/lit/ - Literature

*Mongolian throat sings while browsing /lit/*

>>11656203
Feudelist workers used pitchforks.

reminder socialists will always use this exact same argument and the "if you don't like it leave" against primitivists

>How can you criticize feudalism if you own clothes made by your mother in feudalism
>How can you criticize global capitalism if you enjoy a video game console made by child slaves in global capitalism
Do socialists actually not see any difference between these?
Not to mention feudalism as an economic system bears a significantly closer resemblance to socialism than capitalism, despite "muh inequality"

>>11656367
>Not to mention feudalism as an economic system bears a significantly closer resemblance to socialism than capitalism, despite "muh inequality"
do you just wake up and think about how retarded you can possibly be on the internet

>>11656367
>Not to mention feudalism as an economic system bears a significantly closer resemblance to socialism than capitalism, despite "muh inequality"

>>11656452
>>11656466
read steven pinker

>>11656495
read ass? what does that mean

>>11656495
How about proving your point instead of dodging responsibility?

>>11656203
>he doesn't realize that most innovation, particularly the technology we use today, is the result of subsidized research

Explain yourself, Jordan.

>>11656452
>do you just wake up and think about how retarded you can possibly be on the internet
Holy fuck my sides

>>11656203
>You say your an individualist, yet you have friends and family. How de3liciously ironifc!

socialists are very pro industrialization and technological progress. a product of its time. its ultimately just reformist capitalism. boring stale and dead

>>11656452
>>11656466
Which parts of feudalism resemble capitalism?

>>11656203
The more I hear stupidity from post-socialists the more I'm okay with sending the kulaks down the river.

>>11656561
Just like anti-trust law. We are doomed to the world of military–industrial complex

>>11656547
I think that was exactly his point. He’s not talking about Capitalism or Communism, he’s talking about Socialism.

Isn't socialism literally anything that benefits the social order?

So technology can be socialist or anti-socialist or even neutral

>>11656599
Woh dude, thats like... the moral of technology used in literature.

>>11656209
Underrated

>>11656589
Where's the irony then? Socialists aren't opposed to owning technology.

>>11656599
no

>>11656495
That implies that you've read it. If you can't even argue against what the book was arguing on for hundreds of pages maybe you should improve your reading comprehension there a bit bud.

>>11656203
Socialism has to be defined. The government owns everything, or just redistributes wealth?

>>11656699
>The government owns everything, or just redistributes wealth?
Is there a difference?

>>11656712
There are many different forms of socialism, yes

>>11656712
Yes. A welfare state can have a free market while they provide services with the wealth gained from taxes.

>>11656314
how can primitivists post on Mongolian basket weaving communities if they are against technology

checkmate primmies

>>11656719
And none of them work.

>>11656747
All of them work with varying degrees of success, you mong.

>>11656747
What about Libertarian-Socialism?

Libertarian socialism rejects the conception of socialism as centralized state ownership and control of the economy.

It's essentially a capitalist free market with maybe socialized healthcare and welfare.

> how can you criticize salvery if you eat the masters slop and sleep in his sheep shed?
Unironically though, Socialists are ignorant and ungrateful for the benefits they live under and forget that these things were difficult for humanity to finally attain thanks to Capitalism. Criticize the system all you want, try to improve it but god damn get some perspective because we know where that leads. 50 billion starved Ukrainians is where that leads, bucko.

>>11656757
stop

Jordan Peterson is just a shitposter

>>11656754
Ah you consider dying in a ditch "working." Got it.

Did he actually said that?

>>11656367
>Not to mention feudalism as an economic system bears a significantly closer resemblance to socialism than capitalism, despite "muh inequality"
lmao I love this website, I honestly can never tell if you guys are joking or not

>>11656747
i always think its funny how capialists insist socialism or any other economic arrangement would never work when human beings thrived for thousands of years literally hunting animals and living in caves. but having workers be able to manage their own labor and workplaces is somehow more impossible than that. lmao

>>11656367
>>11656802
Under feudalism, the state owned the means of produce.

Capitalism on the other had is predicated on private ownership, and the lack of state intervention in the free market.

>>11656811
You don't get it do you? We create the wealth, we create the jobs, the workers do nothing at all, that's why we are replacing them with machines.

>>11656811
Having workers manage their own labour and workplaces is something I have considered. Who hires them? How are they paid?

>>11656814
Please keep going, this is hilarious

>>11656814
capitalism is and always has been statist you fucking mong

>>11656831
I disagree, you're incorrect.

>>11656811
That's because you know it's not as simple as saying
> cimern guise, we just want worker management of demselvesssss
Something already available under capitalism. What is really on the table is violence, theft, redistiribution and the meddling of a voluntary and spontaneously occuring system of order out of chaos.

Just like when Libertarians say
> We just want interactions to be peaceful and voluntary
and you guys think
> Wage slave in menial depressing jobs or starve to death!
At this point in history people are just talking passed eachother from different viewpoints that see the world a different way from eachother and value different things. It's like sales, some people have a vision in their mind of being safe if they buy insurance, others have the vision of being ripped off and possibly denied money when they need it. Neither is objectively correct unless you look at statistics and facts but at the end of the day these two viewpoints can both be undersood and we can address issues in society. Just need to start giving eachother the benefit of the doubt and stop with the broad generalizations, get back to the specifics, specific people, specific policies, specific structures and their real world outcomes and consequences.

>>11656817
no i get it, or i get thats the writing on the wall. but to insist that capitalism is the only true way possible on a fundamental level and that socialism is impossible is stupid dogmatism

>>11656825
People still hold positions of operation within the business. Like there would still be an accountant and management because those roles help. But they would not be treated as better.

>>11656782
and you’re gonna die in front of your computer - where’s the difference?

To me it’s that no one made money on my death in the ditch.

>>11656845
it doesnt matter if you disagree you're wrong. theres no disagreement here, im saying something obviously, factually, historically accurate, and you just dont want to hear it because youve assimilated this retarded ass viewpoint from people that dont give a fuck about you or your mom into your identity because you're too shitty to construct your own identity independent of what you're told

>>11656852
Aren't those jobs more specialized than general labour and therefore fewer people are able to complete them?

>>11656852
What's the point of learning boring ass shit like accounting if you don't get treated better?

>>11656845
Dude - you should publish a book.

>>11656863
define capitilalism:
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

define: statism
a political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs.

They are diametrically opposed.

>>11656737
you really have to wonder at the kind of person who'd be trapped here who also thinks that it's a good thing

>>11656845
>your workers produce shit
>you demand that they hand over what they produced
>they tell you to go fuck yourself
>there's nothing you can do, unless you want to hire mercenaries to keep them under your thumb
>feudalism part 2: electric bugaloo commences

>>11656877
>come up with an idea to make money
>get a loan
>hire workers to assist you
>they try and steal your business
>you're the bad guy somehow
Also feudalism 2 is sharecropping you mong.

>>11656877
Mercenaries are illegal, firing them would be my best bet

(((libertarians))) go suck jew cock on reddit, this is a national socialist board

>>11656886
>anything that has to do with farming is feudalism
stop before you hurt yourself

I think it's pretty distasteful how many who refer to themselves as socialists revel in the worst aspects of capitalist society, but it doesn't refute them in anyway.

>>11656887
>anything being illegal without a state
>thinking you can fire (preventing others from using your capital) without a state or mercenaries

>>11656873
look you mong ill only say this once and i want you to get over this with no shame or personal feelings

capitalism urequires contracts, laws, in order for things like trade and private property to even exist. this legal system does not exist independently of the state. the criminal justice system is an integral part of capitalism because it holds up the contract if there are no contracts there is no capitalism in the first place. i dont care if i signed a piece of paper with you ill just fucking rob you if i need to. there are no private owners of anything without the state. everything belongs to what one can take and defend.

in a contract is always implicit violence and force to uphold those terms.

capitalism has literally never existed outside of this framework. ever. it is built upon it. it is part of the state, the new manifestation of it after the end of its incarnation as the religious monarchy.

also your definitions of capitalism and state are fucky as shit and you just made them up.

>>11656892
2% of those referred to as socialists actually self-identify as socialists. id say the reason is the same as why natzees constantly pretend not to be natzees and chose not to refer to themselves as such, but it's not.

Name 1 socialist country

>>11656903
>thinking you can fire (preventing others from using your capital) without a state or mercenaries

Amen

>>11656918
California

>>11656918
THE US, DOH, NO WAIT!!! GERMANY UNDER THE NAZIS.

>>11656918
probably tylo be chillin

The point is that socialists are always screeching on Twitter on their brand new iPhones while sipping Starbucks, all of which are unnecessary luxuries, but they still enjoy it. All these things are made possible with capitalism, and yet they could society would still be better off with socialism. If you unironically think socialism would yield better results than capitalism you're actually retarded.

>>11656906
Capitalism is an economic system as applied to the state.
Statism implies significant government intervention in the economy.
Capitalist economic systems are not statist economic systems.

Every single political ideology is statist except anarchy, by your definition. Does the existence of the state justice system mean the definition of capitalism contradicts itself and it's a meaningless term?
Law and order is not economic theory.

>>11656936
How long can you possibly beat this strawman? We get it, everyone but you is a hypocrite. I hope one day when you've grown up we can have this conversation like adults.

>>11656817
Uhh we do the work

>>11656943
Yeah but if you didn't do the work I would simply find someone else who WOULD. Checkm8 socialists, BTFOd again.

>>11656825
More holistically, worker-managed productive sectors would be differently divided and directed.

>>11656817
>the workers do nothing
then why pay them?

>that's why we are replacing them with machines
no, it's because they are cheaper and more efficient

>>11656957
In a holistic sense, all the parts of the body work together, and every body has a head.

>>11656825
>Who hires them? How are they paid?
For some reason your questions made me think of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjHwl5SRdCo

>>11656203
>The most succesful business ventures and research are made by capitalistic enterprises
You literally cannot refute this, the Soviet Union's main technological advancements in aeronautics and space travel were made in spite of their systems meanwhile their overall technological advancements stagnated under their state socialism

>>11656817
>we create wealth
your workers do, you take the wealth for yourselves, i'll give you that
and no, ''being an entrepeneur'' and ''having an idea'' doesn't produce wealth
>we create the jobs
work and production can still occure without your jobs, spooked retard.
You manage to convince a large chunk of the actual workers to waste their labor on useless projects, again, i'll give you that
>the workers do nothing at all
thay make you retarded ''entrepeneurial vision'' possible
> that's why we are replacing them with machines.
machines build and designed by workers, oh and btw, i thought you guys supposedly created jobs

>>11656942
Except it's a true strawman? Most of the people dubbed the working class avoid class based idpol , it's only bourgie leftists who are actually interested in it.

It's not that there are *no* working class , it's just that it seems to be a bourgeoise phenomenon in the 21st century to he obsessed with actual socialism.

>>11656988
>being an entrepeneur'' and ''having an idea'' doesn't produce wealth
Yes it does my dude Henry Fped would disagree with you

>>11656918
Jackie Chan

Socialism means "healthcare" to one person and "state-owned factories" to another. Therefore, we cannot simply critique "socialism." We have to be more specific.

>>11657021
>Socialism means "free shit" to one person and "concentration camps" to another
fixed that for you

>>11657037
The ism debates could make me cry;*( They both attribute their definition of the ism to the other person without listening :(

>>11657037
>capitalism means free shit for one person and starvation for another
maybe we're not so different

>>11657049
>>11657051
please learn how to read

>>11657021
socialism is any arrangement in which the international jewish bourgeois do not own everything

>>11657061
>bootlicker larping as a nazi to false flag socialism
yaaaawn

vote nazbol

If you don't want to be poor under capitalism it is this simple: don't work some bs manufacturing job, don't work a minimum wage job.

>>11656853
Do you not want to make money off of yourself while you are alive? Not everyone works some menial office job.

>>11656811
You're right, why would we keep progress moving forward when we can simply revert back to killing animals and eating their raw meat with our teeth. How do you not manage your own labor? You decide where you are going to work. Its funny that you communists always picture jobs (read: since you have never had one) as being factory work or making cars or something. There is literally so much opportunity for work and business in so many areas right now.

>>11657122
calling a false-flag on this one

>>11657108
> it’s not exploitation if you exploit yourself

No thanks. And not for lack of trying. I’ve turned down jobs at hedge funds.

>>11656203
>You say you're a conservative, yet you've used a liberal amount of salt in your gumbo. How delicious.

>>11657051

Capitalism means sophisticated methods of food production and distribution that have led to us only needing to contribute about 2% of our collective GDP to food production and it has led to the least amount of poverty and starvation among humanity ever.

And you want to tear that all down. For shame.

Literally go move to Commiezuela you fuck.

>>11656852
I've never seen management treated well in my experience. Their jobs are horrible.

>>11657306
and yet it's unnable to put an end to hunger

>commiezuela
>wanting to go to a country where the majority of industry is in private
>going from a rich capitalist country to a poor capitalist country
literally why

>>11656942
What strawman? There are people who think socialism is a better system than capitalism.

>>11657334

Yeah and it hasn't put an end to us needing oxygen either. Do you think socialism would be better than that? If you do you should really pick up some history books.

>>11657306
>green revolution boosts total population by billions, mostly starving
>but the % has gone down lately mainly from social programs that are despite capitalism
why are you shills too dumb to get what a double edged sword is? is it just an IQ thing? or has capitalism just corrupted your soul so much you find it impossible to not be a shill?

>>11657361
population growth is all that matters, if they strave after birth it's because they're tards, also without tax funded social programs philanthropists would all be willing to create wage labor for them

>11657361

It's not an IQ thing it's a fefe thing. That said you're not nearly as smart as you think you are bud and I'm a little surprised someone of your persuasion is thinking along those lines. Don't step to far into the wrong-think box now you might lose some social cred.

>>11657369
>population growth is all that matters
that's exactly what cancer would say
why do you bother try putting it into moral terms if you bluntly don't give a shit?

>>11657373
>muh wrongthink
>i won't even give him a you which will show how im not flustered
yeah one moment it's muh ebin stalin and mao and how morally good capitalism is when you obviously just want Terminators after everyone you don't like

>>11657397

>unleash terminators on everyone we don't like

Honestly this is becoming a more appealing option by the day and I think if there's a vague race war/IQ war in the future the high IQ factions would use drones en masse to mass slaughter the low IQ niggers/liberals.

>>11656212

>>11657421
yes, i'm already aware capitalists and their bootlickers want to exterminate people in the way of their profits
you're not telling anything new buddy

>>11656203
based.
>yes I am a postmodern neo marxist

>>11656909
Fair enough. It also depends on the type of socialist too. I'd give acceleratoionists and certain Marxists a pass, but it doesn't doesn't make the rest look good.

>>11657445

If you'll fight to destroy society you may one day have to be destroyed by the noble hearted defenders of all that is good and pure. Socialist are easily ignored when you're unsuccessful but the more impact you have the more of a threat you are and the more hard-hearted the actions may be that are required to keep you shits down. Might be worth keeping in mind.

>>11656909

Nazi and socialist are pretty comparable terms nowadays. They're both just broad rhetorical terms that are meant as put downs for anybody who's not a milquetoast centrist. Honestly if you're at all politically involved and you've never been called a nazi or a socialist you're probably a complete fag with no spinal chord or independent thoughts at all.

Socialist: anybody who wants to expand the government in some way
Nazi: anybody who doesn't hate white people or love abortion

>>11657421
look i hate commies too but they were right about you los diablos americanos faggots being the actual worst
crying about UN population control for decades and now look at your bullshit voting in an ultraorthodox temple thinking you'll be spared as a dutiful pawn.

>>11656712
No difference between state capitalism and welfare programs.

>>11656757
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)

>>11657445
>>11657485
Not him and I mostly agree with you but let's not pretend the status quo is "all that is good and pure."

I think of how the U.S. govt treated the black panther movement as a primo case study.

When the black panthers were trying to become organized and educated the govt used the full scope of its power to disrupt the group, even to the point of assassinations.

After they split into disorganized, violent, criminal gangs the govt didn't spend nearly the effort or resources to disrupt their activities.

Why? because the black panthers wanted to be a rival state. That's not more immoral than being a violent criminal gang, but it is more threatening to the status quo, so it had to be put down.

>>11656845
>I disagree, you're incorrect
Best post I've read in a while

>>11656983
>soviet union
>socialist

>>11656825
look up Corporación Mondragon

>>11656203
Why do people follow this mental midget?

So when is the attempt at real socialism going to work or happen? Or are bougie leftists just gonna sit in their armchairs all day and scoff at definitions for the next millenia?

>>11657558
You literally don't know anything about economics if that's how you think the world works.

I am a Nazi now. Fuck you. Seig heil.

>>11657596
right

>>11657596

>>11656555
>he isnt a friendless hermit individualist
Fucking normalfags out.

>>11656599
>Isn't socialism literally anything that benefits the social order?
Not according to Marx

>>11656814
>the state owned the means of produce
put me in the screencap

>>11656203
so OP, you call yourself a philosopher, yet you dont believe in knowledge, how deliciously ironic

>>11657505
I mean I just hope everyone realizes this kind of post is
1) made by an actual insane person
And
2) very, very stupid and (seemingly intentionally) Ill-informed

>>11656203
so this is the power of >right-wing intellectuals

>>11657603
Literally whomst?

>>11656886
>bad guy
why are you brining ethics into this? no one cares who you think is the bad guy in that thought experiment. read Hobbes.

>>11657665
Coop man

>>11657666
Why not? Objective morality is extremely important, as it should be in any concrete ethical system. Read Calvin

>>11656814
>feudalism
>the state
wew lad

how come no one ever talks about the asiatic mode of production these days?

>>11657676
It’s hilariously juvenile because the only writer I can think of that uses Feudalism so much is Karl Marx. Just think that most of these people read atheism Communist Manifesto one time and think they know everything

>>11657675
are you arguing capitalism is an example of a concrete ethical system rather than an economic theory?

>>11657675
>>11657666
Don’t read Calvin or Hobbes. Read Andrew Garfield. He was the best president we ever had

>>11657704
That’s a Non-Sequitur. Why would anyone ever read that Family Circus?

Don’t cast the Pearls Before Swine as they say. What are you, a Blondie? Honestly, go suck Doonsbury’s cock

>>11657665
Picture 1, Yanis Varufakis ex finance minister of greece, professor of economics at the university of athens
Picture 2 Richard wolff, professor of economics at university of massachusets

>>11657529
The difference is state run businesses are not welfare programs.

This is the worst thread I've seen in weeks. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

From each according to how they feel like it. To each according to their social network.

>>11657700
Not me, but if the ideal is liberty, then I think capitalism affords men the most liberty.

>>11656918
Venezuela

here you go /polit/

>>11657790

>finance minister of Greece
Is this a meme?

>>11657875

Jordan Peterson has fallen out of favour with /pol/ recently and Shapiro has been hated since he became a never Blumpfer. Personally I think Noam has a good deal of integrity too. 90% of Jews have a hypocritical stance of wanting ethno-nationalism and imperialism for Israel while decrying the same for Western nations (Shapiro) but for a Jew to actually have a consistent stance on the two like Chomsky does is rather refreshing. I wish all Jews had that much integrity.

Also he was one of my favourite political commentators when I was younger. There are far worse commies out there than good ol' Chomsky.

the problem with the word "socialism" nowadays is that when someone uses it you can't know if they're referring to socdem countries like sweden or to marxism (or, rarely, non-marxist variants of socialism)

to be honest though "communism" suffers from the same problem, except replace the socdem part with the ML state capitalisms from the 20th century

>>11657653
>ur insane and uneducated
Yeah you've got nothing.

>>11657655
Peterson's a liberal. He's not right winged at all.

>>11656212
based

>>11657914
If Peterson was a lib, libs wouldn't be so mad about him. He's a basic reactionary

>>11657921

Libs aren't mad at him, insane university social justice warriors and outright Commies are. He's very center left and has never actually spouted a right winged view, possibly ever.

Things that are right winged:
>nationalism
>Christian social rules
>minimalist government intervention

Refusing to call trannies by their made up pronouns doesn't make you a conservative. It only makes you a not insane uber-leftist.

>>11657921
Peterson is everyone's mom, repackaged as Kermit the Frog, for easier digestibility.

>>11657882
Varoufakis wanted to leave EU and start Greece's economy anew, I'm pretty sure. It's why he left Syriza. Tsipras was the one who accepted austerity measures, furthering Greece's situation.

>>11657921
>imputing libs with rational sapience

>>11657933

Damn I wish I had a mom like Peterson. That would be amazing. Instead I have a low IQ, fat, lazy, hippy of a mom with no conception of loyalty who's more like pic related than an actual intellectual.

>>11657914
Nuh uh, he is your retard, he even went to speak in the Canadian Conservative party convention IIRC.

>>11657958
>>11657914
Conservadumbs and 'liberals' are actually both politically a part of Liberalism. Worrying about protectionism/interventionism/etc. is really just a point of disagreement on how to run CAPITALISM. All the moral issues are distractions for the masses.

>>11657950
Jordan Peterson is also the mom you wished considered truth to be a function of a proposition's utility towards the survivability of an animal, as opposed to correspondence with reality.

>>11657963
Liberalism became the Right as soon as Monarchism was crushed politically though.

>>11657927
>insane university social justice warriors
so libs

>and outright Commies
you're confusing this with libs, probably because you're american and libs is the furthest left you can imagine. for a real commie, libs are a representation of the ultra-right establishment ideology that reproduces the current social order and quite a lot of their positions are in essence reactionary. peterson is just yet another element within the recent degeneration of political standards around the globe, which includes the "alt-right" and general rise of fascism and other assorted reactionaries which are borne out of the crisis in the liberal establishment

>>11657937
didn't varoufakis found that democracy in the EU movement? the real point, for a left-winger, is for workers as a class to control the governmental organ, not to dissolve it.

>>11657981
I think that was after the fact. He thought that the EU was really too entrenched to simply leave it after Tsipras, so he vouched for transparency. He has talked about the corruption he saw, and decided the only thing that would stop it was broadcasting the Troika meetings.

>>11657975
Sure, but it's a bit confusing. I don't understand why socialists chose to call themselves leftists, unless they were making a point about the inevitable progress of history. I do appreciate liberal revolutionaries like Marat, so I guess it stands.

>complaining about socialism
>on the internet with a computer
>both of which were literally invented by the government subsidising high-tech R&D that wouldn't last 2 seconds on the free market
>and if you're doing it via a smartphone or tablet, guess what: the LCD screen, touchscreen, and wifi all also invented from government funding of R&D

>>11657889
>anarchist, doesn't believe in state or corporate or personal authority
>commie
pick one

>>11657969

Having an odd view of truth is disjointed enough from real world action that it doesn't really matter what your mom's view of truth is.

>>11657975
Monarchism was never crushed and some of the wealthiest and most prosperous countries on the planet today are monarchies.

>>11657978
You're just muddling things. Peterson doesn't hold right winged views ergo it's disingenuous to call him a conservative.

>>11657996
>I don't understand why socialists chose to call themselves leftists, unless they were making a point about the inevitable progress of history.
Because they are the new Left. What generally separates Left from the Right is either to change or persevere existing hierarchies. If you put a socialist in the French Revolution he would have been a Jacobin and vice versa. Maybe someday there would a global socialist world, then socialism will be the new Right and whatever comes up to oppose it is the new Left and the ballad between Left and Right continues coz the dialectics must flow

>>11658002
That is not Socialism. That is state-legislated intervention. Not all state-legislate Intervention some how becomes Socialism which is in fact a very specific economic system. You think Plato was a Socialist because he had an outline for a system based on the state? Come on.

>>11658009
>some of the wealthiest and most prosperous countries on the planet today are monarchies.
Go and check what are crowned republics brainlet. Unless you are saying Saudi Arabia as the bastion of monarchism lol.

>>11658006

Anarcho communists are communists.

Don't blame me that have multiple views that are inherently contradictory. I'm not responsible for the lefts inherent lack of consistency.

>>11658017
Chomsky isn't an anarcho-communist

>>11658025
Anarcho-syndicalism is so close to anarcho-communism, they're almost synonymous. I'm sure he doesn't care whether or not the dissolution happens via trade unions or not.

>>11658015

I'm not talking about the UK dipshit. I'm talking about Monaco, Qatar, Brunei, Liechtenstein, etc. Saudi Arabia as well but they're far from top dog of the wealthy monarchies in terms of overall prosperity of their nation.

>>11658009
No. Jordan Peterson claims to be an epistemological pragmatist, but has a unique take on pragmatism, whereas he thinks the truth of proposition is contingent on its utility to the survival of an animal and/or species. He has said as much. All of his views stem from this epistemology.

>>11658028
No they aren't similar at all. syndicalism is a very different ideology than communism that relies on muh trade unions and shit instead of the general proletariat. To consider the same is a sign of your own lack of consistency.

>>11658037
umm sorry sweetie but your physique's appalling sexual fitness proves you wrong

>>11658040
I've been in the IWW and there's really no distinction made with trades... I was an unemployed student, and all they did was adjust my rates. I was still seen as part of the proletariat, despite having no trade.

>>11658036
Yes wow, so you are only left with those countries that have little influence in global order and are heavily reliable on oil money. Pretty pathetic examples for monarchies desu

>>11658009
>Peterson doesn't hold right winged views ergo it's disingenuous to call him a conservative
i called him a reactionary, and he is quite literally a reactionary with his calls to 'respect tradition' and blatant attempts to undermine things that he perceives as "excesses from the left" (or, in internet lingo, those fucking sjws).

the fact that you can't see the character of his thought as reactionary only proves that you are also one.

>>11658050

And the European powers were at their strongest and most influential as monarchies. The heck kind of point are you trying to make? Yes the big players have ditched it, but it was never because of actual pragmatic need, it was mainly just because of jealous usurpers and there's been no proven benefit for the states of the move from monarchy. In fact after ditching monarchy all of the former world superpowers are in a state of free fall collapse. Really makes you think...

>>11658048
Did you suddenly forget that the raison d'etre of the IWW is always to bolster the trade unions for syndicalism? I don't see how them recruiting members from trade unions or not changes their goals and objectives.

>>11657996
>I don't understand why socialists chose to call themselves leftists
because socialism in the 19th century is a clear outgrowth from enlightenment thinking and humanism and in the case of marxism aims to transcend it - to take it to its logical conclusion, which involves critiquing it.

>>11658058

It's not reactionary to respect tradition, any derp head with 2 brain cells should respect tradition. What he doesn't call for is an adherence to tradition, he thinks people should pick and choose what traditions to follow on a whim and that makes him entirely not reactionary at all. The only way a radical individualist can be right winged is if they're purely Libertarian, which he's not, not even close, therefore he is not right winged.

>>11658059
>And the European powers were at their strongest and most influential as monarchies.
And they threw it all away in an extremely retarded war, allowing two republics to eventually become the only superpowers around. Wow that really does made me think...

Face it senpai monarchism as an ideology is obsolete so much so that the best 'monarchy' to survive the transition to republics to be a crowned republic.

>>11658062
The reason is to organise the workers (i.e., general proletariat) without relying on a highly stratified "vanguard" party, which has only ever been shown to be ran by an intelligentsia. Of course, not every organisation can get every prole to vote or have their opinion heard - or even to sign up - so both of them are really vanguards. However, the Bolshevik model has been shown to devolve into vulgarity and state capitalism.

>>11658058

Also being reactionary to a fringe minority of extreme liberals is very different than being an actual conservative reactionary. University campuses are not representative of society at large btw, they're pretty much the farthest left bubbles of our society, and he's reactionary only to the ultra left winged element of those far-left bubbles.

>>11658067
tradition in the sense peterson talks about it is inherently reactionary in any form, because it is the expression of a social order that is/was maintained by violence, expropriation and superstition. tradition has to be constantly overcome and rendered obsolete, as does capitalism (or did, at least, in the past), and reactionary elements within capitalism usually decry this as attacking what is sacred.

peterson's entire world-view is pure reaction.

>>11658072
Unless you hear the GDC of the IWW confirmed that they want IWW to be the leader of the trade unions when anarcho-syndicalism is established, there is no reason to assume that they are a vanguard party. Their actions of supporting unions here and there is not something the Leninists or Maoists did.

>>11658058
>whyyyy would anyone ever react against us? :)
you are forcing them to

>>11658074
dude, university liberals are not 'extreme left' they are the fucking right. i know it's complicated to process this because in your country, they are perceived as the left (since real leftists barely even exist) but they are not. the people who get mad at peterson the most are milquetoast twitter hillary voters, those peddling identity politics and moralistic, individual-responsibility-based views of social change, which is a very establishment ideology not amenable to leftist thought.

>>11658087

>dude, university liberals are not 'extreme left' they are the fucking right.

I'm a man of the right and this statement offends me.

>>11658078
yeah you talk a big game but everyone's seen what this amounts to
capitalism is trash but that doesn't mean you're some epic vanguard on the good end of it

>>11658090
If you won't own your retards don't expect leftists to own theirs :^)

>>11658091
of course not, the 'vanguard' can only exist if there is already a mass movement predisposed to it, and such mass movement does not exist and has not existed for decades. do you think leftists are HAPPY with the state of the left, or society? you buy too much into retarded /pol/ shitposts that are based on nothing but the paranoia inside the heads of postmodern schizophrenics and probably believe that "the left" has actually gained ground in recent history, which couldn't be further from the truth

>>11658095

We have our own retards a plenty I'm not taking responsibility for yours as well.

>>11658103
Nuh uh those retards aren't mine either. Not as if these people are like the New Left of the 1960s.

>>11658105
Your perspective is skewed by too much time away from the free market. When you get a job, start paying taxes and move off the university campus/out of mommy's basement you'll start to learn. Hopefully.

>>11658111
the most american post in the entire site right now

>>11658111
Not an argument

>>11658116

Not American, just an old man with life experience who can smell the scent of a young naive kiddo through the internet tubes.

>>11658099
how the fuck do we stop capitalism then, riddle me that
the left's been so thoroughly coopted i've stooped to pushing anticap on the right.

>>11658126
we have to first try and develop and understanding of the current world that is correct and rigorous, the way marxists did during the 19th and early 20th centuries, and then try to practice it insofar as to build a genuine proletarian movement, like how it existed during the 19th and early 20th centuries. only when we are actually doing something will answers start showing themselves. meanwhile we are just stupid intellectual onanists lost to the tide of the current garbage world filled with incipient neonazis and technocratic neofeudalists

>>11658085
>Their actions of supporting unions here and there is not something the Leninists or Maoists did.
What? The French Communist Party was instrumental in stopping May 68 because they controlled trade unions.

>>11658121
Boomer please, you have ruined this Earth enough. Don’t ruin my Tibetan puppet show boards with your shit opinions

>>11658140
the problem with marxists though is they're usually fanatics tied intimately into communism which is a nonsensical solution based on german idealism that's two whole centuries out of date.

>>11658157
it is the ONLY thing that makes any sense, and with sense i'm not trying to colloquially say 'it works', i'm saying it's the only thing that actually addresses the actual problems in a way that is even intelligible

>>11658144
What is this random non-sequtier? FCP isn’t even a Leninist party since they are reformist. Nor does IWW at its apex had such huge influcene over the trade union movement (not with that pussy Glompers in charge) or even planned to control them in such a top down approach

>>11656918
The Roman Empire

>>11657558
look, i'm not a huge fan of capitalism, but isn't that picture just a super obvious example of the problems people have with socialism?

>if we just get rid of rich people and profits, everyone will live in rainbowns and sunshine!

I'm not even saying that socialist ideals are bad to strive towards, but this utopian line of thinking is rather naive and kinda dangerous desu

>>11658087
>but they are not
You don't get to decide what is left and what is not. The crazy university progressives are left. Commies are alt-left/boomer-left.

>>11658185
because that line of thinking is not socialist. or, at best, it is a vulgar kind of socialism. you know who else used this discourse of "the bad rich people vs the good people of the fatherland"? fascists. and you can see it today in the alt-right, how they constantly rant about "the jews" who "control things" and are "behind the big corporations and the government and the media". the belief is that when you purge these ruinous individuals (which are always jews, according to the fash) society solves itself.

real socialism is acknowledging that society has to be actively solved by us, constantly and at all times

>>11658193
oh, so who gets to decide it? complete retards who are so caught up in the minutiae of their irrelevant discussions to see the bigger picture?

also it's not 'me' that decides what is left, but the actual leftists that have always existed and how they approached politics and society. your dumb internet categorization games (boomer-left? what the flying fuck is that? there are no "boomers" in my country) are completely irrelevant to reality

>>11656599
No. Socialism is marxist. The muddying of the lines between social programs with the term "socialism" is done deliberately by socialists. Social programs long precede the ideology of socialism and are an integral part of liberal democracy.

In a socialist society, the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned or regulated by the community as a whole. A socialist is someone who is trying to implement such a system. For example Venezuela is run by socialists, they tried to implement socialism and failed like anyone who ever tried to implement it.

>>11658196
>no "boomers" in my country
There is one.

>>11658220
:)))))))

>>11656814
There is no state in feudalism, the monarch and nobles are the land owners.

>>11658160
it isn't and hasn't kept up with actual science.
"what you're looking for - this positive conception [of communism] - doesn't exist" paraphrasing engels from memory
it's about reforming the god damn transcendental ego. it's bullshit and can't ever exist

>>11658193
>boomer-left.
lol

>>11658193
>complains that someone shouldn't get to decide what is left or not
>proudly declares what is left or not in the very next sentence
Do right wingers really lack that much self-awareness?

How is this thread related to literature?

>>11657958
great pic, saved

>>11657958
>>11658359
Bad comparison. All of the systems that actually existed were based on cost and reward principles in a capitalist or proto-capitalist fashion. In Socialism/communism people get paid/rewarded the same no matter what they do. It removes incentives to do a good job and innovate. That's one the primary reasons why socialism always fails. You can't have an Apple IPhone in a non-capitalist society. Nobody would have bothered commercializing and spreading the internet. Nobody would have bothered inventing the social media platforms.

>>11656918
my diary desu

>>11656495
HAHAH

>>11658382
>i wouldn't have slaves building my soitoys to shitpost on
where would we be without farmville and candy crush

>>11658339
>Do right wingers
I'm a left winger m8.

>>11658420
You probably did not notice because you were busy shitposting on 20 year old imageboard software, but the internet gave you access to all of the education and information that the world has to offer. Never has there been so much transparency and access to the political process. Never has there been so much peaceful interaction between people of distant cultures. But all you see is farmville and candy crush.

>>11658423
Sure you are :^)

>>11658445
>Peaceful interaction.
There has never been more warfare than there is at the moment between cultures, it is simply silent and cyber.

>>11658382
>In Socialism/communism people get paid/rewarded the same no matter what they do
ffs not even socialists believe that

>>11658457
>silent and cyber
Are you trying to say there is warfare but nobody gets hurt?

>>11658382
>Nobody would have bothered commercializing and spreading the internet.
t. doesn't who developed the internet
If a certain someone really want to 'commercialized' it, we would have a series of intranets than one global internet we have right now.

>>11658471
The internet was developed in a military context, like many technologies that later became commercially successful. Commercializing and spreading it is a completely different pair of shoes than inventing it. Electricity was a thing for thousands of years before people started using it outside of laboratories. It took capitalism to bring it to the masses.

>>11657378
yeah but cancer isnt alive

we've all seen The Matrix..

>>11658463
Quite the opposite, China has benefited immeasurably from stealing and being sold state secrets. The Clinton's made their fortune doing so. This can be as simple as infiltrating or hacking a construction companies server and stealing schematics for technology you have not yet the capability to produce or design.

>>11656959
No, it's because they are Satanists.

I'd consider myself more libertarian than anything, to be honest I wouldn't mind living in a socialist state but honestly it just puts more pressure on the "laws" to abide by.
The system we have now for crime is still piss poor.
Get rid of crime (and the people who do crime (which will never happen because of the cultural demographics being constantly defended on the grounds of racism, sexism etc.) and you have the perfect society.
You can't "share" shit if criminals are exploiting the system.
Which is unironically why nationalistic socialism tends to seem like the most effective.

>>11658479
>What is the World Wide Web?
All you have tried to prove is that capitalism commodificated existing technology, not developing said technology.

>Electricity was a thing for thousands of years before people started using it outside of laboratories.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>11656209
I unironically have been doing this for the past year or so. I've been getting better but it's still difficult for me to do the ultra-low sound. I haven't really looked into any guides or anything, just something I've been working on. My roommates think it's hilarious.

>>11656918
How can we ban children from the board?

>>11658492
An invention is useless if it is not spread and made useful. You don't need capitalism to do science, but your science is useless without capitalism. A central planing bureau is unable to predict what is potentially useful.

>AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Try and use words to express an argument

Why are you retards even seriously discussing an out of context troll post?

>>11658486
so has the states

>>11658506
wow is this ur first day here lmao

>>11657963
I wish more people realised this. How sad that people are divided by such petty things.

>>11658486
And that is comparable to actual warfare how? Getting my intellectual property stolen is way better than getting my daughter raped and my legs blown off. China is a failed socialist state by the way, which slid back into capitalism through the backdoor without following any of the rules that the other capitalist states had established. The other capitalist states should sanction it like Trump is doing for this exact reason.

>>11657361
how effective would those social programs be if they weren't backed by powerful capitalist economies?

>>11658508
The United States has "unequivocally benefited" from stealing technological state secrets from Russia and China? I appreciate you posting my thoughts on your post preemptively as not to waste my valuable calories on rewriting the sentiment.

>>11658504
But that is rich that you mentioned the internet, when Tim Berners-Lee himself refused to patent WWW which would make him really rich, in order to ensure that the emerging internet would be a global one. The discovery and implementation of the internet we are using now to communicate is not born out of someone's desire to make a shit load of money, so your comparison is moot.

>Try and use words to express an argument
Oh wow so you really don't know anything huh? Electricity was barely understood until like 200 to 300 years when Maxwell came along. Hell when Faraday showed one of the uses of electromagnetism to the Royal Society, nobody knew what the fuck to do with it. The implementation of electricity can't be soley attributed to capitalism if at all, because its understanding only happened around its time. A lot of other conditions had to be made to set the stage for its implementation, a lot of which didn't involve the invisible hand (AC/DC wars).

>>11658087
Well, you are correct about them not being extreme left (I hate that meme), but how the fuck would they be right?
Almost everyone is center at this point (within an automated trajectory of generalised leftism).

>>11658525
id tell ya but then id have to kill ya

>>11658111
>capitalism wor-

>>11657875
All polemics, Chomsky being the only respectable one of course. None of these people are political theorists.

>>11658087
>>11658531
He's not correct, he's retarded. There are no conservatives in the humanities. If you think there are, then you don't understand the difference between the two.

Tyranny is universal, you're confusing it with right wing opinions.

>>11658140
How does this work when almost everyone in the West is lumpenbourgeoisie?

>>11658538
only a Sith deals in absolutes

>>11658527
>when Tim Berners-Lee himself refused to patent WWW which would make him really rich, in order to ensure that the emerging internet would be a global one
What you are criticizing here is the concept of intellectual property and its implementation. You could get rid of it completely and still have capitalism, it's not inherently a part of capitalism, but rather a somewhat reasonable regulation slapped on top of it.

Let's assume he had patented it. That might have staled the development of the internet. Most likely it would have resulted in big corporations holding proprietary closed networks, like AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy and Delphi. It would take longer for them to open up. In the worst case by 50 years, which is the patent period in the US if I remember correctly. I always thought patent periods should be shortened for this exact reason in some countries it is even 100 years and there is some fuckery in law and courts to prolong patent periods underhandedly. But again, this is not a criticism of capitalism, rather a criticism of regulations on capitalism.

"Nothing could possibly make this thread even worse," I thought to myself, right before December appeared.

>>11656495
I would prefer not to

>>11657441
>not telling him to drown in his ideals and die

>>11658581
Debatable coz of first mover advantage and not much profit to be made in connecting intranets.

>But again, this is not a criticism of capitalism, rather a criticism of regulations on capitalism.
But I didn't meant to critique capitalism (I would have used ISPs and their Summer of Love) with this example, only using to show that it is by no means a product of capitalism, since crucial stages of its development were not influenced by the profit motive. TBL did the least self-interested action literally turned down the option to be the next Gates or at least Notch by refusing to patent his invention and we got the 'best' version of the internet to use on

>>11656547
>he believes that cause of innovation is goverment

>>11657889
>90% of Jews have a hypocritical stance of wanting ethno-nationalism and imperialism for Israel
citation needed

>>11658002
>government subsidising high-tech R&D that wouldn't last 2 seconds on the free market
what are banks and loans? And it took 20 years before internet became accessible for average person, it was researched too early