communist Russia was indeed communist. The bread lines and the proletariat rhetoric were real.
The difference is DRPK may call themselves democratic, but rhetoric and actions speak louder than titles.
Nazis still promoted the uplifting of the working class and socialistic ideals
>>703591198
>tfw I don't a qt Bund Deutscher Mädel gf
>>703591239
>>703590827
That is NOT what anarchism is. Anarchy is simply a lack of a governing body. it advocates that people should to be free to make their own choices and keep all of what they earn and produce for themselves, to do with as they see fit, as is their moral right.
Communism attempts to force everyone to be the same by abolishing private property in the name of 'the common good'.
They actually couldn't be any different.
>>703591428
>1428 ▶
>File: 1469189112977.jpg (154 KB, 313x507)
>>703585908
Turn to the truth of True Roman Gods!
>>703590838
Because the study of capitalist evonomics only examines exchange to a serious degree. If you are to understand the explotation at hand, you must examine the sphere of production. Captialists can only generate a profit off of selling products developed from the raw materials that is refined by their workers. The workers are not given the full compensation for the value of their labor, otherwise the profit of the product would directly to him, not to the capitalist who did not spend his time to generate the product.
>>703585908
nazi on the right and not the left? What a joke. whoever made that is retarded
Far left should be nazi,liberalism should be classical liberal and moved to the first step right, with its place being taken by progressives
>>703591486
>>703591569
>>703591095
>Millonaires employ the police that are attack you.
You misspelled "cities." Which are run by officers elected by the masses.
>>703591269
If I create a fuedalistic state without any barons, knights, kings, or lords of any sort, all while calliblng myself a fuedalist, can it truly be called a fuedal state?
>>703591201
I'm afraid that's exactly what it is though. The good news is that in an anarchist society if you and your buddies want to form your own communist commune them you can go right ahead. So long as you don't impose on the rights of others, no one should give a shit.
>>703585908
Anarchy is true freedom
Government is literally the giving up of freedoms for security
NO GODS, NO MASTERS
>>703591729
The legislators are lobbied and bought by the ruling claas to protect their interests. It is very rare that the working class organize and demand referendum to serve their interests.
In fact, when they did back in the 1920's and 30's they recived many of their demands like 8 hour work days, minnimum wage, and safer working conditions.
>>703589401
>Left = larger central government, right = smaller.
Because the Nazis were know to show fiscal restraint and to let free enterprise flourish. Oh wait, no there weren't.
>>703591865
Thanks!
>>703590827
>Yes, capitalism can only function so long as there is a class that does not own private property and capital.
What kind of non-sense is this? Capitalism can and will work for society where everyone has equal capital at the begining as well. People will always trade their stuff, since different people have better conditions to make different stuff.
>The boirgeoisie are dependant on the workers to work and mantian the factories they own.
fair enough, but i dont see it as a bad thing. I mean - i work in their factory, they give me money. Sounds like fair deal. And its not like selling all those automobile parts i make is NOT work. Its work as well.
>If the workers resist they are supressed by state sanctioned violence
I dont really follow. Why would i resist, since the trade with those is good for me? How would i resist?
>>703590480
>If your're a communist, you're not an Anarchist
A stable, anarchic state was the end goal of communism.
>>703590631
>Ultimately Fascism leads to freedom
Fascism leads to the freedom of a small ruling elite only.
>>703591541
The workers aren't fucking slaves... They're not handcuffed to the production line with guns to their heads. They can stop working and leave whenever they want. The owner of the factory owns the factory because he payed for it to be built. He bought the materials from someone who took the time to take them out of the ground and put them together into something useful. Not only dose this benefit him but it benefits the local population by providing job opportunities that they can choose to take part in if they so wish. Stop acting like a fucking victim because you didn't try in school.
>>703590801
You won't be 16 for ever, though.
>>703591547
I agree it's retarded, but the Nazis were a far right fascist party, period. They suspended the german constitution every four years declaring a State of Emergency in order to control production to finance war. They had no interest outside of war of controlling the means of production. Most people confuse them with socialists because they called themselves National Socialists, but all that meant to them was that any German no mater how poor was worth more than any foreigner.
>>703592296
>They can stop working and leave whenever they want.
You've obviously don't have much experience with the real world.
>>703591095
>Millonaires employ the police that are attack you
Should i agree (which i am not sure i do), i would reiterate that problem is state - not the millionaires.
State is hurtful by its very exxistence, since it need taxes to exist. Rich people? They dont hurt me inherently.
>And they do not provide work, all they do is move the capital produced by other workers into the hands of their workers to create a product to be sold for profit.
Dotn forget addin selling the said products on the list. And it DOES sound like work to me. Maybe not physical work - but mental work can be just as taxing.
>>703592129
Captialism does not function on the equal ownership of captial. If the land and capital used for profit were equally divided, then it would be impossible for a capitalist to generate a profit. He has no position to leverage others into working for him.
The trade may seem beneficial for you, the individual, but your class remains subservient to your bosses.
>>703592166
But see. Calling yourself an anarchist, they saying you want a government to regulate the free market and control private property is like saying the sky is blue only to imminently state that the sky is in fact red, but still blue. I.e, a logical black hole of nonsense.
>>703592005
All of which were enacted by legislators. You know, the people you claim to be slaves to entrenched interests?
>>703592166
>anarchic state
That's fucking hilarious. I can't believe people buy into that garbage.
>>703592461
I'm sorry is that not a fact? Are you voluntarily working for the or not? If you're not then you're being force to, i.e you're a slave. So which is it?
>>703592558
But the state arises first as a means to ease class disparites and then is repurposed over time to protect the wealthy classes interests. If we look at the foundations of civilization, only when a small part of the population owns productive land, does he begin to have power over those without land.
And the capitalists do not personally sell their products, it is the salespeople, yet more workers who negotiate the trade and movement of capital and products.
>>703592842
This
>>703592461
Oh fuck you. Every capitalistic worker is free to quit. Any time, for no reason. At WORST, you may be limited by a contract that you, personally, negotiated and signed. And even then, American courts have repeatedly uphold that violating a contract is a fundamental right. Everyone can always do it.
You're implication that people voluntarily working at a job for wages is analogous to the quasi or actual slave labor enforced by authoritarian regimes is a fucking lie.
>>703592748
Exactly, because the condtions were so terrible during the great depression, that the workers were forced to take action as a class. They proved that a class concious and organized movement is capable of attaining their goals.
This is equally true of the bourgeoisie. When they are aware of their class' role in society, they will work in their interest to protect themselves from the working class. It is in each classes economic interests to oppose one another.
>>703585908
> Anarchism is a logical progression from communism
Are you daft or just being intentionally dense?
Your diagram is rubbish.
>>703593041
Explain that to the sweatshop workers in China and India whose families will die if they do not work for a wage.
>>703591541
>The workers are not given the full compensation for the value of their labor
Since they agreed to work for certain wage, i'd assume value of their labor is just that - their wage.
You seem to imply that the labor has some kind of intrinsic value - how do you measure it?
I dont think there is one - for worker its more valuble to have his wage, than forty hours of free time. Vice versa for capitalists. They why they complement each other.
>otherwise the profit of the product would directly to him, not to the capitalist who did not spend his time to generate the product
Worker earns too! He's free of risk. He will get his money, even if product wont sell or go bad, or something. And that is significant.
Also, selling the stuff and organizing big company is work just as well, dont you think?
>>703585908
>anarchy
>slavery
u wot m8
>>703593258
The premise of this is a lie. There are no "classes" in America. People move up and down economically and socially all the time. Until recently, the trend was always up over time.
All that "class" bullshit in Marxist theory is a holdover from feudal Europe. It has no place in America. The closest that it ever came was racial laws, and even that varied wildly over time and place.
>>703593401
They're free to leave. Just because it would be inconvenient doesn't mean they're enslaved.
And I notice you're pointing out third world developing nations that were ruled by socialists for decades, and trying to slip them in as relevant to a conversation about America.
You sneaky fuck.
>>703593414
But the workers most often than not are not voluntarily working for the boss. If they do not work for wages then they will not have money to buy housing, food and ither necessities.
And labour itself has no value, it is what is generated by the labour where value is found.
>Worker earns too! He's free of risk. He will get his money, even if product wont sell or go bad, or something. And that is significant
But due to the inherent instability of markets, failed investments or decisions made by the capitalists could spell destruction for the company, and by extension the workers of that company.
>>703593616
There are people with productive property and those without. Those with with can enjoy a generally comfortable life, and thise without must sell their labour in order to earn living wages. Simply having a lot of money is not enough to be of a ruling class.
>>703593806
So too am I free to chop my arm off, but that does not mean I wish to. And have you ever wondered why those third world companies are so reliant on first world companies and corporations to function? It is because those same companies enslaved the native populations, extracted the natiral resources, occupied the land, and did everything in their power to halt development.
>>703593865
>And labour itself has no value
That's not true.
>construction
>skilled trades
>lawyers
>physicians
>accountants
>>703594497
I can go dig a whole in the forest but there is no intrinsic value to what I've done until that labour is used for some practical purpose.
>>703585908
selfishness does seem to be what fucks all these things up in the end. I see it on the smallest scale to the largest scale.
>>703592331
I am not anymore. And i missed your point?
>>703592612
>equal ownership of captial
Oh. I was talking about initial conditions, where everyone will have his own piece of capital and can do whatever the hell he'll pleas with it.
In scenario you offer (capital is community owned and earnings are equally divided) things are going to be different, for sure. And i fear you offer good point - without possibility to earn, most people wont work (as much).
Sure, you can probably argue that not working as much is better.
Also, everyone would receive same amounts of watermelons and cars - while some dont care about former or latter or either. They probably would trade those with other people to better appease their unique tastes.
>>703594696
So do something practical dumb ass. Something people will give a shit about and pay for. Are you kidding me with this crap?
>>703590631
>Ultimately Fascism leads to freedom
kys
>>703586411
Fascism is not different from corrupt socialism. And communism is the final goal of both socialism and anarchism. Nobody got there yet.
>>703594815
The situation you describe, where the inital condtions are equal and peoples needs are met, is actually a fairly communistic ideal, material abundance and so on.
>>703592982
>But the state arises first as a means to ease class disparites
States were formed by warriors who coerces weaker into giving them their stuff. (Which institution we know today as "taxes".)
Admitedly, today state is somewhat different.
>>703591269
No. The USSR was never Communist. Even Comrade Stalin said this.
It was Socialist, on its way to Communism before Kruschev "de-Stalinized" the country.
>>703595248
Yes, but those warriors first had to have their needs met by the men who owned farms that produced food necessary for villages, towns and cities. The aforementioned warriors then mantain the oeace by keeping the farmhands from resisting against the landowners.
Capitalism is unique in how it has streamlined the social relationships.
>>703591445
>What is Anarchist-Communism?
Peter Kropotkin is rolling in his grave right now.
>>703593865
>But the workers most often than not are not voluntarily working for the boss.
Well, that's true. But you dont usually need to work for this particular boss.
>If they do not work for wages then they will not have money to buy housing, food and ither necessities
If you didnt need to work in order to get food - someone else would be forced to make said food to you... for free. That doesnt seem fair.
>>703593616
>All that "class" bullshit in Marxist theory is a holdover from feudal Europe.
What year do you live in?
>>703585908
How fucking stupid are to think anarchy is slavary when it's all about freedom, fucking kek
>>703585908
10/10 just for the image op you weren't a faggot today.
>>703595764
>If you didnt need to work in order to get food - someone else would be forced to make said food to you... for free. That doesnt seem fair.
People like you don't need to be discussing Communism if you don't even understand how it works.
What if... crazy idea here... What if we ALL contributed to society and reaped the benefits of it all rather than having it artificially rationed out using the price mechanism?!
>>703595855
>ancom
>It's current year
what next? "YOU'RE A WHITE MALE"?
Typical pinko bullshit, kill yourself
>>703585908
Anarchism is not a furthered state of communism socialism or any left-ism. The farther you are to the left the more you keep everyone as a union with less branching freedoms and more social systems, while monarchism is not farther right as its less power to the people and a stronger central govt power. This post and this entire thread is garbage.
>>703593865
>it is what is generated by the labour where value is found
Oh. That only moves problem one step further - do you imply that the product of labor has some kind of intrinsic value - how do you measure it?
ad risk: I admit that sayin worker is free of irsk was exaggeration. Point stands, though. You're moving risk to your employer.
>>703595764
>Well, that's true. But you dont usually need to work for this particular boss
Precisely. Remove the boss, the work continues, remove the workers and nothing is accomplished.
>
If you didnt need to work in order to get food - someone else would be forced to make said food to you... for free. That doesnt seem fair
Not necessarily. Our modern economy is so productive that not everyone has to work, and those who do only need to do minimal amounts of work to meet everyones needs. The only thing standing in the way of that is private ownership, rather than democratic ownership, of the means of production.
>>703596027
Uhhh. What?
Classes exist. There's no debate about it.
>>703596058
union being an equalized baseline, not like a sense of togetherness.
>>703594368
>And have you ever wondered why those third world companies are so reliant on first world companies and corporations to function? It is because those same companies enslaved the native populations, extracted the natiral resources, occupied the land, and did everything in their power to halt development.
Silly me. I thought it was because they eschewed capitalism as an Imperialistic remnant and instead reverted to dirt farming and brute force industrialization by five year plans. You know. Like how what modern Chinese and Indians complain about their idiot ancestors doing.
ANYONE can buy productive property. ANYONE can build productive property. Those who do not, choose not to. The poorest fucker in American can buy stocks and bonds, if he chooses.
You simply assume things are true that are not. You state conclusions that require proof as though they are obviously facts. "People with productive property enjoy comfortable lives." Oh, like farmers? How about small businessmen, the first casualties of the regulatory state? How fucking easy are their lives?
How are you even real? You sound like an academic Marxist from 1942, totally disconnected from the horrific realities of your bankrupt ideology.
Did oppressive system you're whining about subsidize your brainwashing?
>>703595106
Except in time, different people would have different capital as well. In time, some would loose it, some would save it, some would invest it.
That situation is unstable.
>>703586411
Hitler was against imperialistic capitalism of jews, but his idiology about socialism is completely opposote from the original idea of Marx. He was supporting capitalism and German companies and stripped away the rights from the working class. No Nazism is not left wing it's the end of the right wing
>>703595077
>Nobody got there yet
And no one ever will.
>>703596329
But why shouldn't it be invested jointly with others to meet the needs of everyone? If I can come to an agreement with my fellow workers that would meet both mine and their needs, what reason have I to accumlate capital?
>>703596090
Robots could grow us food for free. But we would need to stop increasing the population.
Either robots working for the Station, or everybody having a robot that works for them or taxing companies using automatic workforce would work.
Allowing companies to go from full human labor to full automatic without taxing it would led either to economical meltdown (nobody has money to buy stuff) or to massive genocide (95% of population is not neccessary)
>>703596115
Bullshit. You people pretend that 'classes' are fixed things, institutions within which people are trapped forever until you communist heroes come along and save them by mobilizing the proletariat.
That's a fucking lie. The ranks of the rich and powerful are full of people born poor and weak, from Bill Gates on. People rise and fall all the time.
At best, 'class' is a roughly descriptive label slapped onto a loosely related group at a moment in time. The age of the Estates General is over.
>>703596636
State, not Station, sorry
Left and right are on the same side.
>>703596318
>implying the USSR wasn't a success for Socialism
kek
>
ANYONE can buy productive property. ANYONE can build productive property. Those who do not, choose not to. The poorest fucker in American can buy stocks and bonds, if he chooses.
ANYONE can murder ANYONE else too! Guess what? There's this thing called consequences in societies. If the poorest person in America is buying stocks and bonds, they won't be alive much longer. Your entire basis for this argument boils down to "hurr durr we have the freedom to do whatever we want so everyone should be successful hurrrrrrr".
Literally you.
> bankrupt ideology.
Obviously never studied Marx, Engels or Lenin.
Get it together kiddo, you're completely misinformed.
>>703596356
>stripped away the rights from the working class.
That's simply a lie. Aside from the racial stuff, Nazi laws were a wish list of leftist initiatives from gun confiscation to universal healthcare to minimum wages and workplace standards to state-run care centers for single mothers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn
>>703596318
Because gambling on stocks is certainly in the minds of landless peasants in third world countries. And even if they were afforded the chance to purchase land and start productive enterprises, they woukd be pushed out of the market by the already established companies and corporations.
You seem quite angry about all this anon.
>>703596696
Rags to riches stories in America are statistically insignificant.
Social mobility in the US is lower than most first-world countries because we abide by antique systems of political economy that hasn't kept up with technological progression in terms of production.
You're free to have your opinion, but some are more valid than others, and some are... well, like yours.
>>703596875
Being forced out of the market by unfair practices is the final result of neoliberalism and the birth to a bunch of megacorporations that would be fascist states.
>>703597081
>not realizing that neoliberalism and fascism are still right-leaning ideologies
>>703596813
>>implying the USSR wasn't a success for Socialism
>Death and slavery is better than freedom.
Kill yourself.
Nice threads, fags!
But i need to go. It was nice discussing with you.
>>703596636
Yes, automation could either be the salvation or downfall of humanity. And the answer to which road we take will depend on whether we chose to resign ourselves to capitalism, or if we chose to forge a new society where the needs of all are met.
It isn't to absurd when you think of the drastic changes that shaped the world in the last century.
>>703597081
Yes, and neoliberalism is the essence of late stage capitalism.
>>703591541
The value of their labor is not an intrinsic property of their labor. Value is not an objective thing, but rather something we assign.
They are given full compensation for their labor, minus taxes that pay for public goods.
Nothing has intrinsic value. Get over it.
>>703597168
>b-b-but muh soviet famine and stalin killed all those people
Read a fucking book sometime.
>>703597158
Right is an old concept. Much better to separate political from economical. Some can be joined together like anarcho-communism
>>703597289
>Nothing has intrinsic value. Get over it.
Prove it?
>>703597311
Communism is great, look at this image
>communist image saying communism is great
>>703596875
>gambling on stocks
>wut are dividends?
>Social mobility in the US is lower than most first-world countries
Fucking what? In Europe, people are fast food chefs, waiters, and grocery store clerks PROFESSIONALLY. Forever. That's their *career.* And it's *normal.*
>some are more valid than others, and some are... well, like yours.
>'You're wrong because reasons'
Super persuasive.
>>703597448
You obviously didn't read it.
It's just much easier to post that than type it all out.
If you won't even read the image, you shouldn't embarrass yourself by replying.
>>703597351
No, you prove something has intrinsic value. My position is just the reasonable one when no evidence for something is shown.
But hell, I will give you an argument. Which value could there be if there were no minds?
Intrinsic value derived from labor is the god of communism and it is unfalsifiable as fuck.
>>703589949
>>703589844
The only war is Class war. There are no races, no genders that divine us only classes. So let's braek the burier and bring freedom to us all (A) (E)
How do you take one step from Communism to Anarchy?
Fucking youngfags I tell ya.
>>703597190
Well, just copying ancient greek city-states that give you at least one robot to you or that coordinate all the slave robots and give you at least the neccessary to survive, no matter how succesful you are.
However, birthing of new humans must be regulated.
>>703597311
>Read a fucking book sometime.
Like this one?
>>703597476
People in Europe and the U.S. are living in much better condtions than Guatemalan farmers or landless peasants in East Timor anon.
>>703597476
>
Fucking what? In Europe, people are fast food chefs, waiters, and grocery store clerks PROFESSIONALLY. Forever. That's their *career.* And it's *normal.*
They also have better wage-to-cost-of-living ratios and more social programs to assist. You know, like government has always been meant to do. If government was supposed to be hands-off, we may as well just be living in caves as hunters and gatherers again.
>>703597311
>Read a fucking book sometime.
How about this one?
>>703597579
>I can't so I'll pretend the burden of proof is on you.
Okay.
>>703597657
>>703597726
>let's focus on only the bad and not the 100% employment, 96% literacy, paid maternal leave, vacation time, universal living wages, free universal healthcare and education, the most stable economy the world has ever seen for 6 straight decades, and most importantly the furthering of Marx's ideals in the form of Marxism-Leninism.
You cucks are pathetic. Is this how you really intend to prove yourselves right?
>>703597660
...so?
>>703597662
>have better wage-to-cost-of-living ratios
Never been to Europe, have you?
>>703597630
I don't think it will resemble to greek slave system, but rather that factories, farms, and even transporation will be almost entirely automated, and the increased efficency and subsequent material abundance would essentially solve any scarcity problems.
>>703597857
I live there. Norway, to be exact.
>>703597855
Behold the superior system. Bread lines.
>>703597657
Contributors to the BBC admittted that it's author inflated the tolls to reach the 100 million mark.
And capitalism has no moral high ground discussing deaths.
>>703597959
>>703597855
And 60 years later, shoe lines.
>>703597959
>>703598007
What's your point?
>>703597873
Well, the old Greek system would be efficient. Perhaps they would need a world-sized government to coordinate all human exploitation of Earth, but local governments are more efficient to address citizen's problems.
>>703597855
It is though. When you believe in a labour theory of value, you are implying intrinsic valiue exists when there is no evidence this is the case. In fact without minds capable of subjectivity, there would be no value, since it is assigned by them.
Stop being dumb.
>>703597857
So people in Europe and the U.S. enjoy the opportunity to gain money on the stock market and open productive enterprises. There situation is not analogous to those of peasants and workers in the third world.
>>703597882
Norway isn't in the EU. I forget you exist. Consider this [pic].
The conversation was about social mobility. You seem to be excusing the lack of it in Europe. Which is fine. My point is that there isn't much, and you seem to agree.
>>703598168
Let me know how my McDonald's salary allows me to survive, save money for the future AND gamble in the stock market.
Seriously, I'm spanish
>>703586399
You're retarded yourself?
>>703591781
No, and that was exactly the point of his post you mongoloid.
>>703598054
You've defended the murder of millions, runaway inflation and starvation, and the lack of freedom or ability to purchase basic items of civilization like shoes. All is justified, so long as you and those like you obtain power.
Your utter moral bankruptcy is my point. Your indifference to the lives and suffering of the workers you pretend to care about and use to justify your powerlust is my point.
Thanks for making it for me.
>>703598166
NEWS FLASH
You're discussing philosophy - particularly the branch of it called political economy. The whole "evidence" thing has no place here. These system are modified to reflect and interact with the mechanisms of the real world, not the other way around.
Any other theory of value is just as subjective. We subscribe to these beliefs because they make the most sense logically based on our own knowledge and experience - knowledge being paramount to experience in the case of philosophy.
So instead of calling me dumb, how about you consider how your pseudo-scientific approach to philosophy is flawed, and unfortunately for you, useless.
>>703598312
In US context:
$9 hour, 40 hours a week, 4 weeks a month = $1440 a month. Rent for a single person varied wildly in the US among cities, but in a medium sized town can probably be had for $500 or so. Less if you have a roommate.
That leaves $940 for everything else. If you spend $300 on food and $300 on other crap, you still have $340 left over.
That's more than $3000 surplus per year (I'm discounting tax withholdings, which will also vary greatly) before you get promoted or otherwise find a better job.
>>703598444
So what do you subscribe to?
Fascism? I can point to moral bankruptcy there.
Capitalism? Hell, that's even more than Communism!
Socialism? It's a path to Communism, so they can be combined.
No ideology is bought without a blood price. Not a single one. So the question we have to ask ourselves is: which one produces the most good for the price we pay?
Without question, the answer is Communism, especially if you want to argue morality and ethics.
>>703597855
>100% employment
Irrelevant. Jobs are the means to an end. Who cares about employment when you have a good living standard anyway?
>96% literacy
And 100% brainwashing and with no alternative
>paid maternal leave
Yes, that is exclusive of socialism...moron
>universal living wages
And shitty living standards
>free universal heaelthcare and education
Shitty too
>the most stable economy
Ignore Sweden and the Switzerland
>>703598312
You can't. Most of this board are teenagers who have never worked an actual job in their lives. They will soon realize that their free market "anybody can make it" dream is not based in reality.
>>703598749
Rent is actually higher than that.
Also you forget car payments, insurance payments, and there's no room left over for emergencies if you have to go to the hospital or need maintenance on your vehicle.
And most small cities don't have good public transportation, so don't give me shit about taking a cab or a bus.
>>703598855
All forms of government eventually crumble. Syndicalist/anarchist societies will eventually reign supreme.
>>703598931
See:>>703598749
Surely you can manage basic arithmetic?
>>703598855
>sure, communism is morally bankrupt, authoritarian, and awful, but it's still the best!
>the answer is Communism, especially if you want to argue morality and ethics.
Arguing with the state is illegal in communist countries.
Pic = Lubyanka, where dissident Russians were executed in the basement.
>>703599013
Plus utilities, plus internet,
Also even if rent was 500$ a month (LOL) 300$ for "other crap" such as toiletries, detergents, clothes, entertainment is very low indeed.
Inb4 "hurrr you do not need entertainment"
>>703598879
>Irrelevant. Jobs are the means to an end. Who cares about employment when you have a good living standard anyway?
Don't be stupid. Productivity is always a means to an end. Does that mean employment rates in the US are irrelevant too?
>And 100% brainwashing and with no alternative
No "brainwashing", and Lenin designed the USSR so that any province that wanted to leave could. And some did. So fuck off with your uninformed bullshit.
>Yes, that is exclusive of socialism...moron
HURR DURR WHAT IS CONTEXT
The USSR was one of the first countries to introduce this - well before most first-world Capitalist nations.
>And shitty living standards
Compared to what? All standards of living during the time of the USSR were improved from the reign of Tsar Nicholas II. So fuck off with your uninformed bullshit.
>Shitty too
Source? Or should I give you mine that says that they were comparable to the US and UK during most of the USSR's reign?
>Ignore Sweden and the Switzerland
No. The USSR's economy was THE most stable economy that ever existed. Even moreso than Sweden and Switzerland. Can point you toward sources if you don't believe me.
>>703585908
Anarchism isn't quite slavery. Unless you're a bitch.
>>703585908
Destruction is simply part of human nature.
>As for people saying NAZIs are right wing
The NAZI party was the national socialist party of Germany. It gained power by making the German working, and poor believe that the Jews, who where mostly wealthy at the time, had been leaching of the German people to gain their wealth. Like all socialist, the professed idea was to punish the wealthy, and redirect the wealth to the people. However like all socialist movements this became an impossibility due to the fact that for such a thing to work, all people need to be in agreement about,
>who the wealth will go to
>what happens to detractors
>definition of too rich
>and how to keep people from simply living as leeches
This ultimately led to the final solution, as it seemed that negating diversity was the only way to have a consensus.
>>703599038
I've seen many groups of friends being led by the most charismatic person to believe it would work
>>703598656
Not all theories of value assume value is intrinsic nor objective. The honest approach is saying that value is something we give to the stuff around us and not pretending it is something inherent to these objects.
Also if evidence has no place here, and apparently logic neither since you are just going to go around and jump into the position that make you feel better, then it is not worth discussing it since essentially you are just a bunch of monkeys flinging shit at each other from different starting points.
Also news flash, dumbass. Knowledge is belief that matches reality. How in the fuck are you trying to match it with reality if there is no place for evidence? You commies sure are dense.
>>703599387
>Samefag here.
If people really want a good example of right wing tyranny, the best place to look is the Catholic church.
>>703587037
Where's the ultra-violence?
>>703599255
You clearly cannot manage basic arithmetic.
I dunno in which bumfuckville you live but rent is higher than 500$ a month in the civilized world.
Eating on 10$ a day is also a very meager living but let's pretend that is feasible. 10$ a day for utilities (that you conveniently left out) +clothes +toiletries +detergents +car payments +internet +entertainment is not even close to feasible.
Obviously you are still living with your parents.
>>703599013
What do you think the "$300 for other crap" was for? Burning?
You can buy a used car that runs for $2k or less, financed. Hospitals are obligated to treat patients in emergencies, period; you don't need a bundle of cash for that. Or you can just buy into that awesome Obamacare everyone talks about!
Pic = first hit on rent.com for $500 or less apartments in an upscale suburb of a major city. Huh.
>>703599558
>nothing says proof like a quick google search!
>what are start-up costs?
>what does it mean to get a 2k car financed?
You should get out more.
>>703585908
ur chart is retarded
>would anyone disagree that all political ideologies are doomed to fail because of the inherent selfishness of man?
Argumentum ad populum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
So your chart is retarded and your question is logically flawed.
There is the potential to destroy the selfishness of man but unfortunately we are not at a technologically sufficient point to satisfy the need for unlimited resources.
Until we have gotten to that time we must engage with the tumultuous practice of constant shifting to force technology to increase exponentially because any stable system will attempt to impede technology for the sake of control.
>>703586118
nazism is right wing but fascism can slide left and right. The same applies to anarchism. It's because you're dealing with the libertarian/authoritarian dichotomy, which can be applied to socialism as readily as they can be applied to capitalism.
In other words, this guys scale is shitty. But Nazism in practice is actually a right wing ideology. But in reality it's not that important. Nobody in modern political discourse is anywhere near nazism. The most radical people expressing ideas anymore fall in the anarchist camp, and that's a much less harmful version of radicalism than authoritarian radicalism has the potential to be.
In other words, nazism is no longer relevant.
>>703599013
Rent is actually higher than that.
>>703599311
>even if rent was 500$ a month (LOL)
>>703599540
>I dunno in which bumfuckville you live but rent is higher than 500$ a month in the civilized world.
See: >>703599558
You people think you know everything, don't you?
As for food, learn to cook. It's waaay cheaper. Rice, potatoes, vegetables, chicken, oil, cereal, milk, fruit, nuts. An entire week's worth of calories, $35. My wife and I both ate comfortably for less than $80 a week in our first place.
Also, food stamps and public assistance for utilities and medical care exist.
>>703599697
>You should get out more.
You're the one who doesn't know how to finance a car.
>>703590891
Goddamn that is gonna hurt the titty when she lets the string go
>>703592240
But it does lead to freedom
>>703599477
Not the same guy.
Labour has value because it costs resources. That's how value works. We expend time and effort into production. Sure, value can be subjective - that's why a pair of Asics costs about the same to make as a pair of Nikes, but the price tag is multiplied for the latter.
Your evidence is evident. If you produce, you use resources. Resources have opportunity costs. If you are losing something in an opportunity cost, a rational decision maker will gain something in what he or she chose to do. Your claim that "there is no evidence that labour has no intrinsic value" is specious at best.
And the other anon was partially right. If political economy was a science, we wouldn't need the dialectic.
Have you ever heard of Aristotle's "The Argument to End all Arguments?" Well it's basically your concept of "a bunch of monkies flinging shit at each other from different starting points." All of us make assumptions about things, all of which require validation or evidence to be proved true, but each validation and piece of evidence must be examined as well.
If you're particularly clever (like a 12 year old) you'll see that there's an infinite regression here. All arguments, even scientific observations, are at some point based on blind belief that both parties in a dialectical discussion must agree to or else a discussion can never be started.
>>703599954
I'm in FL, rent is about $500 a month.
>>703600039
Actually, I worked as a manager at a company that financed cars for 4 years.
Don't tell me shit about how car financing works. The entire industry is built on exploiting poor people.
>>703600204
hey, i'd maybe move down there. city/sq footage/room layout?
>>703599954
Learn to cook? Convenient the apartments in the screenshot you provided DO NOT HAVE A KITCHEN!
>>703600346
top kek
>>703598312
You survive and try to get education/training in something else.
My brother dropped out of school when he was 16 and now he makes $30 an hour plus bonuses and a company truck and gas card as a superintendent with a commercial drywall/framing company in a cheap to live in state.
I made $16 an hour within a year, starting off knowing nothing with a framing company just because I'm not a total drunk and can do geometry.
It's intimidating to get into that stuff but they stick you with somebody to train you and you get comfortable fast and can make a lot more money.
Illegal Mexican drywall hangers can make $1500 a week cash piece working.
There is money to be made but you have to broaden your horizons and get out of your comfort zone, which has always been true.
There are still plenty of jobs you can walk into at an entry level that you can actually move up in and make better money.
Sticking with fast food joints and retail stuff is just most people's initial comfort zone because it's most people's first job, and that's what it is, a first job or supplemental income for old people.
>>703600346
this is a really good point. even where i live, one of the most affordable places in america, it costs quite a bit to get a decent kitchen.
cooking, especially for one, isn't always an option.
>>703600395
>nothing proves my argument more than my own anecdotal experience!!!
>>703600341
Most suburban areas, but that's living with a roommate in a house, which if you don't mind sharing some stuff isn't that bad.
obligatory
>>703600395
If it was as easy as you say, more people would be doing it.
>>703600346
>apartments in the screenshot you provided DO NOT HAVE A KITCHEN!
Liar.
>>703600523
what's the job market like down there?
I'm in wichita kansas. a move is fucking due.
>>703599739
Not the OP, but you are retarded aswell.
Argomentum ad popolum means that you are using the fact that a lot of people believes the same thing to make the sais thing real.
In the other hand OP is saying that "everybody is selfish" so it's a generalization flaw
>>703600292
So... it's possible for poor people to finance cars? And it happens so often, there are companies that specialize in it?
How interesting.
>>703600636
Depends really. A lot of retired fucks down here so it's pretty good since they're not working. Some areas it sucks though.
>>703599373
In that order:
Yes, given a universal income and technological progress, that shit is irrelevant.
Yes brainwashing, just like with any system that enforces education with the aim to preserver itself. Your "could leave if they wanted" is basically the capitalist argument of "find another job" on a bigger scale.
Good for them. But that has nothing to do with the pillars of capitalism of free market and private property.
Nice job using the reign of the Tsar as a point for comparison.
Yes, both were shitty endoctrination camps that care not about actually developing skills beyond what is needed to fill a position in the system. How about education based on a mathematical meta-analysis of the fields of knowledge themselves instead of the bullshittery of the decade or private interests?
Point towards the source of you mentioned.
>>703600557
People don't do it because they're lazy and think manual labor carries a stigma.
I earned $10-12 an hour doing work like that in High School back in the 90s, when $12/hr was more like $16/hr today. I ran wire for electricians, laid pipe, cured concrete, roofed houses, etc. And I was just a kid. Guys who specialized and did it professionally made pretty good money.
>>703600691
Yeah. On average, 33% of them lose their cars in 6 months because the financing terms are ridiculous - and pretty standard across the board. Furthermore, over half of them are repossessed by the end of the first 2 years and only about 20% of the finance contracts are brought to term. Those people are then promptly sued and garnished. The entire business model is based on re-selling the same vehicle multiple times over the course of a few years.
You're being facetious and pretending that your "pure logical ability" is infallible.
Actually fuck it, you're just trolling anyway.
>>703599373
>The USSR's economy was THE most stable economy that ever existed.
Well, when no disruption is allowed and the whole thing is centrally planned by a committee in Five Year Plans, and middle managers who don't report good numbers are 'disappeared,' of course it's "stable."
Read: stagnant.
>>703590480
>>703592166
One thing leads to another...
>>703587037
no eco-anarchism?
>>703586118
>>703586411
>T-They called themselves socialists, s-so they must be, even if they didn't act like socialists!
No wonder everyone thinks this website is full of retards.
>>703600964
Nah. I'm just irritated by whiny fucks who insist that poor people are trapped forever in some sort of perpetual cycle of poverty because math, when I, personally, managed to get out through budgeting, work, and good decisions.
Should have bought stocks, though. Would've split by now.
>>703587037
>national socialism
>left
FFS nazism is fascism combined with biological nationalism, how are people this retarded
>>703600192
The fact it costs resources means absolutely nothing. You are just kicking the can down the road. Why do these resources have the value you implied they have if not because we assign it?
I know axioms are required, but why choose axioms based on what makes us feel better or what we prefer because whatever instead of trying to keep the assumption as few as we can and use reason (which includes a nice set of axioms) and evidence in order to create a system and tech that allows us to live as we goddamn please by our motherfucking standards without retarded impositions pulled out of someones ass and fake as shit greater good? This is pretty obvious, even for a 12 year old like myself.
>>703601128
See: 703596871
>>703600844
>Yes, given a universal income and technological progress, that shit is irrelevant.
Exactly. Communism is inevitable because of this. Right now, necessities are abundant enough that we don't need prices for them. Eventually, other things will be as well. That's kinda the whole point of Communist theory.
>Yes brainwashing, just like with any system that enforces education with the aim to preserver itself.
So all education is brainwashing? Alright.
> Your "could leave if they wanted" is basically the capitalist argument of "find another job" on a bigger scale.
And yet, countries still left. But the countries wouldn't starve if they left.
>Good for them. But that has nothing to do with the pillars of capitalism of free market and private property.
Who said it was supposed to? The government's entire purpose is to hold its constituents above a state of nature through regulation. Paid maternal leave isn't something you'll find out living in the wilderness.
>Nice job using the reign of the Tsar as a point for comparison.
Well yeah. Lenin overturned the Tsar. And not even a decade later, he got them out of World War I, ended a civil war and started the USSR which improved the living standards of everyone compared to the Tsar's rule. I don't see your point.
Your last point is just bullshit you made up.
>>703601200
And fascism is a leftist ideology, meant to empower common people under an all-powerful paternal state. So...
>>703600987
Well yes. Stagnant. The western capitalist-imperialistic ideology of constantly increasing economic production is a trademark of capitalism. You're trying to apply it to a Socialist or Communist economy, which "stagnates" (read: stabilizes) as its primary mode of existence.
Capitalism has to always grow or it fails, which means it's unsustainable. Communism can ACTUALLY STOP ITS ECONOMIC GROWTH AND NOT FAIL. CAN YOU BELIEVE IT?
Calling it "stagnating" is trying to make a problem where there is none.
>>703585908
it's not the inherent selfishness of man that is the problem but rather man's inherent capacity for evil.
the most evil people on the planet have more than enough (as far as resources) to last multiple lifetimes over.
the reason that resources are not distributed equally is not because "man is selfish" but rather man has the capability of being evil.
only true evil would bring about the world we have today.
no political ideology is right or wrong and to think that is to miss the entire picture
>>703601161
>what is survivorship bias
>>703601251
>ended a civil war
You're giving Lenin credit for ending a civil war he started?
Communist mind bending perfidy has no limits.
>>703601414
I think you mean, "first hand experience."
And how dare I expect other people to live up to a standard that I myself have met. It's MUCH better to simply assume they're dumb animals incapable of helping themselves.
>>703600987
The USSR really wasn't ever a stable economy. After a short time the Urban population worked much shorter days in the factories, which led to reduced exports, and that cut into the nations ability to import food, as there was less money to spend on imports in general. This led to Russian agricultural areas being taxed more heavily in the form of actual product. Ultimately there was mass starvation in the rural areas, and this wasn't really reported to the population living in the urban areas, as the state wanted to keep the power centers loyal to the government. Honestly anytime you have market control in the hands of one faction you'll end up with disastrous results, regardless of whether the faction is of the state, or of the private sector.
>>703601389
>Communism can ACTUALLY STOP ITS ECONOMIC GROWTH AND NOT FAIL.
So... the population grows, as populations tend to do, but the amount of wealth does not, so less wealth is spread among a smaller number of people, increasing the misery of all.
And you think this is good.
No wonder communists always massacre their own citizens. They have to.
>>703601232
>The fact it costs resources means absolutely nothing.
This is your mistake, I can stop here. Can you prove this or make an argument for it? Because if it meant nothing, you would either labour infinitely or never labour at all. Which do you do?
>Why do these resources have the value you implied they have if not because we assign it?
Because opportunity costs. This is like Econ 101 man.
>I know axioms are required, but why choose axioms based on what makes us feel better or what we prefer because whatever instead of trying to keep the assumption as few as we can and use reason (which includes a nice set of axioms) and evidence in order to create a system and tech that allows us to live as we goddamn please by our motherfucking standards without retarded impositions pulled out of someones ass and fake as shit greater good? This is pretty obvious, even for a 12 year old like myself.
To be honest, this sounds like a personal problem.
The short answer to it is that society becomes different than a bunch of little individuals (whoo Sorites Paradox!!!) at the political and economic level. Society has to function as a whole instead of a bunch of moving parts or else we end up in a self-destructive system like the one in the 'States.
>>703601423
Lenin didn't start it. He was one of many factions that vied for power after HE took down the Tsar who was fucking Russia over.
>>703601513
No, I mean survivorship bias. You don't understand what it takes because you got lucky. You literally can't experience failing what you did because you succeeded. You have to look at the macro, not the micro.
>>703601599
>applying capitalistic principles to Communism again
I can't reply to that. It's like saying "How do you plan to get the orange peel off that apple?"
>>703591083
the girl looks like a man
>>703601938
>>703601938
thanks for your contribution anon
>>703585908
Leave it politically ignorant fucking americans to put nazism before fascism. You do fucking realize that nazism is fascism 2.0 right?
>>703601787
>Different fag here
Population growth is a variable which has to be included in any structure.
>>703601787
>You don't understand what it takes because you got lucky.
I worked my ass off to escape poverty, you little brat. Luck had nothing to do with it.
>>703601787
Lenin launched his revolution in October. Civil war began in November, when the Red Guard seized parts of the capital.
But yeah, he wasn't responsible for it. And the fact that he had an armed body ready for war was just a coincidence.
>>703602092
>politically ignorant Americans
>who defeated the NAZIS?
>who defeated the USSR?
>>703602104
And it is. A communist economy has plenty of leeway to make up for production increases, but it functions differently than in a free market system.
Going into this function, I could break it down in simple terms, but since the person I'm talking to has no clue how a Communist society actually functions, if I don't write an entire essay, he'll just jump at the first hole he sees. Better to just keep it simple.
>>703602191
>I worked my ass off to escape poverty. Luck had nothing to do with it.
WHAT IS SURVIVORSHIP BIAS
Luck had everything to do with it.
>Lenin launched his revolution in October. Civil war began in November, when the Red Guard seized parts of the capital.
>But yeah, he wasn't responsible for it. And the fact that he had an armed body ready for war was just a coincidence.
So I was right. And of course you're going to have an army in a time of political upheaval. If he couldn't defend his right to leadership, then he couldn't put his vision into play. The Mensheviks and the Whites were just going to pander back to Europe.
>>703585908
Nazism is worst then Fascism, should be righter
>>703595077
No you fucking ignorant moron. Anarchism is the end goal of communism and socialism is a lesser more democratic form of communism
>who is karl marx
>what is the communist manifesto
Jesus fucking christ.
>>703596731
Wow. the left graph was shitty,
the right graph is even worse. Impressive.
ANY uni-dimentional ( as in: a line) representation of a political ideology spectrum is the literal fucking definition of restricting free, independant thought in politics, independently of the order in which ideologies are placed
Politics is NOT uni dimentional.
It's not bidimentional, tridimentional of whatever the fuck your populist fucking graphics can think of.
The sheer fucking number of variables that creates an ideology cannot be represented on a dot in a fucking line.
To demonstrate :
Soviet Communism is a(n):
Industrialist (versus Green), Globalist (versus Nationalist), Militaristic, Centralized, Against Private Property, Faithless, Arbitrary ideology
Theoretical Neo-Liberalism is a(n):
Industrialist, Globalist, Anti-militaristic, Decentralized, For Private Property, Faithless, Somewhat Just Ideology
That covers 7 variables (spectrums) which are somewhat inter-connected by not dependant on each other.
Placing Liberalism on the right and Soviet Scummunism on the left is just fucking silly.
Stop that.
/thread
Pic unrelated
>>703602191
>I worked my ass off to escape poverty, you little brat. Luck had nothing to do with it.
hurr durr i don't want to believe that my privilege is the sole contributor to my success it's because i worked hard!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>703602655
Yeah, that's true, but it can be broken down into a biaxial pretty easily just based on type of government vs social policy.
So you can go fuck yourself.
>>703602422
>So I was right.
I was being sarcastic, you fucking moron. Armed Bolsheviks seized the capital in a surprise assault. They obviously and deliberately started the war.
>Luck had everything to do with it.
It's clear that you're just an arrogant child, who thinks he's always right and knows everything.
And who has so little value for work and labor that he assumes as a matter of course that anyone who succeeds does so merely because they were lucky.
Being crippled during military service in the Army? I was lucky.
Coming from a broken home where my father beat me? Lucky.
Living in the barrio, next door to a drug house that was raided by the SWAT team the first month I lived there? Lucky.
The 3.83 GPA I pulled in electrical engineering? All luck. Luck is what did my differential equations homework, and luck is what wrote my lab reports.
You're a stupid child, but you're too clever to see it. I'm going to bed. Speaking with you is a waste of time because you refuse to listen.
>>703602750
No It cannot.
you're either a fucking troll or a dumb motherfucker
Shove your ass up your trash compactor you populist scumlord
>>703602682
>my privilege
Fuck yourself, SJW. You have no credibility.
>>703602292
>Assuming I'm not well versed in the topic already
>Comical
In every model communism ultimately leads to a steadily rising rate of corruption which siphons off more, and more of the wealth without any way to impede it's expansion, due to the nature of a state controlled economy, which excludes alternative methods of procurement of resources. Ultimately you, also end up with an over inflated population, which due to the individual question as to "how do I provide for this child?", never arising. This causes a population bubble, which the state controlled market can not sustain. ex (Chinas one child policy, genocide in USSR, massive imports of food, which is prevalent in all socialist/communist nations)
>>703601664
We work until we die in a strictly physical interpretation. Opportunity costs does not answer my question. This only kicks the can even further towards opportunity costs. You have not made a case for intrinsic value at all. We are still the only thing giving value to everything.
Society is just a word we use to point towards individuals and the complex processes they engage in. We are a bunch of moving parts.
The self destructive system of US is a product of not embracing reason, evidence and the golden principle of letting everyone else do whatever as long as we can sustain it in the long run when you factor technological progress too. Any authority should derive its power from that alone and not try to impose a set of subjective values (which is pretty much the only kind of value, in the context of this conversation, that exists).
this :
Determinism VS Free Will
the answer ?
>both theories are somewhat relevant
pls dont call me a relativist im sorry
>>703602196
>who defeated the nazis
Russia and for my country it was the canadians
>who defeated russia
No one. It just loosened it's restraints till it collapsed with the fall of the berlin wall and the glasnost and everything. The proxy wars for political power didn't do a damn thing against the ussr and basically almost caused ww3 on multiple occassions.
>You're a stupid child, but you're too clever to see it. I'm going to bed. Speaking with you is a waste of time because you refuse to listen.
This thread in a nutshell
4chan in a nutshell
the internet in a nutshell
Western Civ since 1930s in a nutshell
>>703602823
>I was being sarcastic, you fucking moron. Armed Bolsheviks seized the capital in a surprise assault. They obviously and deliberately started the war.
Not the Civil War.
Aw, did I hit a nerve?
FACT: You were born with the ability to think, walk, move. You weren't born retarded or physically incapable of work. You didn't die early on. You were able to make things work without it backfiring or anything going to wrong you couldn't get there.
Face it, you just don't want to admit that your fate was out of your hands. You want to believe that you control your future. You don't. You never did. So while you wake up tomorrow and think to yourself "man I worked hard to get where I am", remember people in other places AND EVEN HERE that couldn't even get to your starting point even if they try.
Fuck off, you self-righteous bitch.
>>703585908
Isn't it the other way around? Thr right wants less government control, because they want to regress or keep things the same way, and the left wants more government intervention to change things?
>>703603147
truth
good to see someone who understands what happened in the past 70 years
>>703585908
Who started the "Hitler wasn't a socialist" meme?
>>703603312
see
>>703602655
>>703585908
nice pic
explains a lot about you
>>703602940
So you say you're well-versed in the topic, then post "facts" oozing with ignorance.
Come on man.
>>703588892
Eat shit commie scum
>>703603147
>So cute it actual believes that
The Russians where losing countless men in their war against the NAZIS, and barely survived even with the US attacking from the west. Had the US never gotten involved, they wouldn't have lasted long. As for the USSR, if it hadn't have been for US forces in western Europe the USSR would have simply taken over the war ravaged western Europe. In hind site the US should have never gotten involved, since western Europe has been nothing, but an infestation on the globe ever since.
>>703603390
>oh then name something that wasn't a fact.
>>703602823
>It's clear that you're just an arrogant child, who thinks he's always right and knows everything.
>Speaking with you is a waste of time because you refuse to listen.
>>703602980
>We work until we die in a strictly physical interpretation. Opportunity costs does not answer my question. This only kicks the can even further towards opportunity costs. You have not made a case for intrinsic value at all. We are still the only thing giving value to everything.
I see what you're trying to say, but "intrinsic" here is obviously contextualized. Without people and the subjective mind, "intrinsic" properties have no meaning.
>Society is just a word we use to point towards individuals and the complex processes they engage in. We are a bunch of moving parts.
Maybe read up on some more political philosophy.
>The self destructive system of US is a product of not embracing reason, evidence and the golden principle of letting everyone else do whatever as long as we can sustain it in the long run when you factor technological progress too. Any authority should derive its power from that alone and not try to impose a set of subjective values (which is pretty much the only kind of value, in the context of this conversation, that exists).
I'd argue otherwise, because "letting people do what they want" and "sustainability" aren't compatible. See: The Tragedy of the Commons.
>>703585908
Liberalism is slightly right of the centre. It's not left, only slightly more left than Republican.
>>703603390
>In every model communism ultimately leads to a steadily rising rate of corruption which siphons off more, and more of the wealth without any way to impede it's expansion, due to the nature of a state controlled economy, which excludes alternative methods of procurement of resources.
WHAT IS ANARCHIST COMMUNISM?
Good enough for you or should I continue?
>>703603603
the russians were pushing back the germans before US involvement in the war.
Second part about the USSR taking over ? True
>hindsight
Last part, thats your opinion man
>>703602940
>In every model communism ultimately leads to a steadily rising rate of corruption which siphons off more, and more of the wealth without any way to impede it's expansion, due to the nature of a state controlled economy
>wealth
>communist society
Wouldn't that be state capitalism?
>>703603658
Basically what you described is State Capitalism, not Communism. The entire thing is wrong.
>>703603838
Yes, I just made that point actually, sucks that you beat me to it.
>>703602196
Waging war is not an indicator of a countries civilians knowledge of politics. The two are utterly unrelated. If your country actually was somewhat more politically knowledgable your country would make use of diplomacy a lot more instead of just bombing the fuck out of everything and destabilizing countries for economical gain.
>>703591875
Honestly shut up
>>703599558
>Hospitals are obligated to treat patients in emergencies, period; you don't need a bundle of cash for that
What dreamland country are you from- and will your mom be making me tendies when I get there too?
>>703603826
he needs explanations on the concept of anarcho communism imo
feed his brain
>>703603838
yes, or oligarchist-ruled ''socialism''
>see Soviet Russia
>>703591875
Hi this is your mom, your pizza rolls are ready
>>703603390
Here's the thing, like talking with all socialist, or communist, anything I say no matter how well documented of a fact it is, you'll simply either
A:claim that example isn't a socialist/communist nation
B:Call me "uneducated" which is extremely comical, or
C:you'll simply resort to sophistry, and act as if I can't understand the topic
Ultimately you like the rest of your disgusting, malformed ilk, will say, or do anything to have your idealism taken for a practical solution. This in spite of the glaring fact, that your ideal has a 100% failure rate.
>>703604100
Canada ?
Every country in western Europe ?
dumbass
>>703602823
What a special snowflake. I'm sure being a crippled minority veteran didn't hand you free college and have companies throwing offers to you like mad because you were a "walking" tax credit goldmine.
>>703604171
>>703603940
>oh look before I even finished the response.
>>703603603
>taking the capital city of the faction your warring against and planting your countries flag on the house of government in said city is not winning a war
Okay so ill take it that the american flag planted on the moon doesn't mean shit either right?
>>703603712
See Ostrom's work regarding the tragedy of the commons.
Letting people do what they want and sustainability, when you factor technological progress, are compatible. Just make sure you make it so everyone has at least the opportunity to do whatever the fuck they want. i say everyone because otherwise it would be a form of special pleading.
I still see this whole discussion as the monkeys I mentioned earlier.
>>703604274
Oh, and how where they able to do that, may I ask? Could it have been because they where only fighting a fraction of the NAZIs actual forces?
>>703604171
>well documented fact
>has done nothing but project shitty opinions and claim them as documented fact
>>703604171
talking about sophisms
define failure
also yeah. communists on chat forums are idealists
>neo-liberals are full of zeal
>fascists live in a dream world
>>703604171
Communism has never been implemented, so it has no failure rate, or success rate. Unless we want to count Anarchist Catalonia, in which is was a little of both.
What I love about these kinds of posts is that the person who posts it seems to think that by predicting what will happen, they somehow invalidate the points I will make.
If a country isn't socialist/communist, you can't criticise it as such. I can't look at Somalia and say with any real meaning "That is a failed communist country".
Considering that I'm nearly finished with a PhD in Philosophy concentrating on political economy, I'm likely more well-educated than you in this particular field. WHAT IS SPECIALISED KNOWLEDGE?
Well, sometimes you can understand the topic, but most people on 4chan put the blinders on and just want to argue instead of learn. The beauty of the dialectic is dead here.
>>703603826
>what is anarchist communism
That is called marxism you fucking faggot.
>>703604335
Maybe way down the line, sure. But that much technological progress just leads to Communism anyway.
If we're at this level and still can't stop fucking the environment and climate, then we're doomed.
>>703604377
Love that picture.
Thanks comrade.
>Anarchy
>Left Wing
>Being this stupid
>>703604587
>thinks anarchy means centrist
>being this stupid
>>703604375
>>703604389
>Oh look they're doing precisely what I said they'd do, surprise surprise.
Communism has been implemented countless times, it's just like all idiots, you'll use any excuse to white wash your failures.
>>703604455
No it's not.
Marx specifically draws a distinction between the State and Government.
This is the shit that boils my blood. People coming in here making assertions they think are true, so smugly, without knowing anything about what they're saying.
Look at the confidence in this post. And all the other ones I've shut down. They're so assured that they're right, but are wrong without knowing it. Ugh. I try to educate but people are just so close-minded.
>>703604650
>oh look my prediction invalidates the point hahahahahahaha i inb4'd you!!!
>>703604650
I have yet to see any citation for your claims.
![Bakunin_Nadar[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ai88QMy.jpg "Bakunin_Nadar[1].jpg")
>>703604587
>Anarchy
>Not left wing
Do we have an "an"cap on our hands?
>>703604650
Communism has literally never been implemented. It's a fact that can't be argued. Socialism leads to it. Socialism has been implemented. No Socialist state has made it there yet. This is the truth.
>>703604733
Actually, what invalidates your point is any, and all empirical evidence on the topic. My prediction, simply verifies your simple mindedness.
>>703604369
Kek the russians were almost in berlin when the allies from the west were still struggling to cross france. You actually have no clue of what happened do you?
Also how goddamn fucking arrogant are you that you claim it to be an american victory while at least a third was canadians and another third was brits and you wouldn't even have been able to start D-day without the help of the french resistance. If it weren't for them you'd all have died on the beaches that day.
>>703604843
Oh, I must have missed all your empirical evidence.
>>703604741
Well you are on the internet right now. That's akin to saying you've been denied books while standing in a library.
>>703604389
Knowledge is belief that matches reality.
In a highly subjective and politicized field such as yours, I would not be ballsy enough to claim that it is precisely knowledge what I have.
>>703604485
We are not doomed. Enforcing intelletual property, which hinders innovation despite it not being a rival good and therefore makes no fucking sense to treat it as private property but what the fuck do I know, is becoming harder with each passing day. This lead to better tech and therefore less polution for the same production. Family planning and sex ed is also a good measure for this problem.
And I would not say it leads to communism. I am not arrogant enough to think I know what it would lead to in a world of enchanced humans and smarter general AI.
>>703604910
Mmm maybe it was because the Germans didn't have as many troops on the Eastern front because it seemed as if the war there was over.......
>>703604942
>>703604979
This goes for you as well.
>>703604979
>shifting the burden of proof
>>703604697
Marx.
>instate government
>equalise the playing field
>reeducate the people
>abolish the government
What do you end up with? An anarchist state that was implemented through communism.
I do i fact know that anarcho-communism is a thing and i know there is a difference but seriously all the fucking different currents of anarchism are utter bullshit the only thing you need is to kick an-caps in the face and to instate anarcho-syndicalism.
>>703605171
So you're saying you're so idiotic you can't do a google search? I don't need to prove something that's already been confirmed. You're the one trying to disprove it.
>>703604389
You've been exercising your materialist dialectic, and why not, your radical subjectivity, no ?
Won't be of much use in wildcat strikes, occupation of factories nor for arson of public services, some would say...
«Work, family, Fatherland», If you differ from this, bureaucrats refer you to their union leaders, sociologists, psychiatrists, urban planners, architects, their foucaults, their Lacans.
And if that's not enouth, then you get to met their structuralists
>>703605288
>it's your job to do all of the research on my baseless and hallow claims, whether they are true or false, I don't have to prove shit except tote on that it's written down somewhere lol checkm8! xDDDD
>>703585908
>thinking usa is free
it's an oligarchy, you're not free, just freer than a dictatorship.
>>703605109
Knowledge is belief that matches reality.
>In a highly subjective and politicized field such as yours, I would not be ballsy enough to claim that it is precisely knowledge what I have.
Funny, since your definition of knowledge seems to be made up. Philosophers, the kings of knowledge, can't even decide on a definite definition. Your definition of knowledge completely discounts metaphysical knowledge, but I guess you didn't come here for epistemology did you?
>We are not doomed. Enforcing intelletual property, which hinders innovation despite it not being a rival good and therefore makes no fucking sense to treat it as private property but what the fuck do I know, is becoming harder with each passing day. This lead to better tech and therefore less polution for the same production. Family planning and sex ed is also a good measure for this problem.
>And I would not say it leads to communism. I am not arrogant enough to think I know what it would lead to in a world of enchanced humans and smarter general AI.
Some parts of the environment are too far gone to be replenished in a reasonable amount of time. And while we are making small strides to help this, it's being destroyed much faster.
Also, it's not arrogance, just historical materialism.
>We make stuff that people need to live
>We make machines that makes this stuff
>We improve our machines that make this stuff
>Wow this wheat field that used to feed 10 families feeds 100 now
>Wow this wheat field that used to feed 100 families feeds 1000 now
>eventually necessities are no longer scarce enough to warrant an artificial barrier called the pricing mechanism
>all humans have access to necessities now
>tadaaaaaa communism
>>703586411
>>703586118
you wanting it to be left wing doesn't make it so.
>inb4 nationalsozialistische partei
North Korea is called "Democratic People's Republic of Korea", that doesn't mean it democratic nor a republic.
>>703605497
Well here's a map that shows some of the nations that have been, or are communist/socialist countries, but you're simply going to claim that none of them where communist/socialist countries, so why should I really bother? I could quite literally fill the tread with evidence, and you'd still make the same idiotic claims.
>>703605497
If you simply change your definition of a socialist/communist nation at will then it really doesn't matter what is presented.
>>703605719
It's because "Communism" is a blanket term for "socialists who are unfriendly with us" and also countries that called themselves Communists but weren't.
If someone handed you an orange and said it's an apple, what is it? It is what is IS, not what you've been told it is, based on properties of apples and oranges. You know apples are red, oranges are orange. Oranges have a rind, apples have a skin. Apples are sweet, oranges are tangy. But instead, you call it an apple because you've been told it was.
>>703605719
>doesn't post evidence related to his viewpoint on why "communism" failed
>posts a fucking map and claims he could post evidence
Then why don't you do it? A lot of shit is written, that doesn't make it true. That's why people debate.
>>703605110
Read more you ignorant fuck. Never has hitler ever thought that the war on the eastern front was ever over. He royally pissed of the russians through breaking his treaty with stalin by attacking russia. He knew the russians wanted blood and eversince the germans fled back out of stalingrad the russians have been tracking them all the way to berlin raping and pillaging their way through eastern europe.
>>703605871
That is quite possibly the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Most of the Communist/Socialist nations have openly professed to being so, and thus it has to be assumed that, that is the consensus of what one actually is. To use your same analogy, it would be like handing be a red apple, and because it's stem is slightly different from the one next to it, you call it a completely different subspecies of apple. It's a simply asinine debate.
>>703605711
*nationalsozialistische arbeiter partei
>>703606107
No, it's not, and if you knew that actual tenets of Communism you'd see that my analogy is correct.
>>703606089
Woops forgot link
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Normandy
>>703606107
>Most of the Communist/Socialist nations have openly professed to being so, and thus it has to be assumed that, that is the consensus of what one actually is.
I profess that I'm god on a daily basis, does that make it true?
>>703604797
Centrist? That's even more ridiculous. I'm talking right wing
>>703604648
How ya doin? :)
>>703606089
I've read plenty. You're just so pathetic you can't understand that Russia couldn't have won without having the war turned into a two front, war, and you're too idiotic to understand that it's a moot point to begin with, as then you'd have been under soviet rule.
>>703605672
Historical materialism...you mean that old unfalsifiable bullshit? Haha no thanks.
Metaphysics is a spook.
Also you are understimating the progress of technology and its accelerating returns.
>>703606200
>an individual is not a consensus.
>>703586888
>>703591174
>not understanding Zizek memes
>>703606230
I mixed up my quotes. You know who you are.
>>703606181
Oh I perfectly understand the tenants, I'm simply intelligent enough to know that under those tenants, the powers that be can alter the nation in any way they see fit, and that's why communism has always died in it's infancy.
>>703606265
>thinks philosophy is science
how dense are you? philosophical arguments aren't made to be falsifiable. historical materialism is actually as close as you can get to falsifiability in political economy. you study the past and predict where it will lead in the future. and guess fuckin what? most of Marx's predictions have come true. he underestimated Capitalism's ability to adapt, but in the long run it still can't sustain.
Get that Stirner bullshit out of here. He's a joke in the field of philosophy.
And if I was underestimating it, that would only strengthen my point.
Have you given up or something?
