Are there any fellow leftists on Cred Forums or is everyone here alt-right/NatSoc/ancap etc?

Are there any fellow leftists on Cred Forums or is everyone here alt-right/NatSoc/ancap etc?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=x72w_69yS1A
youtube.com/watch?v=hAXoGxLx6yk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_International_Theory
youtube.com/watch?v=A-ciyDdBwNE
icl-fi.org/english/icldop/index.html
icl-fi.org/english/wv/1094/archives_icl.html
breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/26/presumptive-gop-nominee-donald-trump-republican-party-now-a-workers-party/
businessinsider.com/ceo-compensation-chart-2014-6?IR=T
antiwar.com/justin/j061303.html
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37486397
breitbart.com/london/2016/03/06/anti-migrant-slovak-pm-robert-fico-wins-election-but-faces-tough-task-to-form-majority/
youtube.com/watch?v=vLE4g0AYK1Q
youtube.com/watch?v=1dIItDBkvA0
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Gtfo you labour fuck.

You must be new.
Also, what he said

Labour are shitty neoliberals. Corbyn is doing good though

not really, just curious

>National SOCIALISM
>not left-wing

...

Can't be a NATSOC without SOC.

Democratic Socialist here.

>Democratic Socialist
I'm a democratic homosexual. Normally it's degenerate but it's ok somehow because I put democratic in front of it

No.

butthurt polack because - got rekt by NatSoc

...

i m a kek fundamentalist

Someone's mad.

Not quite the same thing.

fuck off commie, BETTER DEAD THAN RED

Someone lives in a post-communist country.

Don't worry, comrade, when automation kicks in full swing, socialism/communism will be the only viable ideology. At least from the ones that we have in circulation right now.

youtube.com/watch?v=x72w_69yS1A

Leftists are here, but only because they are being paid.

Leftists ideology can't thrive on a medium that doesn't reward an individual with increased status or lacks a authorativive figure to silence dissent.

>ancap

There's an alt-left presence.

>REEEEEEEE
Go take your meds, pavementhead.

...

autist fucking newfag, i've literally read every book Chomsky wrote

>but when in Rome, retard like Romans

I'm certainly left of these skin heads - wouldn't label myself a leftist tho

must have gotten whacked by terrorists recently

FULLY
AUTOMATED
LUXURY
COMMUNISM

youtube.com/watch?v=hAXoGxLx6yk

So what brand of lefty are all the self-reporting lefties ITT?

Yes. We're here.

Some form of Leninism/Syndicalism maybe, not really sure.

I support true socialist nationalism.

redpill me on Strasserism

I also support Moamer Gadafi.
Fun fact faggot, Libya abolished ownership of land in 1986. He also tried to bring about 'worker ownership of the means of production'.
>The 1969 constitutional proclamation recognized both public ownership ("the basis of the development of society") and private ownership (so long as it was nonexploitive). The application of Qadhafi's new views on ownership began a few months after publication of Part II of The Green Book. In May 1978, a law was passed giving each citizen the right to own one house or a piece of land on which to build a house. Ownership of more than one house was prohibited, as was the collection of rent. On September 1, the ninth anniversary of the September revolution, Qadhafi called on workers to "free the wage earners from slavery" and to become partners in the productive process by taking over "the public and private means of production." The takeover of scores of firms followed; presumably the firms were to be controlled by the new people's committees. Still another aspect of the drive against exploitation was Qadhafi's late-autumn ban on commercial retail activity. The Libyan leader advised retailers to enter productive occupations in agriculture or construction. However, the immediate practical result of these changes, was economic chaos and a significant decrease in production.
>With regard to land, Qadhafi rejects the idea of private ownership. Drawing a distinction between ownership and use, he argues that land is the collective property of all the people. Every person and his heirs have the right to use the land to satisfy their basic needs. The land belongs to those who till it. To hire farm hands is forbidden because it would be exploitive.

Fuck off, regressive scum. We alt right now.

Libertarian left.

I know about Gaddafi. didn't he want to trade oil for gold?

Whaaaaaaaa I want free stuff!

No.

But there's a lot of us that want free stuff!!

Oh well then by all means, go right ahead

>reactionary calling someone regressive
stay classcucked.
yeah but In his green book, the abolition of money was the end state.
>The book states that "Freedom of expression is the natural right of every person, even if they choose to behave irrationally, to express his or her insanity."The Green Book states that freedom of speech is based upon public ownership of book publishers, newspapers, television, and radio stations, on the grounds that private ownership would be undemocratic.
>A paragraph in the book about abolishing money is similar to a paragraph in Frederick Engels' "Principles of Communism,"Gaddafi wrote: "The final step is when the new socialist society reaches the stage where profit and money disappear. "It is through transforming society into a fully productive society, and through reaching in production a level where the material needs of the members of society are satisfied. On that final stage, profit will automatically disappear and there will be no need for money."
You should check out his Green Book. The Green Book rejects modern liberal democracy based on electing representatives as well as capitalism. Instead, it proposes a type of direct democracy overseen by the General People's Committee which allows direct political participation for all adult citizens.
>he thinks socialism is about free stuff
so classcucked it's unbelievable
you'd make a good serf in feudalism i guess

You're on left/pol/ now huh?

So you are a degenerate who wants free stuff. Trash-tier.

GO LEFT. KILL NAZI SCUM

...

I'm no leftist but I'm definitely left of centre. I just come here to shitpost.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_International_Theory

>The Third International Theory, also known as the Third Universal Theory (Arabic: نظرية عالمية ثالثة), refers to the style of government proposed by Col. Muammar Gaddafi in the early 1970s, on which his government, the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, was officially based. It was partly inspired by Islamic socialism, Arab nationalism, African nationalism and partly by the principles of direct democracy.[1][2]

>It has similarities with the system of Yugoslav municipal self management in Titoist Yugoslavia, and the Yugoslav Third Way during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s as developed by Edvard Kardelj.[3][4] It was proposed by Gaddafi as an alternative to capitalism and communism for Third World countries, based on the stated belief that both of these ideologies had been proven invalid.

I visit that board sometimes but I also visit /thirdposition/.

>thinking calling someone a reactionary is an insult

Interesting, seems he really was committed to socialism. No wonder the US had him toppled

>being this retarded
LURK MORE

you know you'd be just a lowly serf in feudal system? you're probably cucked as hell in capitalist one anyways
idk why you support it
>tfw you'll never get state regulated gf
>tfw you'll forever be a wagecuck

>he thinks socialism isn't about free stuff.
That's all anyone who isn't straight natsoc bitches about, how it's not fair they don't have more stuff

I generally am drawn to libertarian socialism as the best way to organize I society.
However any anarchist society would require a huge amount of social cohesion, a sense of identity amounst the public and mass civic participation.
That's why I'm opposed to neoliberalism, multiculturalism, free trade and want trump to win.

>I just come here to shitpost
same mostly

>tfw you'll never get state regulated gf
SOON (pic related)

"In Capitalism, the company/person who owns the productive robots then also owns whatever they make. The workers replaced are now unemployed and may run out of money while retraining before they're in poverty, interrupting their plans and possibly making them homeless or resort to crime.
In Socialism, the community democratically controls what the robots make and how it is distributed. The workers replaced still have a vote in the process, will not become poor, and will retrain (without the often-harmful stress of unemployment) and become productive again sooner and in greater numbers than capitalist workers."

>state regulated gf
How has this not exploded all the feminists?

It's just you copy/pasted my gaddafi post.

>I visit that board sometimes but I also visit /thirdposition/.

Most moar alt-left memes plz.

yeah he was
that's why (((they))) had to liberate him
truly sad. i supported gaddafi 100% and i support all other socialist dictators to this day
tito was also based
>le free stuff
how about we just end wageslavery first?

>socialism is just about free stuff
read more

KYS

Trotskyst here.

→ #
→ #
→ #
→ #
GET OUT OF THIS SLIDE THREAD AND GO VOTE FOR THE 2nd DEBATE QUESTIONS!!!!!!

>I came to pol for the first time 15 minutes ago

...

>wageslavery
>getting compensated for your time is somehow evil and destructive

There are still communists and socialists (real ones) after the debacle that was the USSR? Almost eery economic tenet of your ideology has been proven inefficient or false by real world, objective data.

Collectivism is a meme, central economic planning is a meme, state owned industry a meme.

You have an argument with non state market Socialism, and I would like to to see it tried in the real world. Every this else about your ideology however is just a meme.

Sounds good.

I'm for having basic rights from the government. Companies can't be trusted to provide for their workers. 50% of our country has less than $500 in their bank account. No way to go to the doctor. Something has gotta give. It's getting worse and worse.

See

Interesting, didn't realise he still had followers in Russia. I know there's lots of Trotskyists here.

>implying 50% of this country isn't total trash and somehow deserves more than 500 in their bank account

Alexander please get a job

Not real

what do you mean Olaf?

In a situation where the alernative to working is starving and you have zero say in how the organization/factory is run, you simply take orders from above, then yes it is practically slavery

...

>practically
Key word there. Plus, fuck em if they don't want to work hard enough to survive. That's not hard to do. People who are that lazy/unmotivated should be culled anyway.

I'm saying you're this guy
youtube.com/watch?v=A-ciyDdBwNE

Look buddy, all of that is fine if it works. Problem is once it doesn't work, it has real life consuqances. If the bourgeoisie keeps exploiting the working class people, they will rebel against them by demanding better wages and work times. Call it a "riot tax" if you will.

I want to raise my authoritarianism

Any sort of central/community planning of economy is terrible.

It is impossible for any planning commitee to have all the knowledge neccesary to plan an efficient economy. Furthermore, it creates incentives for production managers to be inefficient in order to meet planned targets. Please do some research about this phenomenon in to Soviet Union. Chronic shoratages and chronic overproduction of goods.

National Titoism when?

>they should just work harder
good goy

That's seriously so retarded. You're implying that the future of this country doesn't matter and their kids don't deserve a fair shot. A lot of those are wageslaves who are paying off student debt too. You're calling them garbage?

Communism is the idea of weak men who do not work.

Every man is entitled to the sweat of his brow your cuck. And you don't hold my wallet.

I'm a leftfag, not in the modern sense though

Get a job

>good goy
They should just suckle at the federal tit instead? Yea no that makes sense. What harm could becoming totally dependent on the state for your income have?!

This

Fuck faggot lefties

>Communism is the idea of weak men who do not work.
no, that's capitalism

no they should unionize and bargain for better pay and conditions, and we shouldn't vote in union busting(((neoliberal))) governments

>efficient economy

capitalism isn't efficient

>every man is entitled to the sweat of his brow
That's literally the goal of socialism/communism. As it stands now you only get a small portion of the fruits of your labor while some leech extracts the excess profits and lives off the backs of working men.

>communism is the idea of weak men who do not work
>self determination is weak
>being pro labor means I don't work
You class fucks are hilarious.

>just work harder, goy! you can make it like all those millionaires did!
>it's not like i'm outsourcing all these jobs so i can make more profit, hehe
>And you don't hold my wallet.
And this is the fundamental problem of your ideology. You think everything can be solved by pouring money on it.

We did a survey of Bernie/Jill Stein supporters and all of them were in the green box. I'd estimate that is a trend nationally.

>meme
>China.exe

>fair
I almost stopped reading here. To use a cliche, life's not fucking fair, deal with it. Do other people who worked hard to get to the top deserve to have their income taken and given away?
>student debt
Lots of people get loans. But if you spent 90k to get an arts degree or something, that's your fault for being retarded.

The only good commie is a dead commie

>Communism is the idea of weak men who do not work.
It's literally called Labour for a reason.

nationalistic socialistic state thats not nazi when

Nice projections. If I were cucked in the capitalist sytem due to being an untalented lazy shithead who can't get a proper job, I'd support socialism as well.

Fortunately I have a father who came from a dysfunctional family, got a degree which he never used, yet managed to get a good job and provide for us and now he is a co-owner of a rather profitable company, so I know that with hard work and talent you can get far when the government is not forcing egalitarian bullshit on the people.

>just work harder, goy! you can make it like all those millionaires did!
It's pretty common knowledge that hard work does not guarantee success, but success is almost impossible without it. As it should be.

And those jobs wouldn't be outsourced if we didn't have ridiculous corporate taxes

The entire internet is filled with leftism, I don't quite understand the point of trying to create a safe space here. Not that I mind, talk leftie bollocks all you like, in the name of free speech.

>Corbyn
>Doing good
Pick one.

Nice bait.

Leftist here, but I can usually only take Cred Forums in small doses. It's fun sometimes because they're extremely easy to troll, but the low hanging fruit gets boring fast.

And full socialism kills incentive to innovate and take risks. Besides your image there is a result of globalism. The mainstream left like globalism, they just refer to it as internationalism. Still means the same shit. No borders, no cultures. Nation states are a MUST if anybody seriously wants to improve the lives of their compatriots. Even internationalist socialists should realise by now that the global revolution ain't happening. Pic related is the only solution.

>Technology makes things worse meme

FYI you will ever live to see that society it's much further off than you think

>China
>Socialist

The tax rate is lowest it's been since the gilded age. Profits are at all time highs. They outsource labor because they collude with the government's of the world to exploit labor pools that haven't had labor movements yet.

Remove the capitalist cock from your mouth.

you mean liberalism
idc what ppl say but liberals =/= leftists
i mean you can be both but most of the time collage kids who smoke pot and think socialism is cool because it will remove their student loan debt are the ones who make it into a meme

Nsdap is the only socialism

They'll grow out of it. Left libertarian is unworkable. Hell it's not even desirable. If you're going to go planned economy then the state needs teeth. Also I bet all you're left libertarian kids are open borders faggots.

Marxism isnt socialism.

Unions are alright as long as they are kept in check. Otherwise you get unproductive lazy fucks that you can't fire.

I'm not trying to create a safe space though, just interesting in debate and different ideas

Move to Africa, there are plenty of revolutionary communist movements there. Show us that you actually believe this shit

It starts in one country, gets exported into unwilling countries on the back of Soviet tanks, then collapses in 40 years.

Everything marxist is bullshit.

>They outsource labor because they collude with the government's of the world to exploit labor pools that haven't had labor movements yet.
This does happen, but it's mostly manual manufacturing, something that will be entirely automated before long anyway. The free market will handle it.

I am a satanist. Yes, I'm 14 years old.

>full socialism kills incentive to innovate and take risks

how does it? Under socialism you'd have a reduced working week, and no threat of unemployment, homelessness or hunger. The idea of "each according to his ability" means people can and should innovate to ease the burden of work for all and raise material conditions.

this is why you "third positionists" bother me, you resort to the same arguments against socialism that capitalists use

Also friendly reminder that first person who says communism is all about "da jooz" lost the argument. It's literally not an argument.
Hitler made so many mistakes. He called himself a socialist to try and pander to the left, never had the intention to distribute the means of production to the workers. He banned unions, strikes, reprivatised banks, protected corporations, and took out socialists in his own party that didn't agree with him. He wasn't a very good negotiator and got into war with Soviet Union for no reason desu. He just wasn't that good of a leader as some people here make him out to be. He had some major flaws that people overlook because they're very much into cult of personalitity and memes.

Hey OP!

Welcome to pol!

KYS

What? Fighting is for the labourer classes, they are intellectuals user, they would form the vanguard of the party and bark orders.

>you'd have a reduced working week, and no threat of unemployment, homelessness or hunger
That's exactly why it would kill incentive. You think I'm going to give a fuck if I know I can't be fired? I would literally jerk off all day

Honestly corporations and wealthy should pay more taxes though. They should also be rigidly kept in line because of the power they hold and the wealth they have. A "bilderberg elite" like what you see now is most definitely the fault of not keeping the wealthy in check and perhaps using their money to either help out small businesses, stimulate a means of sustainable consumption and investment in the large lower classes via some redistribution and social programs (I.e. education), and strengthening the power of the nation on the global scale via military spending.

Even the Nazi's recognized the importance of keeping their upper classes both in line , free of subversion and in full support of the nation.

State capitalism and mixed market economics coupled with a strong central government have always given the best results, and pulled every nation in history out of the dump.

>socialism kills incentive to innovate
No. That's capitalism. If it isn't immediately profitable there is no incentive to be innovative so out tech stagnates. Or if a new technology is going to cut into the profits of large powerful businesses they get snuffed out or bought up by the larger corporations and placed on a shelf until the capitalist feels it's absolutely necessary to reveal it to the public.

Regardless people have been inventing technology to make our lives easier before capitalism. The ecnomic system we live in has little do with it.

Everyone has a different version of what socialism is. My version is a nationalist government that puts its own people before international capital and takes care of its citizens. Complete worker ownership of the memes of production is unworkable. Hierarchy is natural.

you wouldn't. humans are naturally driven to improve their lives. making money isn't the only thing that motivates people.

> basic rights FROM the government.

There is the first problem in your thinking. You are never given rights. You have to take them, bleed for them. No right was ever given from those in power freely. It was always taken, EARNED, by the blood of those fighting for them.


Now your second point. Who are you to say what is and isn't acceptable by two mutally agreeing parties? The employer offers a wage, the employee can take it, try to negotiate, or leave. If the deal is not mutually beneficial they wouldn't make the deal in the first place right? Who are you, with your omnipotence, to decide that someone is being played too low or too much, and not the employee and employeer? This is why minimum wage and maximum wage laws are bullshit. Its politicians thinking they know better than the two parties actually involved.

Statists are left, so prety much everyone in pol are left.

Sounds more like a personal problem. Most people aren't satisfied by living like a pig.

> gets exported into unwilling countries on the back of Soviet tanks

And here is the problem. Not just with USSR but everything socialist. Fuck Gaddafi probably wouldn't have been sodomised with a knife had he not spent 30 years fighting imperialism.

I'm not saying the west, US in particular, don't do all they can to sabotage socialism (in any of it's forms). The trick is self sufficiency first then becoming more efficient than the US.

Except every real world example of socialism has shown to have less innovation than capitalistic ones. That doesn't mean they didn't have any, just less of it.

Also, just becuase it sounds good on paper doesn't mean it actually works that way in the real world.

The West does the same shit. They foist their economic system on the rest of the world by force. Both militarily and through economic pressures. This isn't exclusive to socialism in any way.

You are fucking delusional and know nothing about history.

A lot of innovation came from people looking to make profit. You don't think Elon Musk is doing Mars for the good of humanity do you?

UBI to share some of the wealth created from national assets, and secure borders = greater than eliminating completely class

>has shown to have less innovation than capitalistic ones

Only because the capitalist states tended to be further along in development

What I find funny is commie shits won't read an economics book, history book or philosophy book and have their idealism challenged

Enjoy waiting for your revolution on the backs of rednecks, blacks, and gangs you manipulative misanthropic pieces of shit.

Unions are not just alright, they're the best chance of bringing workers democratic control to the work place. Until then our working lives will be controlled by (((big buinesss))).
As for the issue of lazy people, its hardly is one. I think you have a too pessimistic a view of working people. Besides , workers self management doesn't mean people don't get fired. People dont like working with lazy people.

> intention to distribute the means of production to the workers

This is a meme. Part nationalized with a sharing of the fruits of labour is much more practical.

No leftists here.

Cred Forums is a board of peace

Im not left but dad is hardcore socialist since the 70s

Natsoc is leftist comrade

reporting in

Well most real socialist experiments have taken place in undeveloped nations. It's not really a wonder as to why they weren't able to innovate as quickly as established capitalist nations.

With that said the USSR made great leaps in technology considering it was a semi-feudal shithole prior to Soviet control.

wtf, guess im a /natsoc/ missile now

Oftentimes you have to realize that the balance of power at the negotiation table is very much tilted against the employee unless a shortage of his labour exists. But there has never been a shortage of labour in low skill jobs who's pay determines whether the lower castes of society run around homeless shaking pedestrians or at least earning a modest living.

Also, you whole argument runs off the idea that people are rational and fair to one another. Which (especially among certain groups) has never, EVER been the case. People will get desperate, people won't do their research, corproatiosn might make threats or screw them over in order to get a lower price with no proof left behind for persecution.

Minimum wage simply acts as a safeguard for that, all while stimulating investment into more productive methods in order to avoid said wage. It can increase competitiveness along with stimulating that keystone mass consumption and investment among the lower classes which make up huge portions of society.

You obviously don't understand socialism.

>State capitalism and mixed market economics
These are things I'm ok with. Though we need to seriously fix somethings like education before dumping money into it.
What really goes up my ass is every time the left goes on about "taxing the wealthy", they don't mean just the 1%. Those guys are so rich it almost doesn't matter to them. They mean everyone in the top 50%. I make enough to be comfortable, but this taking 1/3 of my salary bullshit need to stop. It's the middle/upper middle class that gets fucked when talk like this starts.

End yourself, commie scum.

>improve their lives
That is literally why capitalism works.

The top 10% pay over 50% of all taxes you fucking retard. If you keep milking then more they're just going to take their money and leave

I voted for Brexit, actually. Fuck off back to brit/pol/

>satisfied by living like a pig.
That's why capitalism works.

Simply because that's the socioeconomic climate we live in. The main driver in a capitalist economy is profit and that's the world Musk grew up in. If we reorganized society to value contribution, self realization and innovation over profit people like Musk would still exist. The things that drive them will just be more communally orientated.

You don't think he's solely doing this shit to make a buck, do you?

capitalism only works for a small section of society. all modes of production raise material conditions, but it's distributed unevenly and class society leads to alienation. the blossoming of technology and restructuring of society under socialism will let all benefit

fine. shoot them and take their wealth if they try that.

That's how I used to be.

You'll learn in time. We all do.

Pic related is me

Sure you did, Marxist. We both know you can't resist rapefugee cock.

I know. I agree 100%. The main motivation in me being anything like socialist is the desire to rip the throats out of the exploitative international capitalists who rape countries and their people of their resources and labour.

My point was the these countries who tried to a kind of socialism were largely taken down cause of years of working actively against other nations interests instead of just doing their own thing the best they could.

>people having consensual sex is degenerate
Great point

I used to be a fan of a Trotskyist organization called the International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist).
icl-fi.org/english/icldop/index.html

“Soviet Workers: Defeat Yeltsin-Bush Counterrevolution!”
icl-fi.org/english/wv/1094/archives_icl.html

>WAAA SHOOT EVERYONE WHO'S MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN ME SO I FEEL LIKE LESS OF A FAILURE :'(

ebin

>Trusting the State as a good administrator
Give me examples where the State hasn't fallen into severe corruption or nepotism in socialist governments.

OK so now you've shot them and all their wealth stops flowing still. You seize the assets and sell them. You got one lump sum of wealth. A few billion or tens of billions of dollars that will not continue to generate additional wealth anymore as you just killed that

Seriously dude why don't you try figuring out how to make more wealth rather than redistributing it. It's not magic.

their success is based upon exploitation so yeah.

>But there has never been a shortage of labour in low skill jobs who's pay determines whether the lower castes of society run around homeless shaking pedestrians or at least earning a modest living.

woman detected. wages were rising and we had an actual middle class until women doubled the labor supply

>Leftists ideology can't thrive on a medium that doesn't reward an individual with increased status
But parroting Cred Forums's opinions does give me increased status in the form of (you)'s and reaction images.

Donald Trump: Republican Party Now 'A Worker’s Party'
breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/26/presumptive-gop-nominee-donald-trump-republican-party-now-a-workers-party/

>With that said the USSR made great leaps in technology considering it was a semi-feudal shithole prior to Soviet control.
Only a few million people starved in the process, and it was a proletarian shithole where people could hardly get anything than their basic needs while they shot the first man into space.

You do realise that the reason why China didn't collapse unlike the Soviet Union was because they opened up to capitalism and now they are a major player in the world market due to that?

>You got one lump sum of wealth. A few billion or tens of billions of dollars that will not continue to generate additional wealth anymore as you just killed that

Nah. invest it in infrastructure, technology, healthcare, retraining workers, education etc. Rather than sitting in a bank account accruing parasitic interest or being stashed overseas in a tax haven. The assets wouldn't be "sold", but turned over to the workers to run democratically.

>t. bitter loser

I bet people who've actually had sex upset you too.

Nat soc isnt left or right
It is nature
Life without parasitic kikes

t. classcuck

...

Do you really think the 'workers' aka rednecks and niggers who don't give a shit about socialism will do your bidding?

Regardless your 'investment' will not generate wealth especially with lacking resource allocation mechanism

Do you really think corporate assets just sit around in a bank all day? Sure some do but most is reinvested in the company for research, hiring more workers, raising wages and salaries, new factories etc

Take economics 101 this is basic shit

...

We're here, in the woodwork.

>Cred Forums
>censorship

Pick one

I used to be. Now i dont give a fuck. Im here just for the shitposting.

...

one of the core ideologies of the left is political correctness, so you clearly don't belong here.

communism is everything wrong with the modern west. And don't get me started on neocoms

>democratic control to the work place.
Yea I don't want that at all. There's a reason there are manager and there are workers. To many chefs spoil the soup.

You're damn right I have a shitty view of workers. Every where you look are lazy bastards just doing the bare minimum

KEKOLD THREAD!

>implying nat-soc isn't leftwing
>muh identity politics that side bad muh side good

Social democrat here. (Or libertarian by Danish political standards).

In 2016, communism and socialism is something you afford. Unless your country can become self-sufficient, it's not gonna survive either. Even then, can your country follow up on the technological and international progress by itself, or will it have to survive on trading? In the latter case, your country will need to export goods and services, and you'll have to accumulate all risk-taking, innovation, etc, onto the same entity; the government.

This is why capitalism will win, every fucking time. First off, no country can be truly self-sufficient in the globalized world we live in today. Even the manufacturing of a simple pencil with an eraser head requires input from mostly all corners of the world. Putting risk-taking down to an individual level enables your country to benefit from the success of your citizens, through taxes and such. The individual success of your citizens become your main concern; for the richer the people, the more money you'll have to provide government services, such as tax-paid healthcare, schooling, welfare, etc.

The internal market supports the welfare state, not the other way around. After accepting this fact, everything from this point on becomes a question about "how big a state in % of GNP?". And the answer is ALWAYS: as small as it can get. Government services should always be provided in the most cost-effective way possible, as to avoid bloated states; something which happens almost naturally, as the danger of social democracies is the state becoming more concerned of the well-being of its voters, than the people feeding it.

Want to achieve communism or socialism? Accelerate capitalism, for its end-game is literally what you seek.

>Do you really think the 'workers' aka rednecks and niggers who don't give a shit about socialism will do your bidding?

My bidding? It's in our collective interest. Class consciousness is low, particularly in America, but with enough agitation and education people can emancipate themselves. People already articulate what is wrong with the system, but in vague terms (attacking the rich, fatigue of endless wars etc)

Can't deny it though can you?

>it's distributed unevenly
You seem think that everyone should be equal. Idk if I can help you if you're that far gone.

deny a stupid ad hominem?

The fate of the kulaks really shows what is communism about. They were not nobles, they were simple peasants who (or whose families) managed to acquire enough land by hard work and saving money and they were the perfect targets to rile the envious and poorer people against. Of course for some reason once they were deported or at least stripped from their land, agriculture in fertile regions like Hungary or Ukraine become quite inefficient. I really wonder why.

>constructing elaborate philosophies to justify your economic parasitism

>Men having sex with each others feces isn't degenerate

KYS

you have merely begun your journey friend.

NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC NATSOC

not pure equality economically. you should be rewarded for hard work. but people aren't under capitalism. abolishing inheritance and ramping up tax would curb that. CEOs dont work 300x times more than average workers

businessinsider.com/ceo-compensation-chart-2014-6?IR=T

Egalitarianism always benefits the lowest form of people.

>millions of people starved
True. Millions starved in capitalist India under colonial rule. ruleMillions starve around the world while we produce enough food to prevent that but it isn't profitable to distribute it. Does that invalidate capitalism? Regardless I don't want to recreate the Soviet Union. This is all besides the point of innovation.

The Soviets went through similar market reforms decades before the collapse. The SU's collapse is very complicated and you can't really pin it down to one factor.

The truth that you are bitter that other people have things you don't and rather than use that as inspiration to improve yourself you impotently rage about how ITS NOT FAIR BOO HOO WHY CAN'T EVERYONE BE A WORTHLESS LOSER LIKE ME :'(

> Accelerate capitalism

But neo-liberalism is fucking cancer and will likely make a permanent global elite class even in the event they decide to stop pursing profit.

>abolishing inheritance

You are retarded, most people work to provide for their families, that includes inheritance as well. If somebody is incompetent, he will waste his inheritance anyhow.

May I ask how long have you worked in your life and in what jobs?

>people
>gays
Pick one

>class collaboration
>union busting
>privatization of industry
>preventing the collapse of capitalism
>left wing
too kek

>U a storm fag m8.

Anyone who disagrees with you is a stormfag, you're just saying that because I'm White.

If he didn't punish people rebelling against the state then all order would have collapsed because some people just wouldn't participate in a communist society. Sure what he did was bad for the agriculture industry, but what was needed was industrial development to have the military force needed to protect itself on a global scale. It might not be just, but the world isn't just, there is always suffering under every system, but communist ideology aims to reduce everyone's suffering over time, and to do that some people are going to suffer, but it's pretty much "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs".

Nah, I want the highest standards possible for all. The "bitter" slur has been thrown at socialists from hostile elites desperate to hold onto their power since the dawn of time. Simply, not everyone can "succeed" under capitalism. The nature of private property and wage labour doesn't allow it.

The point is that in a fully realized socialist/communist society you wouldn't have to worry about providing for your family. All basic needs (food, shelter, education, healthcare) are provided by the community. So the only reason to have an inheritance would be to buy more commodities which your family could do on there own because they would be employed.

I've been working for 12 years now.

>you should be rewarded for hard work
No you might get rewarded for hard work. If you think you should be guaranteed a result just because you tried hard, you're as bad as the DUDE FREE STUFF LMAO crowd.
>abolish inheritance
Thats literally the most retarded thing I've read on this thread.
>You clawed your way to the top to leave a legacy and comfortable life for your family? Top fucking bad! We're taking all that shit and giving it to nigger Tom who has been sweeping streets for 40 years!
Talk about instantly destroy incentive.

I think the goal is for people to not have to provide for their families because they will just be provided for by the people. And over time the concept of "family" as we know it would dissolve, because the family is a oppressive structure that devalues the labor of women. Once people no longer needed to depend on one person to provide for them you would find women demanding more equality, and traditional relationships would slowly disappear. For children it would be more efficient to have breeding programs, where it's certain peoples jobs to just have children, and this would let them select only the best genetic stock.

>Simply, not everyone can "succeed" under capitalism.
Wow really, you don't say?

So your solution is for *everyone* to wallow in shit. That's happened every time your commie ideas have been tried. Every single time.

>You are retarded, most people work to provide for their families

Another issue of capitalism, that relationships are based upon employment. Commodification entrenches itself everywhere Inheritance, as in passing on large sums of private property and land, has to go. It's unearned. Passing on personal property (e.g. family heirlooms) is fine, but nothing that can be used to gain leverage over others, like a factory or farmland.

The elite has and will likely always exist. In capitalist as well as communist systems. Does it matter if it's a financial elite or political elite?

The only tool we have in fighting them is to stop playing their game. The answer to that is not necessarily communism or ancap.

In my opinion, simply trashing our monetary system and reinventing it should do the trick, at least for few decades.

see No, my solution is for people to establish a system where all can enjoy the fruits of their labour and the collective output of society to the maximum extent technology allows. Not working precariously for a boss for a wage

>reinventing it should do the trick
Isn't this what bitcoin is for

Full communism requires future tech 10 though. Realistic solution for today is some form of national socialism/mixed economy. I mean look at what China did with their state capitalism with space for private ownership. They almost built an economy strong enough to literally buy the world. But their lack of innovation and over reliance on trinkets has now left them without enough customres and their currency manipulation means their own people can't afford to buy all the trinkets the west used to love.

Not exactly sure how my system looks. Bit its a lot of nationalism, a bit of socialism and a splash of capitalism. Like keep the carrots offered by capitalism in place (people can still get rich and buy shiny shit to show off how rich they are), but remove the stick of dying from poverty. From socialism we'd take elements of state control of industry (nationalisation/state capitalism/state socialism) and a degree of central planning. UBI (neither capitalist or socialist) would feature too.

On the assumption that bitcoin is absolutely incorruptible, then I'd say yes.

Whereas in communism there are no families. Thanks, Marx!

So go and start a company yourself without government handouts.

The only way in hell this would work is if everyone maintained the same level of motivation they have under capitalism. But that's so unrealistic.
>I'm going to get a PhD in computational physics so I can make 10k a year more than a fry cook
Progress would halt almost immediately

>absolutely incorruptible
Eh not really. There's a mining hardware arms race that makes large scale production only possible by people/groups with serious capital

there are families. they just don't grapple with the issue families do today. homelessness, poverty, lack of access to healthcare and education etc.

a company? No. I don't have the capital, land or property. that's the whole point of being working class, we have nothing but our labour power

This would unironically be fine by me, but it's not true.

I accept that there is hierarchy. It's just those who're likely going to be at the top of it are generally greedy and cannot be unelected from their position. As things stand now I think the most likely final setup of neo-liberalsim will be neo-serfdom, working your whole life for your boss who also happens to be your landlord and your effective head of state.

see

You're wrong.

>because they opened up to capitalism and now they are a major player in the world market due to that?

Could you imagine what China would have looked like if the KMT won the Chinese Civil War and Mao Zedong's shitty ass CPC lost? They would have been twice as powerful as they are today. Mao's 'm-muh true form of communism' Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution fucked up that nation for twenty years before they opened up.

They you will be paid what your labour is worth. Deal with it.

Feminism ring any bells?

Yeah, I'm economically left-leaning but beginning to resent the left for being not merely tolerant but appreciative of hyperconservative freedom hating ideologies, as long as the adherents of it are brown.

how many of you are voting for hillary?

you're just an upset faggot that you're not the guy on the right :DDDDD

>this thread

no way Cred Forums isn't at least 50% underage. most of these arguments against hard leftism are just memes. are memes really all you have? I'm not surprised since this is a board that would rather play a video game than read

I guarantee you there is a mexican or indian who can do your job better, cheaper of both than you.

Capitalism must be internationalist. Or at least the internationalism cannot be rolled back. Taken to its logical conclusion, you'll be replaced by either wogs or robots.

>beginning to resent the left for being not merely tolerant but appreciative of hyperconservative freedom hating ideologies, as long as the adherents of it are brown.

This is how it starts...

NatSoc is on the left.

You just described a nationalist social democracy. It has nothing to do with socialism. You can't mix capitalism and socialism. They are completely different modes of production.

>nationalization
State run industry is not socialist. A state owned business in a liberal democracy isn't run by the workers and doesn't have their interests at heart. The collusion between capitalist and state still exist.

>participating in bourgeois affectations
>leftists voting for a liberal
Do better, Cred Forums.

I think I've become a bit fascist but I support the communists in China because they have the mandate of heaven, yes I am Chinese.

However Australia needs a more centrist party so I voted for the most centrist ones I could find.

Not an argument.

So are you voting for a protectionist Donald Trump? I guess he's more economically left leaning than Hillary depending on your perspective

Who supports open boarders rapefugees welcome? Pretty sure its not right wingers.

gas the kikes race war now!

You don't get paid money under communism. You get what you need and contribute what is needed, directly. If people weren't forced into shit paying jobs to survive and avoid starvation, you'd see a lot more physicists.

I'm an anarcho-satanist and I hate leftards :^)

no such thing as alt-right
sorry

This guy gets it, everyone else ITT is retarded.

I'm a liberal with conservative ideals
MAGA

No. I don't vote.

Leftist here, can wait for these salty tears from these fags from the Right-Wing.

>sex with each others feces
Is this the same as eating the poopoo?

The capitalist industries that benefit from cheap labor that the right wing regularly sucks off.

>it's a 'no true socialism' poster

> A state owned business...doesn't have their interests at heart.

Why? If everybody is working primarily for the nation and the success or failure of the nation is the success or failure of the individual then why wouldn't they have common interests? I accept that getting (((them))) to put nation above profit requires a bit of work, but if that could be done then you cannot unequivocally say the interests of the nationalised industry aren't the same as those of the people who make up the nation.

I have no issue with people taking their fair share of profits from their labour (and this share sure as hell isn't 100% btw). My issue is the idea of democratising the workplace. Hierarchy is natural and more efficient than individuals pulling in opposite directions.

For now, at least. Capitalism makes demands of us all.

If Hillary wins, leftism loses m8.

I'm personally hoping for Trump, just because it will be hilarious to troll SJWs. The amount of butthurt is going to be galactic in scale.

The capitalists at the top and the nuleft, as well as trotskyites. Even Garl Marx thought that only Europe was ready for socialism.

Fuck off cunt only ancaps are tolerated here

No no its your side that likes sucking off rapefugees, remember?

Quite apart from the fact that most of the fuckers go on welfare anyway, why would they even bother working?

You really didn't think this through at all.

>you'd see a lot more physicists.
>He thinks people would go through all the schooling and studying and courses to be docotors, engineers, scientists, lawyers etc just because of the week fuzzies
I think you're in serious denial about how shitty people are.

So, you're waiting for a lefty revolution to happen? After what lefty revolutionaries have done in the 20th century? I wouldn't hold my breath. Most people would be more comfortable with neofascists.

I'm not even kidding by the way. The major communist party in France would get a solid 20% of the vote throughout the 1900's. Now they don't get 1%, and le Pen gets 30.

The USSR and Maoist China killed the idea of progressivism under a leftist state for most rational people

>trotskyites

Trotskyites tend to be supporters of the wars that lead to millions of refugees desu

Most classical liberals would have voted for brexit as the EU limits personal freedom.

Neo-liberals are the (larger) problem

>Could you imagine what China would have looked like if the KMT won the Chinese Civil War and Mao Zedong's shitty ass CPC lost?

Considering that Chiang kai-shek was an incompetent buffoon and the KMT was a cabal of thieves, gangsters and nepotists, yeah, I can imagine what China would have looked like. Pretty shitty if you ask me.

>If Hillary wins, leftism loses m8.
And with Trump leftism wins?
Look, I'm not blind, I'm kind of aware why Hillary is hated, but just because Trump is "anti-system" doesn't mean he will be benefic to the Left.
Again, Sanders was the only leftist guy in all that conservative mess that is the political stage of the USA, so there are nothing to win there...

*warm fuzzies.

I voted for Brexit because the EU is committed to neoliberalism, enforce privatisation and austerity on its members, wants to become an imperialist power (expansion in eastern Europe, the EU Army), prevents nationalisation and mandates competition, makes no effort to crack down on tax havens and so on.

the TUSC, Socialist Party, Communist Party etc all supported Brexit. So did old socialists like Michael Foot and Tony Benn

Great things happen when cold-hard Gentile industry lines up with a Gentile state to throw out the parasitic jewish finance manipulators

I was going to say you're in denial m8, but I think it's more you're thinking the entire left is the SJW cancer you see on twitter. Many what would now be considered orthodox leftists put primacy on the economic. USSR for example was pretty socially conservative. Libya gave special treatment to it's own nationals and Gaddafi even thought that countries/nations are essential.

When you look at the people who actually propose more migration they do it almost exclusively for economic reasons ie. profit. This isn't a concern for the traditional left.

far left here. we're called humanists.

>its a fallacy poster
If I go into a hockey rink, watch a bunch of guys in pads slap a pick around, and one of them comes up to say they're actually playing baseball it isn't a fallacy to tell them they're actually playing hockey.

>why wouldn't they represent the workers interests
Because historically it's never been the case. Moneyed individuals will use their influence and power to exploit the workers. It's been happening since the dawn of capitalism and the nation state.

If address your points about hierarchy and how a business would be structured democratically so it wouldn't be just individuals pulling in different directions but I gotta get to work. Have a good one dude.

Clinton and Sanders and right of Nixon. The political center is like a hair away from right wing extremeist

i still believe in anarchism, especially the old kind, that has not succumbed to the marxist and sjw idiocy, like pretty much all the left today. but i also believe in a kind of historical teleology, but not necessary in the marxist sense of various forms of organization following each other, more in the waythat certain conditions demand certain actions. and in the case of this time we are living in, I await the rebirth of nazism with all my heart, because islam, sjws and neoliberalism is a threat to all the western civilization. we need a bit of right wing governance, after that we can maybe talk about anarchism. kinda along the same lines as not really believing in god or not giving a fuck, but in the case of need (i.e. fighting islam) i'd join a fucking crusade.

>Neo-liberals are the (larger) problem
But neo-liberals are holding hands with neo-progressives now. In fact, the modern left is a neo-liberal parasite. They complain about them all the time but when it matters (brexit) they side with them. in fact, I don't think one would survive fully without the other

I was baffled to see many people here who claim to be socialists and very left-leaning act smug and pragmatic about how "brexit will be disastrous for UK's economy, just look at the stock market lmao". It's bizarre. Sometimes I wonder if they are confused or if they hate xenophobia so much they are willing to be neoliberal vassals

That's today. Back in the day they were the internationalist faction of leftism in opposition to Stalin's 'socialism in one country'. The journey they've taken in pretty interesting though. I think they're still internationalist, and see themselves as the 'philosopher kings', destined to rule it all. But today they see liberal interventionism (often against strong, independent nations) as better suiting their agenda.

>far left here. we're called humanists
>we can't logic cuz feels
Kek

>When you look at the people who actually propose more migration they do it almost exclusively for economic reasons ie. profit. This isn't a concern for the traditional left.

Like Corbyn? I seem to recall quite a few leftist '''economic experts''' saying how Brexit would bankrupt the country, and how we must have more rapefugees because they will make the UK richer the way they have made Germany richer because they are all doctors and lawyers.

At least that's what they were saying before, now its all 'widows and orphaned babies and how could you not give these poor people all your money you islamophobe.'

Stalinist here. You NatSoc and Trotskyite losers need to remember who wiped the floor with your guys, and why.

COMMIES GET THE FUCK OUT

Because Russia is cold in the winter ?

m8, your ideologically pure socialism hasn't, in over 100 years, ever been tried has it? So what does this tell you?

>Because historically it's never been the case.

Neither has True Socialism™.

>Moneyed individuals will use their influence and power to exploit the workers

How about we're unequivocal from day one. Profit is allowed but must all be declared and transparent. Wealth tax is applied progressively. Anyone dissenting and trying to squirrel away money will be walled.

Have a Pepe, comrade

The traditional left is near kaput. I was just making the point that left wing isn't inherently anti-borders. That's pretty much the core of the ideology we're talking about ITT.

Trotsky, Strauss, and the Neocons, by Justin Raimondo
antiwar.com/justin/j061303.html

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37486397

So is Jeremy 'no limits' Corbyns not old left enough for you? Is he a secret Blairite in disguise?

m8 I gave you two real world examples of socialist states that weren't open borders fagfests. And I'm not fucking endorsing Corbyn (though AYY to nationalisng the power grid). Jesus fuck the issue of internationalism was the very fucking reason Trotsky got a fucking axe through his kike head. Learn fucking nuance.

Anti-Migrant Slovak PM Robert Fico is "a leftist whose anti-immigration views are in line with neighbours Poland and Hungary"
breitbart.com/london/2016/03/06/anti-migrant-slovak-pm-robert-fico-wins-election-but-faces-tough-task-to-form-majority/

kys commie fuck

Immigration - Agreeing With Liberals For The Wrong Reasons
youtube.com/watch?v=vLE4g0AYK1Q

So you're a democrat now?

I'm more of a moderate, but I think left and right have good points

Wait, fuck

>If it isn't immediately profitable there is no incentive to be innovative so out tech stagnates
Prime example:
>Digital camera invented by Kodak employee in 1970's. Supervisors think it's cool but won't sell. Think film is forever.
>Today: Kodak is basically broke and film is basically obsolete on the consumer market

Lefti here,this board is retard as fuck,and all discussion end in Ad Hominem!

I've always thought myself as a working leftist but according to modern collage educated NEET and SJW leftists I am an alt-right shitlord.

So no apparently there's no leftists here. Other than trolls and shills that is.

Shh, how about a nice song?

youtube.com/watch?v=1dIItDBkvA0

I've tried to make some arguments, but the faggot left. See my previous posts. My point is that the new-left is a neoliberal vassal. I'm not even that against neoliberalism, but I am baffled at modern leftists and their confused affectations, like says. Please enlighten me if I'm dead wrong

Libertarian Socialist checking in

Marxist here. I spent most of my time on /his/ and leftypol, but post here pretty often to rustle feathers.

new-left is a neoliberal vassal
Are you retard?

I got shunned by the modern left when I read them Marx and tried to imply that islam too is opium of the people.

Yeah! You heard me collage leftist "Marxists" got triggered when I literally read them Marx.

you're complaining about liberalism. we are not liberals. A lot of people get swept up in the baffling storm of capitalist ideology and fall for lies.

In my heart I'm a proponent of mikhail bakunin. Mainly that communism stemming from the state always ends in tyranny and corruption (pic related). That said as nice as the bottom left compass corner sounds a lot of people are still basically shit and either will not contribute to the collective good because they're so classcucked, racist, conceited, muh brow sweat, etc or simply lazy and stupid and want to wallow in filth and masturbate.
Personally I think the only solution for the current clusterfuck would be to eliminate around 80% of the gobel pop, erase all prior history and culture and start over with a monoracial and monocultrual meritocracy based on science, technology, engineering and environmental balance, were relevant experts in relevant fields determined specific policies. Cultural motivation would be to colonizing the solar system and extract maximum energy from said system and maintain max pop to then start moving to other systems. All births should be genetically modified and cybornetic enhancements are heavily utilized. Children are collectively raised and educated informally, they gravitate to what they enjoy and excel at under individuals willing to teach them. Basically being human inherently sucks so let's use tech to evolve past it already and become Starlords

I don't go on /his/ much. Cred Forums, Cred Forums and Cred Forums are my home. leftypol is a bit too slow for my liking

This kind of leftist is alright

not an argument. From what I see, today's college going left-wing is completely confused about what leftism actually is. They are obsessed with political corectness and anti-xenophobia, but play right into neoliberal hands in the grand strategic political game.

>you're complaining about liberalism
No I'm not. I'm talking about people who legitimately believe they are socialists and hate capitalism, but politically tend to favor liberals either out of deep confusion or ignorance, or sometimes because "hey, it's better than fascists". It's literally the same in every country.

They clearly don't have a concept of class struggle or Marxist economics. The battleground has been shifted to identity politics, which suits the right well. Keeps people divided. And misrepresentation of socialism in media and education doesn't help.

This. The neoliberals got the modern left by the balls. The libs obliterated the left in the XXth century and now an even more radical wing of capitalists are now making them their bitch. Being a leftist today has to be embarrassing.

I'm a bit of a liberal myself, but I think they are going too far. Neoliberalism is economic pragmatism to the point of nihilism. Globalism is destroying cultural identities and honestly, it's just getting dangerous. Ironically, it's the conservatives who are )pushing it back to (hopefully) classical liberalism, while the pussy left is chugging on neoliberal dick lmfao

National-Socialist here (a literal nazi!!!)

Im not a fan of capitalism but the reason i dont like it is because its hijacked by jewry and exploited by jews. The capitalist idea works. But it has it flaws. Capitalism made women work, capitalism destroys cultures, its all about money. National-Capitalism would be cool, but i guess thats just retarded, i dont know.
Any capitalists here? Would like you guys to inform me more

Anyway, Fuck pure socialism, fuck """democratic""" socialism

And exscuse me for my retarded typing

Lefty here. This discussion is futile. Nobody's going to change their minds. I'm out of here

/his/ is great, it's got more hard lefties than fascists

Gtfo

#
>So you're a democrat now?
Democrat aka neoliberal

> The capitalist idea works. But it has it flaws.

You're correct. I believe that democratic liberalism is actually the most functional non-conservative model than can function while accomodating some sort of equality-based progressive structure.

The fact that western liberalism accomodated progressive ideology in a much more sactisfatory way than pretentious revolutionary lefty states such as the USSR are, to me, proof of this. The left never recovered from thier terrible experiences of the XXth century, and that's something even Zizek agrees to. The Soviets Union and many other commie laboratories became less femministic, more homophobic and all-around less progressive in many aspects than the modern capitalist states.

If you're against women working or is completely obsessed with preserving your culture, you're a tradicionalist conservative. Capitalism is very adaptive and could work if went back to 19th century values about women or whatever the fuck too, if that's what you're complaining. I wouldn't necessarily want that, though

>The neoliberals got the modern left by the balls
Truth. Most of the left is WAY WAY left ideologically than the Democratic Party. The Republican and Democratic Parties had might as well merge and call themselves the Corpratist Party.