/lit/ - Literature

>>13381125
what leads people to believe that we are in "late stage" capitalism?

I do not consume news beyond rumours. Whatever is loud enough to enter my hearing is worth being heard. Everything else is either not important, or its' importance is beyond my understanding.

>>13381133
what half-baked retard philosophy is this

>>13381125
Jimmy Dore mostly. RT when I’m near a tv that gets it.
The Beeb isn’t fully reliable, and NPR is another neoliberal mouthpiece. So just be cautious with their narrative

>>13381148
Shut your whore mouth.

>>13381150
I don’t have one of those, furry.

>>13381163
For the record, i appreciate you but I still hate tripfagging

I generally cross-examine hard news in a pretty non-discriminatory manner, from various sources across the political spectrum, then I might check for opinions coming from pundits/opinionators that I assume are likely to have a different view than myself. These will vary in political leaning, so for some events/info I might look for opinions that I predict will be contrary to my own coming from what is generally thought as the left, for others these may come from what generally people think of as the right. And then I discriminate against these opinion pieces based on what I weigh as mostly good faith practice, regardless of political alignment.

I get all my news from Twitter. Why would you get your news from anywhere else?

>>13381125
Wanting to be informed about "the news" is a sign of brain damage.

And wanting to be informed about the News by the BBC and NPR is justification to be put into an asylum.

>>13381240
>Wanting to be informed about "the news" is a sign of brain damage.
this

>>13381132
what are
>over-fishing
>plastic
>petroleum
>livestock
The planet doesn't have the necessary resources to sustain meat, cars and plastic pollution. but hey, boomers don't have to worry about it since the pollution is exported to poor countries, and they can afford vacations on remote island that haven't yet become a plastic garbage bin.

My grandmother tells me.

The only news I like or care about is "Huey Lewis and the News". Their early work was a little too 'new-wave' for my taste, but when 'Sports' came out in '83, I think they really came into their own – both commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalism that really gives the songs a big boost. He's been compared to Elvis Costello, but I think Huey has a far more bitter, cynical sense of humor. In '87, Huey released this, 'Fore', their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is 'Hip to Be Square', a song so catchy most people probably don't listen to the lyrics – but they should! Because it's not just about the pleasures of conformity, and the importance of trends, it's also a personal statement about the band itself!

>>13381280
Keked

>>13381125
WSWS.org

>>13381139
Democracy

>>13381125
/b/ and slashdot

From my boomer dad, with whom I discuss politics. I don't consume news myself.

>>13381254
Problems Capitalism is solving.

>>13381132
Because the people who believe it is will die flipping burgers and no one will notice.
Temporarily embarrassed commissars.
>>13381254
Nothing you listed proves your claim.

>>13381254
Technological advancements and asteroid mining will solve most of the resource and environmental issues if the liberal order is preserved.

>>13381389
bravely fighting the problems it itself created

>>13381391
you know the situation is dire when the most realistic hope for a solution is literally "technology will appear and solve it lmao"

>>13381280
Based

>>13381391
I thought you were a communist, budderfly? You're perpetuating the capitalism you protest when solving social problems caused by capitalism. It's like brushing the lion's teeth before it eats you.

>>13381389
>meanwhile America pulls out of all major environmental deals and prepares more wars for arab oil
Good job, capitalism!

>>13381470
>market socialism
>keynésien policies
>lobbyists

Sure, America is capitalist am I right ?

>>13381507
Yes, its economy is based on wage labour, commodity production, and valorization of capital. "Keynesian policies" and lobbyists are there to make sure that this proceeds smoothly. Also, "market socialism" is a contradiction in terms. Production by private units that exchange their products on the market is the antithesis of co-operative production.

>>13381534
>>13381470
America is Feudalist.

>>13381532
>>13381534

Do you understand what Laissez-faire is?

It is the government intervention which is responsible for war, environmental disaster and poverty.

Also, unironically this >>13381535

>>13381536
>Do you understand what Laissez-faire is?
A pipe dream. Government intervention is the only thing that keeps capitalism alive by managing necessary tasks that can't be fulfilled by individual enterprises which are necessarily driven by short-term profit. Read up on the history of the Factory Acts.

>>13381254
in that case then it's "late stage" for everything
welcome to late stage 4chan(nel)

>>13381536
All great progress in history happened at the hands of the state. muh Laissez-faire is a meme to keep right-wing cucked and without access to the state apparatus as a means of enacting and enforcing policy to grow their interests. This is why the left has been winning globally the past 60 years. muh small government. muh free markets. These cucks get in, reduce government, and that creates a vacuum for the left to fill. Laissez-faire can only ever work in free-economic zones similar to what china has set up. In an actual democracy, it always reverts back to left control, and I say china as city states and small principalities can never exist independently, otherwise they would be looted and burned by stronger, better powers in the future.

>>13381403
Capitalism didn't invent scarcity, and a communist country is the biggest contributor to global warming. But keep up believing in boogeymen.
>polio was eliminated through medical technology
>lmao fucking u had to invent that! haha doesnt count!11!11

>>13381132
because it's already collapsing

>>13381662
Polio eradication is a meme. 90% of cases were asymtomatic. 98% of the cases were reversible. Less than 1% left people unable to walk and affected mostly children. Fecal-Oral Route illnesses die off and only persist in low IQ areas that do not wash their hands. It was on its way out before the vaccine was propagated. I'm sick of brainlets saying MUH POLIO as if it was some terrible plague and a test of human ingenuity to solve it.

>>13381674
Luckily capitalism has also invented antiretroviral therapy for your massive case of AIDS, faggot.

>>13381536
>not true capitalism
I hate people like you more than "not true socialism" folks.

>>13381507
>>13381535
>>13381536
This is LITERALLY "but it's not real capitalism."

>>13381710
>>13381721
I'm not screeching "not true capitalism" what I mean is it isn't free market which is practiced.

>>13381730
>I'm not screeching "not true communism" what I mean is it isn't social ownership of the means of production

>>13381730
Because free market doesn't exist.

>>13381710
>>13381721
>>13381730
Unfortunately, socialists have distorted the term into a catch-all for the bad bad things.

>>13381751
So wait. Do we have the OG anarchokiddie butterfly, and a /pol/yp butterfly? Are there two or did the old one lose even more braincells?

>>13381743
>utilities
>chartered monopolies
>government services
>state-run companies

>private ownership
lmao

>>13381761
I'm a liberal, not a /pol/fag.

>>13381772
That's even worse. Are you the OG butterfly or not?

>>13381766
>he STILL doesn't get it
A communist could make the same argument about the USSR. How do you not understand this?

>>13381751
>>13381766
You're not the real butterfly , aren't you?
Cause you're based and redpilled

>>13381777
I am become butterfly.
>>13381780
What's your point?

>>13381707
> « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!yvm0QrHZZJQ
You would know.

>>13381125
Daily Stormer & Zero Hedge

>>13381801

>>13381662
But it did invent over-production. And China is clearly capitalist, it has commodity production (in fact you probably use some of those commodities daily), wage-labour, capital accumulation on an enormous scale, imperialist foreign policy, etc.

Reuters
RealClearPolitics
Various far right blogs

>>13381275
Based.
I barely watch the news, but my grandmother is stuck to the TV all day and whenever I talk to her she fills me in on who's fucking who and what child is trapped in a mine this week.

>>13381853
>China is clearly capitalist.
What do you mean when you use that term?

>>13381901
I think he explains it pretty well immediately after what you quoted.

>>13381125
>News
You can't trust anything anyone in news says. Even if they agree with you.

You have no idea who's behind the scenes, moving the money around. If you read news, I hope you do it realising it's anime for boomers.

>>13381911
Define the term.

>>13381901
>>13381919
I can't give a strict definition, but what I can tell you is that an economy based predominantly on valorization of capital by means of wage-labour and commodity-exchange is without a doubt capitalist.
But if you're autistic about "muh definitions" then let "a mode of production based predominantly on valorization of capital by means of wage-labour and commodity-exchange" be the working definition of capitalism.

>>13381926
So China and Denmark are both Capitalist? Is there any difference between the two in terms of their mode of production?

>>13381662
>and a communist country is the biggest contributor to global warming
does HRT affect your brain? do you think China pollutes because of its internal production or because of all those corporations leeching off their cheap labor?

>>13381934
Not him but yes, they're both capitalist. Doesn't mean there can't be differences. Denmark is more regulated.

>>13381942
It's internal production, transportation, and coal powered electricity plants and heating

>>13381934
Yes, they're both capitalist. There are differences in terms of implementation but no difference in the sense that production in both countries has very predominantly a capitalist character (that is it proceeds through valorization of capital by means of employment of wage labourers, where the value is realized through sale of products on the market).

Can you give me an example of a non-capitalist country?

>>13381962
Doesn't exist right now, barring fallen states with no government (they aren't really capital or communist or anything). Unless maybe you loosen country to include primitive tribes.

>>13381971
So when you use the term 'capitalist', you could apply it to all modern states currently in existence?

>>13381983
We live in a globalized capitalist world. As far as I know they're all capitalist, though they can vary a bit in that regard and a lot in others. A monarchy is very different from a republic, for example, even if they're both capitalist.

>>13381962
No, even the countries governed by local dictatorships of the proletariat will remain predominantly capitalist for a decent chunk of time (although to a lesser and lesser extent as the mode of production is being transformed).

>>13381983
Yes. The world production has become so globalized that I don't see why national borders would make a much difference here.

>>13381995
>>13381997
So the economies of Russia, China, the US, Brazil, the EU, Zimbabwe, and Saudi Arabia are fundamentally the same, all being capitalist?

>>13382004
Yes, some are more developed than others, some have relatively larger sectors of services, some of extraction, some of agriculture , in some more capital is owned by the government than in others, but the process of production that predominates in most is capitalist in character.

*most of production done in each of them is capitalist in character

>>13381172
The reverse would be much more sensible.

>>13382029
So the fact that these countries make things that have value, trade things that have value for other things that have value, and use that are valuable to make more value things mean they are all the same, fundamentally.
Did you know they all also breath and air, and live on land?

>>13381662
The us is the biggest contributor to global warming and china isn’t really communist. That’s actually part of the problem though, minority countries won’t stop industrializing while they’re behind, we developed ones can’t just tell them to stop developing, they won’t.

>>13382050
It means that their mode of production is of the same kind, sure. I don't know what's so mind-boggling about this. Their flags are all rectangular too (except for Nepal).

>>13381669
it's more vital than ever before. we're living in the best timeline ever, nazi.

>>13382089
Their "modes of production" are pure theory and don't represent the real world. The criteria you've selected are entirely arbitrary and not even useful.

>>13381125
A mix of The Independent, BBC, Al Jazeera, The Observer and various independent online news outlets

>>13381132

>>13382126
>co2 scare
literally a conspiracy theory

>>13382111
>we're living in the best timeline ever, nazi.

>>13381148
>BBC isn’t fully reliable
>watches anti-west propaganda show instead

>>13382126
Yes, because a communist economy wouldn't produce industrial products and release CO2, or what?

>>13381132
People like AOC

>>13381125
Radio aryan and daily stormer

>>13381254
Like petroleum and overfishiing is gonna stop technocapital lmao

"Extinction of buffalo herd is gonna end capitalism" lmao

>>13381125
Secular talk and deep fat fried.

>>13382114
On the contrary, they are the basis of all our social relations. They determine how states function, what goals they have, what laws they implement, etc. It is the proposed alternative analyses that are completely divorced from reality and depend on arbitrary contents of people's heads e.g. "country is not capitalist if it has red flags and it says it's not capitalist", "capitalist production is only capitalist when the profit can be directly appropriated by a private entrepreneur. I'm an aspiring private entrepreneur btw", etc., etc.

>>13382152
No, but it would produce less. Or, in the first place, it would at least be _able to_ to produce less. In the anarchy of capitalist production that's not even a real option.

>>13382134
>muh end of the world
>muh decline
>muh white genocide
>muh spengler
world hunger, illiteracy, crime and unemployment rates are at an all time low. social and physical mobility is better than ever. access to education, information electronic communication and digital cash transfer is not just a privilege anymore but a basic human right. you're just scared that brown people are finally in a position of taking away your white cis-het male dominated jobs in stem and politics.

>>13382191
>you're just scared that brown people are finally in a position of taking away your white cis-het male dominated jobs in stem and politics
Yeah. That will mean Europe becoming equivalent to Africa, that's pretty much the point.

I don't give a fuck about the poverty rate in Africa getting lower? That is so entirely irrelevant to me I can't believe caring, but, as you pointed out, Europe turning into Africa, that is the problem.

>>13382185
>No, but it would produce less.
For what reason? What do we have to give up to get communism and why would we?

>>13382222
>That is so entirely irrelevant to me I can't believe caring, but, as you pointed out, Europe turning into Africa, that is the problem.
The number of african immigration to europe is exaggerated by fake news and conspiracy theories that nobody outside of pol is taking seriously. if anything, it's africa that's turning into europe, not the other way around. and that's a good thing.

>>13382222
It's Africa that's turning into Europe

>>13382191
>things aren't as bad as they could be, so they're the best they can be

>>13382240
>The number of african immigration to europe is exaggerated by fake news and conspiracy theories that nobody outside of pol is taking seriously.
LOL
Yeah, going outside is a conspiracy theory.

>>13382241
That's just as bad.

Well, at least China's neo-colonialism project seems pretty good.

I don't read propaganda

>>13382276
this

>>13381125
mostly selected twitter handles

>>13381125
Why would you seek out news? You don't need any of this information and it could only make you depressed. Also, if you've ever read the news cycle around an event you know about independently you won't trust that the news will be accurate anyway.

>>13382185
The point I was making is the the term Capitalism has very little inherent meaning and no value in defining the material world. I demonstrated this by showing that, according to you: 1) all states are capitalist, which makes them fundamentally the same. 2) Capitalism is where people make things that have value, trade those things, and use value able things to make more valuable things.

1) In point of fact, China's economic structure is fundamentally different to Macau. Just because they both produce valuable things does not make them the same. China's economy is based on top-down control, with some entrepreneurship, but only if those entrepreneurs have a patron. Macau's economy is based on foreign owned casinos. This isn't a variation, this is an entirely different kind of production of value.

2) All societies have used valuable things, produced them, used their valuable things to get more valuable things, and traded those things that have value. Wages aren't a new phenomenon either. People have been performing services for compensation since early agricultural societies first existed.

>>13381254
Buddy, you haven't seen anything yet. We aren't even in the beginning stages of capitalism

>>13382229
>For what reason?
For a multitude of reasons I won't be able to list. Four quick examples would be:
(1) drastic cuts in working time in favour of free time,
(2) complete disintegration of the military (a recent headline: "US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries"),
(3) removal of some barriers slowing down technological improvement in productivity like profitability of investment in terms of value and the opposition of workers who lose their livelihood when their jobs get automated, and
(4) removal of some barriers slowing down concentration of production (national barriers or the barrier arising from the fact that separate production units that could be easily merged are owned by competing capitals).

(3) and (4) are technically not about producing less, but about producing the same with less impact

>What do we have to give up to get communism
Overwork and alienation.
In the revolutionary period the "we" (that is, you and those with the same class interest as you) will mean either (1) the bourgeoisie, or (2) the proletariat. The answer to the question for (2) is "nothing but chains".

>and why would we?
For (1): because you'll have a gun pointed at you.
For (2): because giving up those chains will be in your selfish interest.

>>13382330
>The point I was making is the the term Capitalism has very little inherent meaning and no value in defining the material world. I demonstrated this by showing that, according to you: 1) all states are capitalist, which makes them fundamentally the same.
"All states in a specific historical period are capitalist, therefore the term 'capitalism' is meaningless"
We're on /lit/, maybe you should make a thread asking for books about the economic history of the world and read a few. Your perspective would've been correct if only the world came into existence in 1950 and ended in 2050.

1) Irrelevant details. I'm not even gonna bother since I already explained why they're irrelevant.

2) Let's go back to the "working definition": capitalism is a mode of production based predominantly on valorization of capital by means of wage-labour and commodity-exchange.
The fact that some wage-labour exists doesn't mean that there's capitalism. Similarly with value production and with exchange. They have to be PREDOMINANT.
If agricultural production forms the majority of total production and agricultural production is done either by:
(a) individual producers who consume most of what they produce instead of selling it as commodities, or
(b) slaves
and NOT by wage-labourers for an agricultural capitalist then wage-labour, commodity production, valorization of capital, etc. are NOT PREDOMINANT, and therefore such mode of production is not capitalist.
And this was historically the case around the world, unless you really are the "very young earth creationist" that you appear to be and the medieval period or antiquity didn't exist according to you.

>>13381391
Shutup neoliberal phony

>>13381424
Anarchist

>>13381777
Not. He’s an asshole

>>13382150
It’s not as bad as CNN and others in the US, but they put on a show of it and hide their tory agenda.
>Propaganda
The word has been twisted so.

What is the point of consuming "news"? What difference does it make?

>>13382133
>co2 is the problem
Literally obfuscation

>>13382464
CNN is particularly heinous. I don't understand how they can say they're non-biased when it's clear they get pissed off at every little thing Trump does.

Reuters, or other basic news sources, are the most unbiased. I find ABC news to be rather non-biased as well.

The problem is, that when people say 'non-biased' what they really mean is 'leaning in my political direction, liberals, the RIGHT way, or conservatives, the TRUTH, etc etc'

:3

>>13382428
based anon

>>13381946
Retard

>>13381132
Religious programming from childhood preventing any conceptualization of the future other than apocalypse.

>>13382344
> muh US the climate criminal

You could kill everyone in the US and Europe, and global warming will still not be solved, or even mitigated much.

>>13382557
>they get pissed off at every little thing Trump does.
Except start coups and drop bombs. Guess who pushes the buttons there.

>>13382636
Trump is relatively non-militaristic (so far).

You've picked an odd point to harp on. :3

>>13382623
I only brought it up as an illustration of the impact that military can make. Don't get me wrong, I treat all countries equally, they all need to be equally destroyed.

>>13382642
He tells them to start coups, drops bombs, sells arms but just recently backed out of the ridiculous attempt to start something with Iran. The point was that CNN and other MSM supports all wars. Their bias is clearly for the pentagon and MIC

>>13381125
Aljazeera, Democracy Now, and 4chan.org

For anything involving political analysis, world socialist website (wsws.org). I don't even claim to be a socialist but their analysis on world affairs is the best and doesn't come with that strained half-hearted/watered down/sugar coated cascade of acceptability one sees in the corporate media.

>>13382682
Democracy Now went along with the Russia gate conspiracy. I think someone waved some money at them. If not they’re chumps. Otherwise good source.
Didn’t the CIA shut Aljazeera down though?

>cascade
facade

>>13382623
It probably would seeing they pollute the most. Of course this assume China and other nations stay the same.

>>13382428
>individual producers who consume most of what they produce instead of selling it as commodities,
25% of the world population are subsistence tillagers. But let me guess: it hasn't reached your undefined threshold for 'predominant' lmao

>Irrelevant details
Funny, coming from a guy who said
>they are the basis of all our social relations.
The institutions in these countries do exactly that.

The problem, my dear Marxist, is that the world isn't ordered in a linear order of primitive communism, feudalism, capitalism and full communism.
Indian society, for example, never had feudalism. The chinese had a fully functioning modern state thousands of years ago. Neither was Christiandom a mode of production. Trying to organize history into linear mold is not only inaccurate, it distorts our abilty to analyze historical data.

>>13382713
That's the thing, they don't. The major polluter is China. The 30% reduction in GHG emissions that would be accomplished by eliminating the first world wouldn't solve the problem.

>>13382808
>25% of the world population are subsistence tillagers. But let me guess: it hasn't reached your undefined threshold for 'predominant' lmao
As soon as it can be clearly established that those subsistence farmers are being rapidly transformed into wage labourers, then we're dealing with developing capitalism at an early stage. If your "gotcha" is supposed to be the fact that there's no clear boundary between pre-capitalism and capitalism then congratulations, you're absolutely right.

>Indian society, for example, never had feudalism. The chinese had a fully functioning modern state thousands of years ago.
Nothing I wrote depends on or implies that every country has gone through some defined set stages (defined by you, not me).

>Neither was Christiandom a mode of production.
Good to know, very cool.

>Trying to organize history into linear mold is not only inaccurate, it distorts our abilty to analyze historical data.
Trying to organize what I wrote into organizing history into linear mold is not only inaccurate, it makes you look retarded

>>13381125
People who read BBC/CNN should be officially pronounced mentally ill.

>>13382959
The point I've been trying to deliver to you is that the term 'capitalism' is without utility or defined meaning. It doesn't describe a period of history, as even you can't tell if we are living in an era of capitalism or pre-capitalism or not. it does not describe anything unique, as throughout all periods of history commodities were being exchanged, capital accumulated, and wages paid. The term is pointless, unless that is you need a narrative to intellectually justify your ressentiment. And its pretty clear to me that you are quite insecure in yourself.

In failing to understand my point, you have clearly demonstrated your lacking the ability of abstraction. Defining a historical era as 'le capitalism' is just plain fucking wrong. History doesn't have these clear cut segmentations, and isn't following some logic of historical materialism or class conflict. History is nebulous and uncertain and complex, but someone who has the gall to claim an all encompassing understanding of it would certainly be a self-professed marxist. Time to read a book, nigger.

>>13382878
Per capita you imbecil. If we lived like the average Chinese there wouldn't be a problem.

>>13383062
Have you seen how they live?

>>13383061
>It doesn't describe a period of history, as even you can't tell if we are living in an era of capitalism or pre-capitalism or not.
Of course I can. The fact that a one-sentence working definition fails to capture the entire truth of the matter at once doesn't mean it's worthless. Most of the people who posted in this thread are either wage labourers or employers of wage labourer, or at least they will be once they finish school. They all know they're in capitalism. Some of them only forget it when they need to own an internet commie by reciting multiple variations of "no ur wrong".

>In failing to understand my point, you have clearly demonstrated your lacking the ability of abstraction.
Nice projection going on around the paragraph break, this also includes the end of the previous one.

>History doesn't have these clear cut segmentations
I already agreed with this in the post you're responding to.

>and isn't following some logic of historical materialism
If by "following logic of historical materialism" you mean the vulgar reductionist strawman you have in mind then I agree! Nor will communism be implemented by a planet-sized ghost.

>or class conflict
Class conflict was a very important factor in the history of our society.

>History is nebulous and uncertain and complex
Definitely, but to claim that this means we can't have a good idea about how its development proceeded would be to imply a false dichotomy.

>but someone who has the gall to claim an all encompassing understanding
Again with the reductionism. All I did was claim that we can roughly distinguish a period in history when the dominant part of production has specific character that production barely had before that period. And this claim is supposed to be my grand claim to an "all encompassing understanding". So be it.

>Time to read a book, nigger.
That's all I'm doing today, apart from occasional breaks to respond to people who don't even deserve a response on /lit/.

>>13383153
>They all know they're in capitalism
yeah uhh it's this system we live in guys! sucks right? uhh you want me to define that? lol ur dumb! its where i have to make money to live! its a like really unique period in history ughh such injustice

>>13383115
Modestly compared to west. Don't worry, we probably will live much worse soon.

>>13383235
Actually I like to say that capitalism is not unjust, although it seems to triggers fans of contemporary anglo philosophy since they're apparently very hung up on the concept of justice, or something.

>>13383235
Don't bother. He's merely re-wrapping a fallacy of composition. Just because there are some elements of a market in the way he defines his terms (value, trade, more value; or "valorization of capital by means of wage-labour and commodity-exchange") in virtually all countries in recent history, does not mean they share the same economic system. If his attempt is to find a common denominator and label it as 'capitalism', let him have his label. It's a useless category given that it has so little categorisation power (and isn't congruent with the working definition), but let the autist have his labels as long as he is willing to accompany them with his working definitions.

>>13383357
By capitalism, do you mean a centralized autocracy that distributes resources collectively and doesn't allow for private entrepreneurship, or do you mean capitalism as in the system of market driven prices and freedom of trade? Oh wait, they're the same thing since they both have wage labor and trade commodities. My bad.

>>13383406
They're not the same thing. One is centralized autocracy that distributes resources collectively and doesn't allow for private entrepreneurship, and the other is a system of market driven prices and freedom of trade. So they're different.
Except the first one (assuming it's supposed to represent something like USSR) is not really THAT different, since it also has a system of market driven prices and some freedom of trade. But yes, they are different. And yet they partake in the same mode of production. But they still can be different.
If this is still too hard to understand then ask the fallacy man over here >>13383386 to explain to you which fallacy "either A and B are the same or A and B share no properties" falls under.

>>13383448
Wow. More like: A and B share some similarities, therefore A and B are the same. If the USSR and the US are the same due to x, y, and z, then surely i am the same to a tiger due to the fact we both eat meat, are warmblooded, and like to run.

>>13383448
As the fallacy man, I feel like you've changed your tune a little bit. Good.

>>13381389
>T-They'll fix it
Fucking hell it's like I'm back on /v/

>>13383235
>sucks right?
That it does.

>>13381163
>>13381148
Fucking hell, are you literally on every thread or are some people constantly using your faggy butterfly shit to ruin proper discussion on this board?

Either way, fuck you, you unredeemable retard.

>>13384159
Eh, it's not so bad :3

I'm convinced we live in a whinier time than ever.

>>13384145
They are fixing it though. Explain how the all-powerful state would fix it better.

>>13381132
Because they refuse to read even an introduction to economics. They see ignorance as a right and arrogance as a virtue, thus they believe it a good thing to spout bullshit they have no idea about.

>>13381148
The ultimate proof that being well read doesn't make you smart. Jimmy Dore is a fucking youtuber. RT is literally state propaganda.
>everything I don't like is neoliberalism
You're like a caricature.

>>13381148
Jimmy Dore is alright, in that he's actually a Leftist and not a capitalist stooge hiding behind bourgeois fashion issues, like mulatto transsexuals dependent on smartphone apps and HRT, tying their existence to PTB.

>>13382998
Those people think the same of people who amalgamate information from independent sources. They're just holding fast to their class interest.

I get informed about news topics by imageboards. And by my friends in whatsapp, when they share funny articles. Finnchan /b/ is shit nowdays as it's mostly people linking news articles and then have 2 minutes hate about them.

I don't. I'm on a news diet. Everything really important will reach me anyway.

I love that corporatism is basically ignored despite being what the main fucking problem is. Now all we have are retards defending corporations on the right and retards pushing for socialism on the left. Yay. Here's hoping the culture war goes nuclear and fixing this mess..

>>13381669
Suicide rate? Depression? Personality disorders? White identity?

>>13384771
inevitable

>>13381254
These are problems inherent to population expansion, not necessarily capitalism.

>>13382158
WHOA, based!!1! Fuck AOC, amirite??1

>>13384145
Human populations grow beyond the natural capacity of their environment to sustain life by creating technological solutions which enhance that capacity. It's what they've done for millennia.

https://www.infowars.com/

Best place to get your news and water filters to defuse the gay bomb that is tap water.

>>13381132
low iq

>>13384920
unironically, fuck aoc.

>>13381132
A general lack of historical context in america and a perpetually fascinating spectacle of tit, ass, and violence in said failed experiment.

>>13385110
I'd unironically fuck AOC.

Bitch needs to get out of politics tho.

>>13385185
she looks like she has bad breath and eats lots of cheese.

>>13385191
I doubt she eats much cheese and every girl has bad breath after A2M.

>>13381772
You're a faggot. Now fuck off /lit/ and never come back. Faggot.

>>13385200
you better believe she loves the queso bruh

Climate change hysteria is so obviously a nihilistic death cult

>>13381240
>the BBC and NPR
It's no different than the spew from Fox.
Propaganda is propaganda, no matter the source.

>>13385387
>Le fox news xD
wow you are so enlightened by your own intelligence

New York Times, Aljazeera, and a range of other journals.

>>13384159
The question is, what exactly about it sucks? USSR style capitalism or Venezuelan style capitalism? what capitalism would you replace it with?

>>13385206
Make me, queer.

>>13382543
For some folks, it makes them feel "woke". But it really is just the same shit with a different flavor.

The Economist, Wall Street Journal, Foreign Affairs

>>13384178
>ruin proper discussion
Oh my, look at the dandy everyone. Having a PROPER discussion.

>>13384216
Dore is a regular dude standup comic with a good bullshit detector.
The BBC are state propaganda. NPR, PBS, and all the other US MSM are corporate propaganda.
RT allows some journalists to do news.
Everything in control of the world right now is neoliberalism, and yeah, I don’t like it.

>>13384261
PTB?

>>13385503
Not-capitalism. We need:
*Democracy in the workplace
*A non-accumulative currency

>>13385587
I used to read all those back in 2008~2009. Tory rag and neoliberal shite actually.
Challenge yourself and swallow some of that neo-Trot stuff at WSWS

>>13381132
A fundamental lack of historical perspective, and a genuine desire for this to be the end stages of the "bad old ways". It's a fairly juvenile mindset that used to be the dominion of the hyper religious and the socially lost.

>>13385648
>non-accumulative currency
What's this?

>>13385648
>these longstanding publications are le propaganda
>thats why i read socialist.blogspot to get my real facts!
grow up, kid.

>>13385718
No, dumb dumb. There’s nowhere else for it to go.
Once its done with China its all dust bowls, famines, floods and an extinction event that will either get our species or leave us nearly alone

>>13385648
>*Democracy in the workplace
>*A non-accumulative currency
that's still capitalism, according to your fellow marxist

>>13385720
Labor vouchers. Paid for time worked, spend but it doesn’t accumulate in a till. See Paul Cockshott’ Towards a New Socialism, or check out some yt

>>13385727
Not much of an argument. Are you sure you’re not trolling?

>>13385748
Nope. No money, no accumulation to enrich some creating an owner class and a wage slave class. Democracy in the workplace eliminates bosses and owners, encourages civic duty and a responsible....human. Do it everywhere.

I’m not a Marxist, so there are no fellow Marxists, you gibbering baboon

>>13385766
>Democracy
Because we all know that leads to the abolition of hierarchy. There's a long record of historical data to back that up lmao.
>>13385766
>No money
You can still accumulate value without currency, this doesn't solve your problem. This does, however, create a new problem for you: how are resources distributed without a market? You'll have no way to know where these resources are needed most.

>>13385810
Democracy, when applied, works.
You’re probably thinking of a few faux democracies right now.
>You can still accumulate value without currency
Everyone is valued. Read the book to get the answers done properly.
And take that mask off, you liberal stooge.

>>13385839
>Democracy, when applied, works.
could you find even one historical example of democracy abolishing hierarchy?
>Read the book
No thanks, I have much better stuff to do, and many better books to read.

>>13385860
>loads question
>enforces stupidity

Why even say anything to me? Just blow away

>>13385882
You can't back up anything you say with even a shred of evidence. You're marxist theory is pure conjecture, and its just fucking wrong too.
Kill yourself, trannydyke.

>>13385905
No, its you who doesn’t want to have what i say backed up. Blow away, trolltyk

>>13385922
xD I HAVE LITERALLY BEEN ASKING YOU TO BACK IT UP. YOU ARE DELUSIONAL.

>>13385932
https://b-ok.cc/book/459851/14a866

>>13385961

>>13385961
Read this lmao

>>13385965
?

>>13385961
Read this toooo

>>13385994
Here are some books that le prove my point
go read them now or ur a trolll

>>13381125
>they call it "late stage capitalism"
>this is only the end of stage one
why are people so short sighted

>>13385965

>>13385991

>>13386010
>>13386017
If you don't read the books I've posted, that means your wrong.

>>13385998

>>13386021
My wrong what?
I have no more questions about the liberal world you defend. You’re the one who doesn’t know a thing about what I’m talking about

>>13386027
>13386027

>>13386034
lmao you couldn't answer my questions or defend against my criticisms

>could you find even one historical example of democracy abolishing hierarchy?
was responded to with
>>loads the question
after you claimed that democracy works at getting rid of bosses

Nor did you answer my question as to how resources will be distributed if there is no price system.
Nor did you you refute my correct statement that one doens't need currency to accumulate value. You only need commodities.

face it, youre a fucking pseud dillente

>>13386040

>>13386059

Tripcodes were a mistake

>>13381132
there is no late stage its just gonna get crazier and crazier.

>>13386138
Perhaps it will get better? I think you underestimate the power of adaptability liberal institutions have.

Communist butterfly eternally btfod and ass raped by the liberal butterfly.

>>13381125
I don't get any news and don't need it. I'll inevitably hear of anything big enough to cross my ears.

>>13386528
Where?

>>13386138
Then that would all be a part of the late stage. Certain doom. Its epilogue.

>>13386115
Filters. Filters were a mistake, you cowering man-baby
Someone pass that to him, please

>>13386612
>Where?
>>13386056
>>13386056
>>13386056

>>13386612
Get some sleep. Might improve your mental health.

>>13386623
Phbbbb Going Anonymous to promote yourself.

>>13386628
Mmm

>>13386717
damn girl lol
persecution complex much? go read.

Butterfly posters are fucking idiots.

/pol/, joe rogan and hearsay in descending order

>>13386770
Nah, it's just not conceivable to her that more than one person could find her communist orthodoxy hilariously retarded and annoyingly boring. Take for instance complaining about the media being gatekeepers of the status quo and at the same time, your creed pushing you to perform apologetics for RT, a news organisation under the jurisdiction of a government with the worst trespassings of journalistic liberty in the Northern Hemisphere as pointed out by all the available evidence. Imagine thinking that any stream of output that passes its filters is anything other than the weaponisation of useful idiots.

good thread

>>13386115
>>13386828
>not filtering stubs
I still use the yotsuba catalog which I don't filter, never have, meaning I don't miss out on threads in case an OP has a trip and it's justified. In return I miss out on all the attentionwhoring normalfag tripfags and the drama they create when mongs reply to their shitposts.

>>13386828
>>13386989
do as you will.

Bump

>>13381125
Whatever news source I know the bias of, I'll read/watch/listen to

News is mostly wrong so I actively avoid it
If it's so important I'll read it in a book someday

>>13386819
No, its just that there was no “eternal btfo” anywhere there.
Liberals are ruining this world and need to admit when they’re wrong. Just like Christians

>>13388041
You've been here long enough to understand hyperbole and gauge it accordingly. Theists in general are ruining the world, Christianity probably being the least significant culprit if it weren't for American Evangelism leading its discourse and infecting European Christianity as well. But I take your point. Christianity, regardless of denomination is certainly ruining this board. And much of the world. As far as "liberals" go, your definition has so little descriptive power that it essentially describes anyone not in alignment with your anarcho-syndicalist orthodoxy by which you smuggle in some socialism or thirst for blood, depending on your mood and how self-righteously revolutionary you feel. Responding to such lunacy would be a waste of both my time and yours. Go back to watching RT, they're putting on a fine display of journalistic liberty. Hot takes on how your president and their's bonded over Western press unfairness, but also the recent North Korean-American pageantry. Couldn't think of a better news source. Anything is permitted of course, simply because they also allow ressentiment infected morons to parrot the same old anti-American orthodox tropes. No different from the useful idiots of the Cold War who got wined and dined by their Soviet pimps.

>>13381132
your age demographic wants to collectively go to bed one night and not wake up. this reflects in their political absolution fantasies. it should bother you

i dont
i get updated by dming with frens

>>13388330
Liberal is a capitalist or capitalism advocate. There are certainly a variety of them, but they all like capitalism from one degree or another. Some want heavy reforms and maybe even a state centralized directed economy, others want “free markets” and whatever neoclassical ideas they have. I don’t like any of it.
The “socially liberal” is covered in the other name for anarchist, libertarian-socialist, which as you can see identifies it as a strand of socialism. There’s no “thirst for blood” in me or the ideology. These things happen in violent revolutions, but I’d prefer they not happen like that.

>But don’t you believe in the new cold war
But why aren’t you suspicious of the Military Industrial Complex?

>>13381254
im living im a poor af country and theres a nice comfy 27ºC and i getting a qt underage girl for an ice cream lol

>>13381254
Those are not problems exclusive to capitalism. They are symptoms of economy-centric thinking.

>>13388370
>Liberalism is capitalism
Like I said, I can think of a better way to spend time than someone who thinks delineations within this category have no impact on who it is in fact that "ruins the world" and that it, as the common denominator of its parts is responsible for it and nothing else.
>But why aren’t you suspicious of the Military Industrial Complex?
I am. It's just that acknowledging problems stemming from various interest groups permeating institutional power and creating corrupt conflicts of interest still isn't convincing enough to turn me into a supporter at worst, or an apologist at best, of some murderers and their useful idiots over others.

>>13388414
The system the liberals support is a major cause of all the problems in the world. The wars, the deteriorating environment, the sociopathic ruling class. The traditions of this system stretch back in time well before this modern capitalism or “liberal” ideology, but it has obviously picked up steam since the Industrial Revolution. “And nothing else” nothing.

You are not suspicious of the MIC. Give me a break.

>>13388442
>Give me a break
Sure, my pleasure.

unironically the front page of reddit or whatever my mommy tells me (usually random local news about animals being born at the zoo)

>>13381507
How would your perfect capitalist system curtail the influence of lobbyists and special interest groups?

>>13381132

>>13381132
Because it keeps eating itself.