Where do you fall, lefty /pol/?
socially libertarian
domestically social democrat - I support a market economy, but am for more democratically run firms, and basic economic support programs including universal healthcare, temporary housing, and humane mental institutions
capitalist in economic development - socialist policies are almost completely ineffective, sometimes even damaging, in poor countries that need to move forward.
Sympathetic to left-anarchist values (particularly anarcho-syndicalism and mutualism), but not an anarchist because I don't see it as feasible
for environmental protection
appealing philosophical and political figures: Peter Kropotkin, Murray Bookchin, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Martin Heidegger (in philosophy only), Dogen Zenji, Zhuangzi, William Kunstler, Friedrich Nietzsche, Max Stirner, Julian Assange (and the cypherpunk movement in general), George Orwell (see his journalistic works), Glenn Greenwald, Chris Hedges
Primary news sources: The Economist, Foreign Policy
Religion: non-religious, though generally supportive of Soto Zen, Quakerism, and Reform Judaism
Election: I'm sympathetic to Bernie Sanders and John McAfee. I'm not particularly sympathetic to anyone else. If/when it comes down to Clinton vs Trump vs Johnson vs Stein, I'd support Clinton over Trump for pragmatic reasons, but Stein is the only good candidate out of the four, and Johnson is also honestly preferable to Clinton.
>>76839292
/thread
Better dead than red.
>>76839292
this
>>76839033
>>76839235
>>76839033
That scale is absurdist. I am a liberal as are most educated people for the simple reason that an education necessarily leads you to the conclusion that there are very few questions that ever have a single, best answer. And, as a voting citizen of the United States of America, I do no work "within" the system. I am the system. It is a democratically elected Republic, and I vote with other citizens to determine who our leaders will be.
>>76839813
Modern Russia is not communist though. Change it to the USSR
>>76839944
Yeah but communism ruined it and it's a shithole aside from the military.
>>76839813
>Taiwan on the China pic
Delet this
>>76839926
Meh, save it. I only posted the image because I missed out on replying to this thread last time it was made, so I remade it.
It may be absurd, but it's not absurdist. Camus is absurdist. Absurdism is the view that we construct the meaning of our own lives, just as the existentialists say, but the absurdists go one step further and say that we'll inevitably see through any meaning we construct. Absurdism asserts that the meaning of life is in the very effort of that construction. I don't buy it, but it's a very popular philosophy among college kids.
>>76839813
You didn't read my post (>>76839235)
I'm for a mixed economy, and am a capitalist in economic development
>>76840289
Huh, you're correct. Apparently, absurdist only means "pertaining to absurdity" when used as an adjective but, when used as a noun, pertains to an absurdist branch of philosophy whose adherent are absurdists.
>>76839033
you talking to me?
>>76839235
> The Economist, Foreign Policy
>topfuckinglel
i am a 17-year old intellectual starter pack
Economist did nothing but shill for neocon wars and neoliberal economics, until 2008 crisis got to big to ignore. its pretentious pabulum.
>>76840051
>>76839944
USSR was never communist. Communism implies the absence of a state
Wow poortugal and a bunch of other no name niggers tell us again how when they're card carrying party members they'll throw the proletariat around. Are you guys all in fucking highschool?
>>76840767
no it fucking doesnt you mong. anarchism is supposed to be ultimate stage of communism, where the state withers away.
>>76840759
What news sources do you prefer? Because it seems to me you're full of hot air.
Out of a helicopter ;)
>>76840988
>>76840767
>no true Scotsman
>>76841083
GAS THE MAPLEFROGS RACE WAR NOW GET READY FOR SOME ALL AMERICAN BEEF JEWDEAU
https://youtu.be/zhrYY3ocQ5o
TRUMP WILL FREE US FROM THE GLOBALIST RULE
>>76840961
Yes it does, you literally don't know what you're talking about. Marx believed in a "dictatorship of the proletariat", in which goods would be controlled by a proletariat government as a transition point to statelessness, when equality was achieved. Bakunin, a contemporary of Marx and the most significant anarchist philosophy in history, rejected the dictatorship of the proletariat phase, saying that if members of the proletariat assumed power they'd become an even more corrupt and brutal elite than the capitalist elite. THAT is the difference between the two.
I'm generally progressive in terms of economics, but I also respect the rights of the individual and ergo am libertarian at times.
I am for universal healthcare and better wages but also think that the federal government's money would be better spent on making Americans GET money by having jobs, not GIVE them money. I think that stuff like the WPA was totally awesome because instead of giving poor Americans varying amounts of cash while they sit on their lazy assess and do nothing, they instead get a job AND they work on stuff that benefits the community. Schools, pools, libraries and cemeteries. Win-win in my book.
I also believe that individual tru flat tax would help the nation since it would make it more fair and less complicated effectively reducing government spending of the IRS. If everyone had the same income tax, then they pay proportional amounts. But I also think since corporations are not people, they can be taxed differently since an exponential tax rate is a moral judgement on a citizen's wealth. The only reason why a rich guy should pay at different rates then the poor man is only if they are not human at all.
I support Bernie Sanders because he's a progressive and purely because he is more transparent than Hillary and he avidly speaks out against money and corruption in American politics.
I am pro-racial and sexual equality but reject the stance of SJWs. People have a right to disagree you know, and calling them ignorant isn't going to help. Also, I only think you are either straight, gay, or other. I refuse to support any others until proof comes up that gender identity disorder, despite years of scientific study, is not in fact a mental illness.
Pic related is my American hero
>>76840961
>no it fucking doesnt you mong.
At least bother yourself with reading wiki page
>>76841101
Nope, it's not that fallacy, simply because USSR violated literally almost every single principle of what a communist society should be
>>76841280
What do you think about USSR? Can it be accurately defined as a socialist nation?
>>76839033
>>76839235
>>76840289
>>76840407
>>76840696
>>76840767
>>76840982
>>76841280
>>76842935
>>76843831
>>76843910
>>76839033
Marxism-Leninism
>>76843910
Yes.
>>76844097
>muh every dissenting opinion is surely the guise of trolls from Reddit
>muh leave me alone in my hugbox
>>76844199
But isn't the main tenet of socialism the workers owning the means of production? In what way did the USSR workers owned the means of production?
>>76844329
What do you own? That's mine now. I just have to assert dominance over it when I wish to claim it. I'm the proprietor of all objects
>>76843910
Yes, IMO it definitely can, although it was an extremely dysfunctional one. Again, I'm for mixed economies like those advocated for by most social democratic parties, and those fall far to one side of the socialist spectrum. The USSR falls far on the other end. And while the USSR did implement socialist policies, it failed to attain socialism's goals (alleviating poverty, stopping a corrupt elite).
>>76844652
I'm for democratic rape. Non white men are still 3/5th of a person. Turner dindu nuffin
>>76839033
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
COMMIES GET OUT!!!!!!!!!
>>76844329
Through the state and vanguard party, which were run by workers. I accept the USSR stagnated and ossified because of the bureaucracy, but certainly the means of production were not privately owned. Surplus value was not used to hoard private profit, but instead funded infrastructure, medical care etc. for the people, everything was re-invested into the economy. Workers were extremely hard to fire, unemployment was basically non-existent for 60 years.
>>76844814
Not one commie in this thread so far
>>76844802
So you literally have nothing better to do then shit up someone else thread? Go back to some cuck thread
>>76844867
>Through the state and vanguard party, which were run by workers
One could easily claim that the state was run by workers merely on paper, that the state was there to satisfy the need of the party officials(replacing the borgeois).
ISn't Soviet union what i think Marx called state capitalist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
>>76844768
It definitely failed in that regard, but the problem with the term socialism is that it's been expanded and become so broad. In many ways Soviet-style socialism was a funhouse-style distortion of socialism. Government controlled the means of production. In theory the body governing it should've been the workers themselves, but the Soviet system had become so corrupt that it was anything but - you had to support a massive party or face severe consequences. One of the most obvious distortions was unions - in theory those unions should've been political bodies for workers to democratically decide on the actions of firms. Instead, they were huge, thuggish, corrupt government bodies used to exploit the workers as much as possible. The Soviets were power-hungry authoritarians who used the socialist banner as a political tool to take power, then distorted every element of the socialist system to their ends. But while the Soviet government was used to almost opposite ends of socialism, it still functioned on some level as a socialist system.
>>76844936
Shitting in shit doesn't make it any less shit
>>76839033
>>76844936
You just won a free helicopter ride
>>76845335
>It definitely failed in that regard,
Then how can you consider USSR socialist? It's like calling something capitalism when there is no private property.
>The Soviets were power-hungry authoritarians who used the socialist banner as a political tool to take power, then distorted every element of the socialist system to their ends.
Exactly.
>>76845353
Why are you so obnoxious? I'm not communist, and the proxy bro isn't either. We are both still capitalists. Why are you so closed to a little discussion?
>>76844097
At least I bring an opinion based on fact and reason and not shitpost memes
>>76845580
Because I can't find anyone here to agree with me and I'm kind of an asshole irl too. I hardly use any services. I hunt and garden for most of my food. Im forced into paying for healthcare I never use. I drive on almost exclusively the shittiest two roads in my province. Ive never collected a cheque other than income tax which I still feel cheated on. I'm forced into buying public insurance for my car. When i worked on government projects i was foeced into a union and then forced to hire natives to get around the other union cronies that would come for 1 turn around than go back to ei for the most part. I just want family to be the only thing we have past individualism. If someone can't sustain themselves with all the help available in current year I have no doubt they would be first to go in the gulag. Anything inherently high up on an authoritarian scale isn't much different no matter who's in charge. I'm upset by all of it. As much as you might not want to admit the pestering jews were attempted to slaughter for the same reason anyone portraying bourgeois tendencies was. They go against the grain. I'd like to see no grain in the way of a politics not because I'm a libertarian, which I'm not; but because I'm tired of pandering, public debt, riots, immigrants, lack of family and faith, and a myriad of other things I see wrong. If people stopped mingling we would have far less altercations
What does "the people owning the meanings of production" even mean anyway? Who are "the people" and how do they own/operate those means?
>>76845203
I disagree with the state capitalist assessment, it implies the bureaucrats operated with the same motives and methods as the capitalist bourgeoisie, which was blatantly false, given the equality of wealth and communal nature of work and life in the USSR. Ironically, I would call Russia today state capitalist, where cronies siphon off all the wealth with the backing of Putin's state.
Even if the party officials replaced the bourgeoisie, they didn't have anywhere near the power or wealth that the bourgeoisie do under capitalism.
>>76839033
>>76839235
>shithole country
>commie
coincidence?
>>76846380
>they didn't have anywhere near the power or wealth that the bourgeoisie do under capitalism.
The same goes for all the other classes as well.
>>76846254
>that wall of text
Go write a blog. I don't care about you or your story
If you are fishing for attetion get a Israel proxy
>>76846377
>What does "the people owning the meanings of production" even mean anyway?
Exactly what it means Rui.
>Who are "the people"
The people.
>and how do they own/operate those means?
This one is hard. Unions is a start, i guess. But that question is best answered by someone who actually read socialist literature
>>76846380
fair enough.
>>76846136
>>76846640
An uneducated leftist. What a fucking novel sight. Go ahead, cite academia. I think, therfore I am offended. Jesus Christ you're a fucking idiot. That's why I'm being obnoxious. Because you won't even entertain a different idea. Like I said. Shitting in shit
>>76839033
I fall with HillDawg
>>76846892
>Exactly what it means Rui.
Which is?
>>Who are "the people"
>The people.
So everyone owns everything and are able to operate everything? Seems great.
>This one is hard. Unions is a start, i guess.
But you said it's the people. Now it's the unions?
>But that question is best answered by someone who actually read socialist literature
Don't bother asking them either, they've still not planned past the revolution phase.
>>76846997
>the irony
You are trying to silence dissenting opinion so you could keep on circlejerking with other tards
The thing is if /pol/ was moderated by it's users, this kind of posts would be pruned immediately. That is why i think i would be a good janitor. I fucking hate you all with passion
>>76847165
Wow. Racist and sexist and fascist much?
>>76839033
>Marxist
>redpill
>>76847139
>Which is?
The workers owning the means of production
>So everyone owns everything and are able to operate everything?
No the workers control the means of production. The Steel mill workers are the ones who own the steel mill.
>>76847229
I'm racist. Not sexist, but i believe in traditional family. Not fascist but a little near. More of a social democrat with a huge racist undertone
>>76847260
It's the ultimate one.But you are too brainwashed to even entertain the thought
>>76846540
I do development work, which is why I am where I am. I'm American. And I'm not a communist.
>>76847139
>But you said it's the people. Now it's the unions?
Unions are in it's essence a body of workers.
>>76839235
I should add Reuters to my news sources
>sanders calls himself a communist and socialist
>put him as far from marxist as possible on a scale
ok then
>>76846540
>>76839235
>shithole country
>commie
>commie autist replies, "coincidence?"
coincidence?
>>76847165
Freedom reigns. Go jump off a cliff, kike slave.
>>76847361
>The Steel mill workers are the ones who own the steel mill.
buy stock in your company
>>76847584
>sanders calls himself a communist and socialist
Source? He is a social democrat, therefore still a capitalist.
>>76839033
where is Hitler in that pic?
>>76847581
R A R E
A
R
E
>>76847581
you should k.y.s.
there are NO good leftist countries
>>76847658
look at his political career
>>76847629
There is free speach in this place simply becasue it isn't the users moderating this place, that is alll i'm trying to say.
>>76847653
When they can't barely sustain their family, you are expecting him to gather a few millions of dollars, and engage in something he doesn't have a clue?
Grow up kiddo
>>76846997
I rest my case
>>76847361
>The workers owning the means of production
Everyone is a worker. Does everyone own every mean of production?
>No the workers control the means of production. The Steel mill workers are the ones who own the steel mill.
How is maximum efficiency assured?
And you didn't clarify the union part. How will the workers control the means of production if the unions control them instead?
To finish making your heads explode, I'm anti-racist but against anti-hate speech laws because I'm socially libertarian and for free speech. Also, my paternal grandparents are Jewish.
Have a nice day.
>>76847165
No, he's not trying to silence it, he's trying to discredit it, and banter the person. There's a massive fucking difference
>>76847492
>Marxism
>the ultimate redpill
>a bunch of philosophical ramblings from a man who never had a real job in his life about the labor market, almost all of which are theoretically and realistically impossible, based on "muh equality"
kek I don't think so.
>>76847581
kys my man
>>76847492
I pointed out the fascism in that "wall of text." I know. And I know leftists have ok ideas. They fail to see past idea though. Look at trudeau. Bringing in such opposing viewpoints will ruin the idea of family you have with civil wars and other means. Socialism COULD work. But today, it WON'T. Much like Trump is a stepping stone towards a stronger nation, bernie could have been to a more Nordic style nation. But he tried to go all in and please too many people. Saying it's democratic wont win anybody over if he proposes undemocratic force in the way of taxes and immigrants. He's not the superhero he's made out to be
>>76847765
no, you - I'm more educated than you, my political views are based on education and personal experience, I'm better traveled than you. You get your idiotic fringe political views from an image board. I'm sure you're also a forever alone who hates women for his own sexual failings, and you're probably a NEET. Have a nice life, but do consider the alternative.
>>76839033
>leftist
>/pol/
pick one
there is Nothing more politically correct than a leftard.
>>76847492
>being a communist is the ultimate redpill but being a rugged individualist means you are too brainwashed to understand goy
Literally a Zionist plot to overthrow the Russian aristocracy that got out of hand. See my previous picture for details on what you should do.
>invent something
>don't mass produce because can't own a factory
>nothing new ever gets made
communism
not even once
>>76848162
>my political views
are retarded
>I'm better traveled than you
>I've seen more 3rd world shitholes than you
kek okay I concede on this point
>You get your idiotic fringe political views
I tend not to hold fringe political views
>from an image board
literally none of my opinions were formed on this website
>all that other stuff
who cares you dirty commie, stop shitposting and go back to your excellent interesting life then
>>76847861
>Everyone is a worker.´
Eliminate the capitalists out of equation ( the ones living out of investments and dividends) and redistribute their earnings to the people actually creating the surplus.
>Does everyone own every mean of production?
No, you own the means in wich you work.
>How is maximum efficiency assured?
By cutting out fats. Instead of profits going to people who don't work, they go too the workers and expanding... And the workers are now working for themselves, not to the jew so he can buy a new airplane
>How will the workers control the means of production if the unions control them instead?
The unions are run by workers. Sure the current ones are corrupt as fuck, but they are corrupted by the capitalists.
>>76839033
>Where do you fall, lefty /pol/?
Hopefully from the gallows
>>76848085
>No, he's not trying to silence it, he's trying to discredit it, and banter the person.
He is tryiong to derail the thread. I'm not here since yeasterday
>>a bunch of philosophical ramblings from a man who never had a real job in his life
>>76847822
>and engage in something he doesn't have a clue?
So you've pretty much described why socialism fails without fail.
Communism has been tried, yes, it just can't be achieved on a long-term, stable plan. A truly communist land with no state and collectivized means of production would just be an incessant struggle over who can do better in that same scenario. As it always has been. In Portugal that struggle lasted for a bit over a year, for example. The only way to then end that struggle is to implement a Communist dictatorship. As it always has been.
No matter how "collectivized" you think the means of production are, there will always be people left out in detriment of personal interests. That is the major flaw of collectivism.
>>76847822
>millions of dollars
>for company stocks
i still say leftypol exists just to make communists look like idiots
Remember comrades, the USSR had freedom of speech just like America! In America you can go to Washington DC and yell "The capitalist system sucks!" and nothing will happen. You can stand in Red Square and yell "The capitalist system sucks!" and nothing will happen to you there either!
>>76848442
>Eliminate the capitalists out of equation
>eliminate all the people who coordinate the economy and just have people produce stuff kek!
ever heard of the socialist calculation debate? Nobody with an education has seriously held your opinion since the 1960s
>but they are corrupted by the capitalists
kek, just blame everything on "the capitalists". Your mom die of cancer? It was the scheming capitalists, ruining the worker's family by hiding the real cures to cancer! God damn, you commies are intellectually lazy.
>>76848171
They're leddit rejects from a failed board on cripplechan.
Your scale is based on beliefs on how to bring social change? That's not what signifies each of these groups.
Terrible thread
>>76848566
>implying Milton, Murray, or Ayn Rand were nearly as pampered or inexperienced with the real world as Marx
>implying berating other academics actually addresses the problem of Marx's dubious personal background
my point stands
>he's trying to derail the thread
that's not the same as censorship
>>76848102
>Look at trudeau.
Don't know the man, not his ideas.
> Socialism COULD work. But today
Totally agree with you
>Much like Trump is a stepping stone towards a stronger nation
hahahahahhahaa
>>76848171
>muh hugbox!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>76848397
The russian jewish communist revolutionairies were atheist, and many hated the theist jews and were anti-zionist
>B-B-BUT IT'S ANOTHER JEWISH PLOT!!!!!11111!!!
Nice tinfoil
>>76848403
I'm pretty sure MArx adressed it. It's a doubt i have. How would new factories be built withputh capitalist investment?
>>76849025
>>76848162
>I'm more educated
>I'm better than you
>You are stupid sheep, accept my views as correct
>ad hominem attacks against those he disagrees with
You aren't a communist, you're a plutocrat.
>>76849025
>How would new factories be built withputh capitalist investment?
obviously the investment would have to come from the small circle of rich oligarchs who run the country
>>76848588
>Communism has been tried, yes
Where?
>>76848642
Wow, you can say words.
>>76848761
>eliminate all the people who fuck up the economy with speculation, money lending, interest, who import millions of worthless niggers and arabs
>>76848761
this. the mental gymnastics these disgusting people actually do to try & avoid recognition of the fact that they are they main culprits of their failed lives.
> FFFFFFUCK commies. i mean it.
>>76849025
>slav jews were atheist
>they totally hated their own people
>you're tinfoil for thinking one group of Jews could influence another
Joao please.
>>76839033
It always make me feel a little better to see a new flag that's uglier than ours.
>>76839235
Welp, that's pretty much me as well. Except I would only name Kropotkin among those you mention. I'd add Chomsky, Bakunin (for his analysis and fiery prose, not the violence).
I generally watch/listen to Jimmy Dore and The Humanist Report to follow US politics. I won't begrudge Bernie or Bust folks, nor those who will vote for Clinton. It's a tough choice.
>>76849025
>Much like Trump is a stepping stone towards a stronger nation
>hahahahahhahaa
Ah yes this is one of them "non arguments" the left is so fond of
>>76849205
In a socialist society you can't accumulate capital.
>>76849294
It's crazy that what /leftypol/ users call capitalists is exactly the same as what /pol/tards call jews.
>>76839033
you fall here
>>76849489
just because you "can't" doesn't mean people won't
>>76849313
You can say words (and not get arrested for it) is the point I'm going for, Joao. You can't question or criticize the leadership in a communist country.
>>76845982
saved
>>76849313
Who exactly are these people? Will lending be allowed in a communist economy? Do you think money should even exist?
I'm not actually interested at this point in trying to convince you or anyone reading that you're wrong, I'm just vaguely interested to see how retarded you actually are.
>>76849468
I'm not leftist. By your accounts i am a far right guy
But yes, if you think Trump is anything else then a joke, you are wrong
>>76840051
>shithole asides from the military
know any other countries which might fit that description?
>>76849468
not an argument, I'm afraid
>>76839033
wow, look at all those jews
pure coincidence
>>76849662
>But yes, if you think Trump is anything else then a joke, you are wrong
don't let the door hit you on the way out
>>76849566
Then it's not a socialist society
capitalist == capital
>>76849574
> You can't question or criticize the leadership in a communist country.
No? I'm pretty sure the russians did it. Just not in public.
My country was a capitalist dictatorship and people were arrested and torutred for badmouthing the gov. Estado Novo was highly anti-communist.
Socialism is not authoritarian by definition
>>76849616
>Will lending be allowed in a communist economy?
Currency doesn't exist in a communist society, iirc
>Do you think money should even exist?
My opinions are not relevant in discussing Communism/socialism. Again, i am somewhat aligned with many of /pol/ popular ideas.
>>76839033
Pic is garbage. Sanders and Stein are full blown socialists. Obama is pretty damn close too.
>>76848220
Wow sure showed me
>>76849025
Wow sure showed me
>>76849799
I will be here for the whole fucking day in November posting so much that i will get a permaban when Trump Looses. God, it will be epic.
The democrats haven't had an actual moderate since the 80's. They've all been fringe or far left of center. Closest is possibly Clinton who's more of a neocon. Republicans same thing neocons since Reagan.
>>76850102
>Pic is garbage. Sanders and Stein are full blown socialists. Obama is pretty damn close too.
Source? Your fee fees are not source
>>76850241
Obama is a centrist
>>76850296
You can visit Sanders and Steins pages they put up or hear them talk. They're socialists through and through.
>>76850324
No. Obamacare was illegal and socialized medicine further. Common Core socialized education further. Lunch programs socialized further.
>>76850324
lol no
>>76850324
>>76850241
>muh left right centrist etc
it's relative so it doesn't fucking mean anything
stop being so autistic. Being one thing or label doesn't mean Obama is any more or less of a marxist nigger
>>76850580
128thPBP
>>76850580
It matters because they had some actual candidates that were seemingly moderate like Jim Webb and Mcballsack.
>>76850241
You mean on social issues? Because Obama tried to cut social security. He bailed out the banks and has generally been just as loyal to his corporate backers as any Republican would be.
>>76849313
>Where?
Huh, every single country that held a Revolution? In Portugal too. Didn't you know that?
>>76850754
I don't see much of a difference between either of them that have been in power since 88. I can go on about Bush who did no child left behind who then left it to fucking kennedy to write up. He also put in medicare part D which was huge.
>>76850580
If you were not to be edgy for a second: Do you actually think Obama is a marxist? Do you feel like he has pushed for a lot of marxist policies? Do you even understand what the term marxism implies?
All those questions were rhetorical, please just keep on being a burger with extra mayo.
>>76850754
>le right wing ebil rich corporate banker meme
>>76850367
I don't know who Stein his. But Bernie is a capitalist. He just wants to nationalize healthcare and have a higher minimum wage.
>>76850580
>it's relative so it doesn't fucking mean anything
I know. I just have to adapt my speech to the place i am in.
> Obama is any more or less of a marxist
source?
>>76839926
Wigga Please.
Liberals are anti-science, anti-logic, anti-choice. Liberals seek to grow the size of the dumbest people in society (blacks, hispanics) and the size of the inefficient bureaucratic government. This ridicoulus dual mandate will destroy our country.
Whites and Asians are genetically more intelligent than blacks and hispanics and are therefore less needing of a large government to help them live. If you want a first world country you need two things:
- a first world people (East Asians, Whites)
-a first world system (competitive capitalistic meritocracy with free speech rights)
>>76851131
>I don't know who Stein his. But Bernie is a capitalist. He just wants to nationalize healthcare and have a higher minimum wage.
That just isn't true in his past nor present views and actions. He isn't even clear on healthcare actually works let alone minimum wage. He doesn't identify crony capitalists and just says banks in general with little knowledge of the subject.
>>76851131
>>76849025
>>76847658
Do you know anything?
>>76850956
>Do you actually think Obama is a marxist?
Yes. Read the book, "The Amateur".
>Do you feel like he has pushed for a lot of marxist policies?
Not in general, but his border security and racial justice and title IX policies are pretty far in that direction. His healthcare reform is not very marxist in its implementation with all the 1000s of pages of special interest, but the general idea is quite socialistic.
>>76844814
This
>>76850917
I'd agree with that. I don't get how you see the Democratic party as being fringe left or even left of center though. It depends on how you define it I suppose, but they mostly seem like status quo elite types to me (ie. power sluts with exceptions for social issues that already have a lot of support in the general population).
>>76850915
The "communist" states that had a "communist" revolution say they were trasitory states to a communist society. We both know that they ended up as authritarian shitholes
> In Portugal too.
We never had a communist revolution. We had Societ backed attempts after 74.
Again, communism implies the absence of state.
>>76850981
They always side with the winner. And Obama was the clear winner
Also when they think of big interest reublican they think of Bush, who literally started a war for corporate interests
>>76851832
>it's another communism hasn't been tried because it requires open borders and a one world government episode
Well. I'm gonna go get fucking hammered or something. Not like I'm learning anything here
>>76851457
>He isn't even clear on healthcare actually works
It works for the rest of the world.
> let alone minimum wage.
I have to aggre that doubling the minimum wage is a little extreme. Maybe if he does it in the course of 7-8 years
>>76840767
>Literally becoming the straw man from another person's straw man argument
>>76852361
I'm not getting the (you)'s from you. This sucks ;(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
For you. Read the first paragraph
>BUT FACTS MAKE MY THINKY HURT
>>76851540
I have absolutely no faith in the claim that Obama believes in class struggle and has a marxist outlook. Furthermore, the private concentration of wealth has reached new heights under his presidency, not exactly very marxist to say the least. If he is indeed a marxist, he is the most inept one to ever have existed (in regards to being a marxist).
I can't comment on border security (Hillary is all for keeping Mexicans out btw) but racial justice just seems like modern day progressivism, even if it had its roots in the marxist tradition. Anyone who's for any government funded program is marxist to some degree, so I think slapping the term on him for his minimal contributions to equality is a bit meaningless.
>>76852167
Portugal is poor and unimportant. Increasing the size of your government and lowering standards for everybody isn't going to fix it. It will finally kill off the wheezing corpse that is Portugal
>Marxism
>the redpill
>EVER
>>76839235
>socially libetarian
This is where I thought you were an autist
> the cypherpunk movement
This is where I knew you were an autist
>>76852769
>Portugal is poor and unimportant.
True, but it doesn't make my opinion worse and yours better. Literally not an argument. And if it was only banter, it was a bad attempt, since i don't care. I just want to live my irrelevant life at peace
>>76853127
What?
What war is Portugal knee deep in at the moment?
You honestly believe the implementation of worldwide facism wouldnt lead to all out war?? How old are?
>>76851832
>The "communist" states that had a "communist" revolution say they were trasitory states to a communist society. We both know that they ended up as authritarian shitholes
what does that make of that belief then? how many more tries do you suppose we'll have to endure?
>We never had a communist revolution. We had Societ backed attempts after 74.
Uneducated opinion. We had a very much socialist rule as you define it. Direct democracy.
>Again, communism implies the absence of state.
Which we had. Briefly. Just as all the other poor countries who were subjected to the unfortunate experience and then turned into authoritarian shitholes.
>>76853606
What are you trying to say?
>>76853754
>what does that make of that belief then?
That it was used by demagogues to reach power
>We had a very much socialist rule as you define it.
Means of production were still in private hands.
>Which we had.
source?
Daily Reminder:
If you want a first world country you need two things:
- a first world people (East Asians, Whites)
-a first world system (competitive capitalistic meritocracy with free speech rights)
>>76839033
>tfw I already have equatorial guinea but not normal guinea
>>76854134
You suggested that you wanted to live in peace. That implied that you weren't currently. Ask the Russians how peaceful their lives were in the mid-twentieth century. Why don't you grow up. Your weak country has made you weak. Grow stronger.
>>76854433
> That implied that you weren't currently.
????? What kind of logic is that?
>Your weak country has made you weak. Grow stronger.
HAHAHAHA, and let me guess, americans are strong?
>>76854592
If America isn't strong then nobody ever has been, and nobody ever will be.
>>76849454
brofist
>>76852885
if you're an authoritarian and against freedom of information, why are you on this site?
>>76855261
Don't ask leftists logical questions. You'll just confuse them.
>>76854907
America as a country is strong. But we are talking individual.
>>76855863
>>76854907 (You) #
America as a country is strong. But we are talking individual.
Well, you concede to that reality, and that's an important step. So let's play this out logically.....America is strong because it is capitalistic. Portugal is weak because it is socialistic. Yet, YOU WANT MORE SOCIALISM. How is that in any way logical? Has it ever occured to you that the very thing that you desire is the very thing that is making sick?
>>76839033
The last political test I took said "patriotic social democrat" aka nationalistic socialist.
Are u actually in Guinea?
I'm a Marxist btw
>>76839033
>redpill
>Marxism
On the left, there are only bluepills.
>>76856869
yes, doing development work
been here about 6 months
before I was in Senegal for a little over 2 years
going back to the US in a month, though
>>76839033
I guess I'm a National Socialist.
>>76854134
>That it was used by demagogues to reach power
Partially wrong, they delivered on some of their promises and did not betray the people who supported them.
>Means of production were still in private hands.
Wrong.
>Which we had.
>source?
Raquel Varela is a good start for someone who doesn't know anything of post-revolution, which is where you qualify apparently.
>>76856349
>America is strong because it is capitalistic.
No. America is strong because it has 200 million europeans and natural resources countries only ddream about. It also has a priviledge position without any dangerous neigboors and acess to the most important oceans (Pacific and Atlantic) If america was anything it would be strong DISPITE.
>Portugal is weak because it is socialistic.
Portugal is weak becasue it's tiny. USSR was strong, remember?
>Yet, YOU WANT MORE SOCIALISM
source?
>Has it ever occured to you that the very thing that you desire is the very thing that is making sick?
Oh, my bluepilled friend...
You have potential. You can leave your american conditioning. But you probably won't.
Go worship your capitalist overlord
>>76857479
>they delivered on some of their promises
who?
>Wrong.
When?
State always existed. It was severely wekened in post revolution. Still i admit i don't know much about the post-revolution, only that the americans sent a battleship to Lisbon to pressure us to accept Mario Soares
>>76857923
>Portugal is weak becasue it's tiny.
Nope, we're weak because freedom of enterprise has been but a myth around these parts. Which actually explains why several smaller countries than ours aren't remotely as shitholish.
>USSR was strong, remember?
Yes, having a completely mobilized aggregation of countries at the expense of sovereignty, freedom and overall quality of life has its perks too. Who would've thunk.
>>76857923
Leftism is the bluepill, Pancho.
America doesn't have an incredible amount of natural resources. And many countries that do have a surplus of natural resources (Venezuela) are impoverished DUE TO SOCIALISM.
We have smart people and a smart (though getting dumber) system.
Russia collapsed. The quality of life there was inhuman. You using it as an example of strength is a sure sign you don't know what you are talking about.
>>76858393
>Nope, we're weak because freedom of enterprise has been but a myth around these parts.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, tinha de ser um libertario ou um desses merdas quaisqueres. Nunca falham...
>>76858128
>who?
PCP/MRPP and all the other trash.
>State always existed. It was severely wekened in post revolution.
It was inexistent. Read "O que é uma revolução" by Raquel Varela. She's a complete PCP shill but she does explain what happened.
Still i admit i don't know much about the post-revolution, only that the americans sent a battleship to Lisbon to pressure us to accept Mario Soares
That's almost irrelevant considering the USSR was focusing more on our colonies than Portugal by then, and they had no intention of interfering with. In fact they frowned upon the Revolution itself (they didn't want to deal with the implications of the sovietization of a NATO member, even if it was a weak one).
>>76858641
>eu
>libertário
lol
>this thread
>>76858638
Leftism != socialism
>Leftism is the bluepill
Agree with you
>America doesn't have an incredible amount of natural resources.
It does. It has a huge amount of fertile land, oil, minerals...
> And many countries that do have a surplus of natural resources (Venezuela)
We can both agree that contries built on one export tend to be shitty.
Venezuela is capitalist, bro.
>a smart system.
That is importing niggers. I don't think it's a very smart system
>>76859311
Nice webm.
Now explain me in what way do the venezuelan workers own the means of production?
>>76859311
holy shit lel saved
>>76859823
>Now explain me in what way do the venezuelan workers own the means of production?
They used to, not for long though.
>>76860131
>They used to, not for long though.
So how can anyone classify Venezuela as socialism?
>inb4 anglo definitions of everything the state does it's socialism
>>76860273
I guess something went wrong in the process? I mean, the workers had ceased in fact the means of production, so what happened?
>>76839033
probably somewhere between liberal and progressive
>>76860550
I don't know. Again, i'm not a socialist, and i have my reservations of the praticability of socialism in today world. But the question is wether or not socialism existed.
>>76849025
Trump is a joke how?
>>76861095
Just loook at the Mexican judge episode.
And the concept of the wall, kek
And i thought my country politics were pitifull
>>76860980
It has existed, in our very own country inclusively, as I have pointed out to you several times in this thread. Whether you actually want to learn more about it is not my problem.
Your main trouble seems to be that you refuse to understand something has existed just because it didn't result in the expected outcome.
Has it existed? Yes, it has. Every Communist revolution had a dictatorship of the proletariat phase. I've read about many of them and I have not found one where it wasn't the case.
Has it worked out long term? Absolutely not. All of them resulted in a complete lack of guidance throughout all the productive sectors, ultimately resulting in a "temporary" totalitarian regime where things could be settled down.
>>76861512
What's wrong with the wall?
Seriously
The mexican judge episode was just an excuse for people to call him a racist once more
who cares
>politicians never make mistakes
>>76861512
They are.
The judge episode was nothing but Marxist media fishing. I'm for the wall, we need to keep inferior people out (if we are to maintain a first world quality way of life).
>>76861760
>What's wrong with the wall?
It's a stupid costly innefective idea
>The mexican judge episode was just an excuse for people to call him a racist once more
No, it's book definition racism. Trump said that the judge could not make his work well because he was mexican. That is very low tier in my book. If he was american he would have lost my vote because of that.
>>76861992
> I'm for the wall
There are more effective ways
>>76860131
which is what happens EVERYFUCKINGTIME FUCK THESE COMMIES
>>76862514
>It's a stupid costly innefective idea
>costly
who cares
>innefective
how
>No, it's book definition racism.
"hurr muh wacissm"
I thought you were a racist yourself?
>Trump said that the judge could not make his work well because he was mexican.
Who knows, maybe.
Maybe he would feel slightly biased towards mexican cases
>it's a "believe us pol is left wing" episode
You lefties are so delusional thinking that just because you make shitty threads you are going to take over /pol/. Fucking retards, go back to your shitty 8 chan board with no visits.
I hate all of you.
>>76839292
>>76839630
>>76839746
hahahaha ebin XDD
>>76863324
>commie
>in america
Want to switch? My government is left as fuck, has been for years. It has gun control and immigrants from Haiti. We don't have any kind of border patrol too. All the good things you love.
>>76839033
The ground is always an option.
>>76863064
People can dig under a wall. They can hop on the wall. They can go by boat. They can overstay their visa (wich is what happens nowadays).
>I thought you were a racist yourself?
I am. But that is just a cheap hit. I'm racist in a way that i don't want niggers on my country. They can stay in thier country for all i care. And i don0t believe in racial superiority.
>Maybe he would feel slightly biased towards mexican cases
But judges work is ignore their bias. If he felt he had a unfair veridict because the judge was mexican, then he would appeal.
>>76839033
fucking loled at maoist rebel news
>>76839813
Nice meme
>>76840988
>>76841083
HAHAHA FUCKINGGG EPICCCCCCCC MAN XDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!
>>76841101
>someone tries to point out objective differences you could find in a fucking dictionary
>HURRRRRRR LE NO TROO SGOTSMAN XDDD!!!!!!!!!!!
Every. Fucking. Time.
>>76844097
le post le dank memes
>>76845414
ebin
>>76847584
>calls himself a communist
source?
name a bigger cuckoldry than being a leftist?
>protip: you can't
>>76839033
top bait thread. I'm glad to see the lefty faggot is agreeing with you, it makes my life so much easier because now i feel no reason to not filter his trip.
>>76856997
reminder that the creators of the Matrix and originators of the terms "red pill" and "blue pill" were lefties
also >tfw further left than #4
>>76864991
Don't mind them. They are usefull idiots.
>>76865139
It was not actually meant to me, but the "lefty"s in /pol/
Is communism a mental disorder?
>Pro tip
It is
>>76868208
>political ideologies I don't like are mental disorders
Brezhnev pls go.
>>76868582
There are plenty ideologies I do not like.
Only one of them is a mental disorder
>>76868762
>a political ideology can be a mental disorder
Still sounds like something Brezhnev would say.
In a communist land am I forced to work? What work do I have to do? Can I choose which work I do?
In a socialist land am I forced to work? What work do I have to do? Can I choose which work I do?
Is an Aboriginal tribe communist?
Is an Aboriginal tribe socialist?
>>76839033
>Implying marxism isn't the most bluepilled of them all
>>76868914
Well sounds like he had a mental disorder
Can I pursue random shit in a communist land?
Can I pursue random shit in a socialist land?
Do I have freedom of speech in a communist land?
Do I have freedom of speech in a socialist land?
>>76839630
Better dead than red.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgjlwmWnpZo
>>76839033
either out of a helicopter or into an oven
>>76869284
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DozeQuEMgbY
They shall never take us.
>>76869284
>or into an oven
Old habits die hard
>a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.
wow this sounds lame
So I can't own my own stuff?
>>76839033
conservative marxist.
>>76869501
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkr01bWJnM4
It is lame.
>>76868929
>In a socialist land am I forced to work?
I don0t think welfare is a thing in socialism.
>>76869007
>socialism in a non-industrial society
(You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You) (You)
>>76840759
This is correct, the Economist in particular is vapid nonsense written by 22-year-old tofflets.
>>76869732
I'm trying to learn.
Can I own my own things in a communist society? Or do I have to share it? Or I can't own my own things?
>>76869932
private property is not a thing in a socialist society. But i don't know how personal objects work in such a system
>>76839033
What do Questlove and Stephen Hawking have to do with politics?
>>76870085
Can I sell/trade personal objects for other objects?
>>76843910
Yes
>>76870085
Is Universal Healthcare good in your view? Please explain why or why not
>>76848442
If you eliminate the business owners, wouldn't there be no businesses?
I still don't understand if I'm forced to work in a Socialist or Communist land or not. Can I just do nothing or will I be forced to participate?
>>76870236
I'll trade my deodorant for your dildo
>>76870567
Yes it's good, because it is way more efficient then private/semi-private healthcare.
>>76870657
>wouldn't there be no businesses?
Not in the traditional form
I don't get how the fuck this system works. I'm trying to read the wikipedia. Are people punished for doing things? How is everyone organized?
>>76871049
I'll trade you these gold rocks which are shaped like small disks and if you want you can trade me certain amounts of them for different things.
>>76871158
care to explain how it would be more efficient? Please go into detail if you know enough about it.
>>76840982
You should move here, you sound like you'd love CNN.
>>76871193
Well, try reading Karl Marx
i hope all of you get gassed in the coming war for advocating the destruction of western civilization so you can get free shit
>>76870688
What I understand when I look at Marx's theory is that you can do anything as long as it is productive. But that's where the theory falls apart. How can you be productive if you as a person can't own the means of production? Idk. It sounds like Marx just wants a worldwide commune.
>>76839033
>lefty /pol/
>>76871193
I think we should name these small disks shekels.
>>76871274
Can you give me a simple answer to whether or not people are forced to work and what the punishments are IF ANY for not working ?
>>76871426
Okay so what happens if I don't do something """productive""" and who gets to chose what is productive?
I really don't understand how this shit works at all.
Maybe I can understand why communism would be okay in tiny little groups like tribes in Aboriginal Australia but I can't imagine how this would ever work on any large scale.
All right, I'm going to give /pol/ a quick intellectual history lesson, not that it'll do any good.
1) Marx was a social scientist, and analyzed society it terms of exploiter vs. exploited -- to wit, there's always an elite, and they'll always be trying to work the peons for all they're worth. Their interests are opposed.
2) Then there's the activist Marx who advocated a specific political program.
You can think Marx was right about (1) without (2).
>>76871597
Idk. Marx doesn't really talk about what communism will be like. All he really does is complain and talk about what he thinks will happen in the future. There's really no reason why he was such a big impact on history. The ideologies of "communist" parties is nowhere even close to what Marx taught. For example, the idea of a vanguard party was put forth by Lenin, not Marx
>>76871817
Marx was a beta faggot who just complained his whole life. Don't try to make him look intelligent.
>>76871418
>for advocating the destruction of western civilization
Source?
>>76871459
>muh hugbox!!!!!
>>76871597
I don't know. I'm not a socialist, not am i well versed in socialist literature
>>76871813
cummunal farming != socialism
