/lit/ - Literature

File: 80 KB, 476x661, 82km1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:01:36 2017 No.9724799 [Reply] [Original]

When did you realize that Marxism was the end point of philosophy?
Marx convincingly demonstrated that philosophical problems were resolved in the realm of social being and political praxis. Philosophy can only exist as a separate discipline if you abstract its subjects from their historical content in a fruitless search for essences, thus rendering them meaningless. The practice of philosophy reaches its climax in the conscious realization that it is basically class struggle in theory.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:02:37 2017 No.9724803 He took all that from Hegel's objective spirit you fucking dunderhead.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:09:03 2017 No.9724809 Actually a decent Marx thread for a change. >>9724803 Except Hegel's wankery happens exclusively in the realm of ideals.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:30:04 2017 No.9724853 >Muh metaphysics Derrida is the end point.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:32:37 2017 No.9724862

>>9724799
>Marx convincingly demonstrated that philosophical problems were resolved in the realm of social being and political praxis. Philosophy can only exist as a separate discipline if you abstract its subjects from their historical content in a fruitless search for essences, thus rendering them meaningless.
I feel like this is a pointless remark but i have to make it anyway: yes and no. Epistemology, for example, is self-sufficient.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:35:28 2017 No.9724867 >>9724799 What if the subject of philosophy is philosophy itself as in your post and in critical theory generally?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:35:29 2017 No.9724868 >>9724799 He was wrong about everything though.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 04:54:00 2017 No.9724906

>>9724868
>wrong about everything
>predicted a century of revolutions with the working class attempting to seize state power

Marx is held to an absurdly high standard because of his infamy. Please name another philosopher who was able to impact history to this degree and deduce its fundamental forces. The neoliberal triumphalism over the "failure of communism" is slowly degrading already and socialist ideas are returning in full force. I wouldn't be surprised by some leninist takeovers in the following decades.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:10:32 2017 No.9724945

>>9724906
>predicted a century of revolutions with the working class attempting to seize state power
>implying said revolutions didn't happen because Marx was actually dictating to his fellow jews what they should do to destroy the European aristocracy so jews could take over European nations via manipulating the lower classes into believing they were working in their own interests.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:12:24 2017 No.9724948 >>9724945 oh just fuck off back to /pol/

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:13:52 2017 No.9724954 >>9724906 I hope they try. I sure can't wait to shoot some commies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:15:32 2017 No.9724963 >>9724948 >go back to /pol/ The mantra of the moron.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:18:28 2017 No.9724968 >>9724906 If humanity ever attempts a utopian project again the one theory they most certainly will not employ will be Marxism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:21:11 2017 No.9724975 File: 159 KB, 604x954, ee2de38f7248efb5cdaebf05cddbc20411a0d2220b3562d5e048e90e16c506b2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9724963

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:21:42 2017 No.9724976 >>9724906 I hope the world would stop trying that Leninist Marxism

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:22:02 2017 No.9724977
File: 31 KB, 396x594, boss chomsky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>When did you realize that Marxism was the end point of philosophy?

George Yancy: When I was an undergraduate philosophy student at the University of Pittsburgh, where I was trained in the analytic tradition, it wasn’t clear to me what philosophy meant beyond the clarification of concepts. Yet I have held onto the Marxian position that philosophy can change the world. Any thoughts on the capacity of philosophy to change the world?

Noam Chomsky: I am not sure just what Marx had in mind when he wrote that “philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” Did he mean that philosophy could change the world, or that philosophers should turn to the higher priority of changing the world? If the former, then he presumably meant philosophy in a broad sense of the term, including analysis of the social order and ideas about why it should be changed, and how. In that broad sense, philosophy can play a role, indeed an essential role, in changing the world, and philosophers, including in the analytic tradition, have undertaken that effort, in their philosophical work as well as in their activist lives — Bertrand Russell, to mention a prominent example.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:29:42 2017 No.9724994

>>9724977
Bertrand Russel is the very definition of a champagne socialist. If you don't have any program to achieve socialism, no concept of a revolutionary transition, you're just blowing hot air. I guess the bourgeoisie will capitulate if you give them enough moral arguments, lol.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:32:18 2017 No.9725003 >>9724975 What does this have to do with the discussion here? Are you trying to prove the assertion that you're a moron?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:32:23 2017 No.9725004 >>9724975 >8ch filename Why make shitty off topic Marx threads on /lit/ when you come from a board that is practically dedicated to Marx's silly ideas? Stop trying to convert people and fuck off back to /leftypol/.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:35:56 2017 No.9725016
File: 28 KB, 640x196, dilbert-11-12-1991.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9724906
>>predicted a century of revolutions with the working class attempting to seize state power
It doesn't take a genius to predict obvious things. Pic related.

Marx was wrong about the evolution of western economies. He thought wealth would increasingly concentrate in the hands of a few rich elite, and that workers would increasingly do repetitive tasks. He was wrong on both counts: the rich actually became much poorer and the rich much richer, instead of society devolving into two classes there was the creation of the middle class, and work became increasingly more complex instead of simpler.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:36:37 2017 No.9725017

>>9724799

Why is Marx retarded?

1. You can't ground progress into material things because of Hedonic Treadmill ( we still have whiny college students in America crying how opressed they are even if they are the most privileged generation that ever lived in the history of the world)

2. Owning "the means of production" is retarded when managing an entire nation. "The invisible hand" of supply and demand regulates what resources goes where and how much of the resource and the level of priority people give that resource. All this shit needs to be done in a commie state by a bunch of knuckleheads (since we killed the class enemy elites). Good luck with that, inb4 millions dead.

3. Marx's theory was preceded by his unhealthy resentment about people who have shit. He can't understand that labour itself is a commodity since human beings can get kind of depressed if they don't work towards a certain goal. Which is why a hierarchical system is needed always. Marx never worked, he retreated himself into his shell of hatred of the world and designed a loony theory that killed millions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:36:59 2017 No.9725018 >>9725016 >the rich actually became much poorer and the rich much richer meant "and the poor much richer"

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:39:21 2017 No.9725021 Who gives a fuck? You people are discussing politics as though you had power of any kind.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:41:04 2017 No.9725023

>>9725017
>He can't understand that labour itself is a commodity
?????????????

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch06.htm

>human beings can get kind of depressed if they don't work towards a certain goal. Which is why a hierarchical system is needed always

????????????????????????????????

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:46:23 2017 No.9725029 The labor theory of value is demonstrably false.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:49:03 2017 No.9725038 >>9724799 >The practice of philosophy reaches its climax in the conscious realization that it is basically class struggle in theory. lmao

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:51:48 2017 No.9725043

>>9725023

Working is a product that people want. The value of work is determined by the possibility of social advancement, either in a certain field or through the aquisition of capital. People want hierarchies in which social advancement is possible through a controllable measure(work).

If there is no work and no hierarchy you can't be happy. You have nothing to live for. kys anon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:52:01 2017 No.9725044 Won't be any class struggle left when we execute all of you low IQ Marxists.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 05:58:14 2017 No.9725058

You don't need to read much more than chapter 1 of Capital to realize that Marx didn't know what the fuck he was talking about when it came to the labour theory of value (LTV).

His entire economic system is based on quicksand and no one takes him seriously in modern economic academia except the TISS interpretation people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_single-system_interpretation

Yet other people would incline more towards analytic marxism and agree that there is a shit ton of shit jammed into Capital (such as the LTV) that needs to be shoveled out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_Marxism

There are more of the first kind of people than the second, that is out of all the people who would identify as Marxist. Most people just lean socialist instead.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:07:58 2017 No.9725076

>>9725058
>no one takes him seriously in modern economic academia

This is for no other reason other than the fact that the description of his economic system contradicts itself (google: transformation problem). Only TISS folks still cling on to the entirety of his ideas.

LTV is the main issue with Marxism in modern economic academia, it's nothing much else, all the criticisms put out here and in general discussions (such as "oh it's never worked before") isn't something professional economists bring up that much in their papers, mainly because of the theoretical and logical rigor that economics demands, Marxism doesn't pass this first "stress test" so there's not much else that it is criticized for.

Here's Prabhat Patnaik on the problems on the LTV (watch till 3:00, it's vital to understand what he's talking about to understand Marxism in an economic context):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IsLv7DIT2Y

TL;DR: If you go by Marx's economic model, it is not possible that the sum of prices = sum of values and that the sum of surplus value = profits simultaneously. Both of these equalities are thing she asserted would hold true, as such, Marxism as a whole is self-contradictory and Marxian theories would be seen as flawed/in need of salvaging if not entirely useless by economists.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:09:39 2017 No.9725078

>>9724945
>>implying said revolutions didn't happen because Marx was actually dictating to his fellow jews what they should do to destroy the European aristocracy so jews could take over European nations via manipulating the lower classes into believing they were working in their own interests.

You're describing nationalism.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:11:14 2017 No.9725081

>>9725058
>Yet other people would incline more towards analytic marxism and agree that there is a shit ton of shit jammed into Capital (such as the LTV) that needs to be shoveled out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_Marxism

Oh I've also seen some people play the "don't use volume II and III of Capital" card, because Marx didn't finish writing those himself and it is because of things stated in those two volumes that his system contradicts itself.

Without Volume II and III the Marxian LTV isn't so much self-contradictory as it is "absurd".

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:13:14 2017 No.9725086 >>9725058 Doesn't sound like you came to this conclusion yourself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:13:21 2017 No.9725087 >>9725076 Personally I think what most Marxist economists are doing isn't really what Marx was doing, they're doing economics influenced by Marxism, rather than critique of political economy. For the latter, see Heinrich, Postone, Backhaus, etc.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:17:34 2017 No.9725092 >>9725078 No, I was describing judeo-bolshevism, and the anti-national jewish movements that led to the creation of the proto-internationalist sociopolitical entity known as the Soviet Union.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:19:00 2017 No.9725094 >>9725092 Nope you're describing nationalism unless you think the French revolution was in favour of the aristocracy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:22:15 2017 No.9725101 >>9725094 We're talking about jewish political movements here. Jews don't lead nationalist movements, they oppose and fear them. I think your wires are crossed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:24:16 2017 No.9725104 >>9725101 Nationalism literally originated in the French revolution you idiot

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:24:18 2017 No.9725105

>>9725086
What do you mean??

>>9725087
Well there isn't much "doing" going on anymore really, Marxist Economics is already very heterodox.

I suppose I get what you're saying in so far as the non-Marxist economists approach to criticizing Marxism would involve the use of many "tools" Marx himself never used, but point is that if you, as a Marxist, claim to study an economic system and run into a MAINSTREAM economist (provided he's actually studied Marx, most of them don't give a shit) who quotes Marx and says "here he says XYZ are true together and X, Y and Z, cannot be true together because of ABC, your system contradicts itself", you're going to look like a bit of a foot if you have no response to that.

You don't need to make yourself aware of these angles of criticism if you're discussing things with less rigorously trained Marxists but you're going to be caught with your pants down when you run into someone who is aware of these age-old angles of attack.

Also, don't draw a line between "Marxist economists" and other "Marxists" so confidently, people like Prabhat Patnaik would very much not see any difference between himself and other Marxists, ditto for most other academic Marxists.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:26:16 2017 No.9725108

>>9725105
>when you run into someone who is aware of these age-old angles of attack.

I suggest reading Ronald Meeks "Studies in the Labour Theory of Value".

It's a brilliant book that has been used as source material for an even more famous History of Economic Thought textbook, it's regarded very highly by most academics but it's otherwise a simple read and made for students.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:27:01 2017 No.9725111 >>9725104 So fucking what? The only person talking about the French Revolution here is you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:28:18 2017 No.9725113 File: 817 KB, 761x731, sdfdsfds.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] AYYY WHERE IS MY COMRADES AT!!

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:29:15 2017 No.9725114 >>9725111 Are you aware of what happened to the aristocracy in the revolution?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:32:43 2017 No.9725117

>>9725101
>We're talking about jewish political movements here.

We're talking about how you don't have any true sense of history and you're making shit up because it sounds good to you. Nationalist revolutions put the aristocracies of Europe on the back-foot, not Marxism. The aristocrats didn't control the means of production.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:32:47 2017 No.9725118

>>9725105
I would definitely say the object, methodologies, and organization of knowledge of Marxist economics is very distinct from the object of both Marx himself in his works and from Marxism as a movement (cultural, political, etc). It's an attempt to assimilate Marxism to the discipline of economics, rather than to be a Marxist (or militant, if you will) in economics. For instance, the work of someone like Heinrich or Backhaus has nothing to do with the work of Wolff, Resnick, etc.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:33:13 2017 No.9725119 >>9725114 That's not what is being discussed in this thread and your bizarro-world comment about judeo-bolshevism/communism being a nationalist movement is retarded. The exact opposite is true.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:33:56 2017 No.9725120 >>9725108 >History of Economic Thought textbook I mean the one by Prof. EK Hunt, guy speaks very highly of Meek's book.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:35:04 2017 No.9725124 >>9725119 You're the one who brought up taking control from European aristocracy in the context of Marxism when it more accurately describes nationalist movements.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:35:19 2017 No.9725126
File: 194 KB, 1024x600, Screenshot_2017-05-21-16-49-50.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725058
Except LTV has strong empirical support that "subjective" theories of value fail to provide. It's also laughable to use the prevailing economic orthodoxy as a knockdown argument, neoclassical assumptions are so fucking bad they can only prevail by expelling dissenters from the field.
Neoclassicals as a whole have failed to engage with contemporary advances in Marxist economics, like the research done by Cockshott and Cottrell.

http://bnarchives.yorku.ca/308/2/20101200_cockshott_nitzan_bichler_testing_the_ltv_exchange_web.htm
http://www.academia.edu/32232262/The_Scientific_Status_of_the_Labour_Theory_of_Value

Also google "testing the ltv in Sweden"

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:36:09 2017 No.9725128 >>9725124 Tbh in the case of Russia that comment was accurate. Your focus on bringing up again and again the FR borders on autism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:36:13 2017 No.9725129 >>9725117 You're delusional if you think jewish/communist movements were nationalist. Nationalism, particularly in the form of fascism, arose to oppose them. It's you who doesn't understand history.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:37:12 2017 No.9725132 >>9725126 Marxist economics is an oxymoron, since marxism is not a scientific discipline like classical economics, but rather a metaphysics (or, if you're mean, the inane ramblings of a crazy Jew).

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:37:20 2017 No.9725134 >>9725128 Russia is barely European.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:37:47 2017 No.9725136

>>9725118
>For instance, the work of someone like Heinrich or Backhaus has nothing to do with the work of Wolff, Resnick, etc.

I got you now.

I agree that the bodies of works would be "different", but I don't want to agree with any kind of sentiment that it is best to ignore the economic analysis of Marxism given that such an analysis generally digs up bits of his theories that contradict themselves; that is, if you're trying to encourage this kind of sentiment in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:38:14 2017 No.9725138 >>9725134 You're just shifting the goalposts. I could also cite Germany. Was Rosa Luxembourg a nationalist?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:39:12 2017 No.9725140 >>9725129 Nationalism precedes Socialism historically, and German/Italian nationalism precedes German/Italian fascism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:40:33 2017 No.9725141 >>9725124 Communism was a jewish movement that used the lower classes to diminish the power of the European aristocracy. The aristocracy was the nations bulwark against those jewish movements, and fell after they succeeded.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:41:39 2017 No.9725144 >>9725138 You're shifting the goalposts by suggesting the case of Russia is the same for all Europe. France was the model European culture to Austria, Prussia and Russia up until the revolution. Do you not know basic European history?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:43:48 2017 No.9725147 >>9725140 Fascism was the last gasp of nationalism, which obviously existed prior. Much of the aristocracy had already been eroded by that point.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:43:52 2017 No.9725148 >>9725141 The power of the European aristocracy was diminished before Marx was even born. The aristocracy isn't even nationalist; they were mostly foreign-born hence the call for nationalist revolutions.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:43:57 2017 No.9725149

>>9725144
>You're shifting the goalposts by suggesting the case of Russia is the same for all Europe
What? No I'm not. I'm just explaining what should be painfully obvious to anyone with two neurons and a synapse connecting them (more than what the average commie possesses, I agree), that when that other anon was talking about jewish revolutionary communism overthrowing the aristocracy he quite obviously wasn't talking about the French Revolution, which if you didn't know, predates the birth of Marx.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:44:34 2017 No.9725150 >>9725141 But the very notion of a nation in political discourse was founded in the movement against aristocracy? I agree that the bourgeoisie later mobilized aristocracy in certain places but I'm not really even sure what you're arguing?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:44:53 2017 No.9725151

>>9724799
>The practice of philosophy reaches its climax in the conscious realization that it is basically class struggle in theory.

I don't understand. Does this suggest that literally all philosophy is about class struggle? Even stuff dealing with perception, knowledge, etc? That sounds like an extreme claim to me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:45:59 2017 No.9725152 >>9725149 >he quite obviously wasn't talking about the French Revolution He was describing it closely, hence the initial comment in the first place.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:46:45 2017 No.9725153

>>9725126

First off, you're totally right, LTV empirically holds up pretty well, I am aware of this. That doesn't really prove Marx's theory is correct though. Discussing this further would require getting in to too many details so we'll have to agree to disagree here.

>neoclassical assumptions are so fucking bad they can only prevail by expelling dissenters from the field.

First of, you're homogenizing economists way too much. this is one of the reasons some of us like to scoff at people outside of the field who criticize the field as if it is this one big chunk of "neoliberal" capitalists or whatever.

There is a bit in the aforementioned text by Meek which speaks of how one of the reasons Marxists stick to their guns with LTV so much is that many of its criticisms have historically come less with the intention of reforming it and re-inserting it into the labour movement as they have come with the intention of saying "fuck it all, the whole system is rotten to the core, dump it and forget about it and the labour movement". So I see where you're coming from...

But I cannot emphasize enough that it is not only the economic orthodoxy that has a problem with the LTV from a theoretical (note, not empirical) sense. Hell, most critics of Marx right now who engage in much theory-crafting are probably socialists or something along those lines, most really orthodox economists would not have even read Marx let alone written a paper about him.

And I brought up the fact that most economists shit on Marx not because I think that objectively proves he's worthless but more to draw light on the fact that "hey, most people don't look up to him". The guy gets glorified way more on /lit/ than in any academic circles I've come across.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:48:59 2017 No.9725157

>>9725151
Yeah, as Althusser says "World outlooks are represented in the domain of theory (science + the ‘theoretical’ ideologies which surround science and scientists) by philosophy. Philosophy represents the class struggle in theory. That is why philosophy is a struggle (Kampf said Kant), and basically a political struggle: a class struggle. Everyone is not a philosopher spontaneously, but everyone may become one."

Of course it's a bit reductive to say that philosophy emanates from class struggle as he does here, however I think it's quite accurate to say that philosophy is, in the last instance, determined by class struggle (insofar as class struggle renders bourgeois society possible), a claim even Deleuze and Foucault took as their points of departure. Extreme? Of course. But what's wrong with that?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:49:11 2017 No.9725158 >>9725132 "Hegelian nonsense" is how I've heard one economist of note put it.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:49:14 2017 No.9725159

>>9725148
>The power of the European aristocracy was diminished before Marx was even born
This isn't true.

>The aristocracy isn't even nationalist; they were mostly foreign-born hence the call for nationalist revolutions.
Are you still the guy who thinks communism was a form of nationalism?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:49:26 2017 No.9725161

>>9725152
>He was describing it closely,
No he wasn't, in fact he was responding to a post which mentioned the revolutions which were "predicted" by Marx, which couldn't have been the FR unless Marx was a time traveler.

At this point I have to ask you, are you clinically retarded?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:50:27 2017 No.9725163 >>9725153 Marx is really important in social sciences and humanities other than economics and this is where the most productive Marxist works are produced desu

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:51:19 2017 No.9725165 >>9725150 That was a particular case but there is linearity here in the sense that the French Revolution was what liberated the jews and allowed them to begin their anti-nationalist agitation.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:51:40 2017 No.9725167
File: 32 KB, 276x361, hegel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725151
It doesn't mean literally everything, of course you can go into highly specialized fields that don't have much of anything to do with socioeconomic issues. But the fundamental assumptions, academic authorities and historical divisions in philosophy have a class character.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:51:52 2017 No.9725168 >>9725163 >>9725136 >I don't want to agree with any kind of sentiment that it is best to ignore the economic analysis of Marxism given that such an analysis generally digs up bits of his theories that contradict themselves.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:52:00 2017 No.9725169 >>9725163 That seems coherent, considering that the modern social sciences and humanities are occupied by ideological cranks and pseudo intellectual frauds of all kinds.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:52:32 2017 No.9725170 >>9725165 So are you saying nationalism laid the grounds for its own dissolution? That it's its own gravedigger, so to speak?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:52:43 2017 No.9725171 >>9725159 >Are you still the guy who thinks communism was a form of nationalism? No that was you misreading my argument.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:53:12 2017 No.9725172 >>9725169 I'm >>9725136 and I'm back on /lit/ after a while. Is the guy above me an outlier or has the atmosphere of this place changed while I was gone? Not many people would look down at the humanities here before.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:54:39 2017 No.9725174 >>9725161 The idea of people displacing the European aristocracy more accurately describes nationalist revolutions than it does communist revolutions.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:54:42 2017 No.9725176

>>9725168
No I just mean that I don't see how economic thought can, at this point, be in any way productive or militant. The most significant Marxists have historically been also the sharpest critics of Marx and I'm not at all against it, I just don't see how it can be done from the discipline of economics.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:55:59 2017 No.9725178 >>9725172 I'm just a /pol/ack who browses from time to time. Also I'm not shitting on the concept of humanities, I'm shitting on modern humanities (infested with PoMo nonsense). Sorry if I triggered you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:56:01 2017 No.9725179 >>9725165 Why do Socialist countries in South America nationalise their industries in response to American global capitalism?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:56:33 2017 No.9725180 >>9725178 Which academics do you have in mind specifically?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:56:49 2017 No.9725181 >>9725176 >I just don't see how it can be done from the discipline of economics. Huh, weird. What do you think it is about the discipline of economics that prevents economists from putting out valid criticisms of Marx?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:57:10 2017 No.9725182 >>9725178 >it sounds better if I use words like 'infested' and 'nonsense' Be honest, you've never attended a humanities lecture even once, have you?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:57:17 2017 No.9725183

>>9725170
Not really. What we're talking about here is a duality, two opposing forces: at the national level is the European who lives in a nation with his people; on the other side is the international jew who uses the lower classes (and now minorities if you want to fast forward to today) to the attack the national entity. When the jew does this successfully he erects internationalist, not nationalist, institutions to take power away from the nation (soviet union, eu, imf, world bank, etc.). That's how this works.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:57:43 2017 No.9725184

>>9725174
Not necessarily, because Fascism is an example of a nationalistic system which was in bed with the aristocracy. In fact the only example I can think of a nationalist revolution which was very anti-aristocratic is actually the French Revolution.

Anyways I don't even know why I'm bothering responding to you, you're either a troll or a moron, in both cases a waste of time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:58:19 2017 No.9725188 >>9725171 Or you making a poor one.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:58:48 2017 No.9725189

>>9725178
>Sorry if I triggered you.

Nah, idc, people I know shit on humanities all the time, it's a very well established opinion on other places I lurk like EJMR too (a forum known as the "4chan for economists" if you haven't heard of it).

I was just surprised to see someone doing that here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:59:03 2017 No.9725190 >>9725183 But weren't, as you say, the nationalist movements the ones who "liberated the Jew" and allowed for supposed anti-nationalist activity?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 06:59:29 2017 No.9725193 >>9725183 Europeans didn't have 'nations' until comparatively recently. Ironically, not until people wanted to displace the foreign aristocracy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:00:14 2017 No.9725194 >>9725179 You need to stop thinking in terms of systems and start thinking in terms of people. People determine the nature of those systems. And people are different so how can you be surprised when the results turn our differently?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:00:15 2017 No.9725195 >>9725180 I don't have any in mind. >>9725182 English is not my native language, so I don't know what the proper style is. Or maybe you're just a brainlet? And yes, I study Electrical Engineering, so I've never been to a humanities lecture.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:02:35 2017 No.9725199 >>9725184 Out of the three main 'fascisms' of Europe, only Spain was aligned with the aristocracy in any meaningful way. Italian fascism didn't have opinions on the Jews.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:02:40 2017 No.9725200

>>9725193
I think you're confusing ruling dynasties and aristocracy in general. It's true that the ruling dynasties of various european countries intermarried, creating a sort of international aristocracy, but other than them the aristocracy was usually "native" (since they were tied to land).

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:02:55 2017 No.9725202 >>9725195 So if you've never been to a humanities lecture and don't have any specific academics in mind, where did you get the impression of what contemporary humanities is like?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:03:17 2017 No.9725203

>>9725153
I will concede that neoclassicals aren't a homogenous bunch. However, from my experience with taking econ courses, I maintain that the field as commonly thought holds a strong ideological consensus based on general equilibrium theories. When you take an econ course, you're not going to study the different schools of economics, learn why neoclassicals rejected Ricardo and Marx etc., in fact there is very little "comparative economics" unless you are literally an econ graduate. I find this to be starkly different in other social sciences like sociology, where it's immediately clear that there are differing methodologies with their own traditions, and multiple ones have a strong presence in the field. Major disagreements in Econ seem to take place entirely in the academic sphere, with the public perception of common-sense econonics remaining neoliberalism. Why aren't criticisms of free-market economics even by major figures such as Stiglitz represented?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:03:29 2017 No.9725204 >>9725190 I'm not the one saying the French Revolution was a nationalist movement. It in many ways was an internationalist movement that jews favored and benefited from, and it sparked and spread a non-nationalist ideology.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:03:37 2017 No.9725205 >>9725194 Why did you avoid the question?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:03:43 2017 No.9725206 >>9725199 Why are you bringing up Jews? Why are your posts so incoherent? Kill yourself my man.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:04:09 2017 No.9725207

>>9725194

I don't want to get too /pol/-tier, but I don't understand why human biodiversity is something completely off the table, in these types of discussions. It seems like an absolutely huge variable to leave out. If you assume that all groups of humans on earth are basically interchangeable, seems like your economic/political theories will inevitably be wrong, or incomplete.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:05:02 2017 No.9725209 >>9725202 Mostly through reading mainstream media publications, which are usually the refuge of humanities graduates. Also the general vibe I get. I'll admit I try to avoid reading their drivel. I also have a question for you: do you deny my claims?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:05:24 2017 No.9725210

>>9725204
>I'm not the one saying the French Revolution was a nationalist movement

But it actually was a nationalist movement, one of the most, if not the most, significant nationalist movements ever. It was literally the origin of nationalist movements as such.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:06:04 2017 No.9725212 >>9725207 The denial of HBD started when insecure jews got posts in anthropology departments.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:06:23 2017 No.9725213 >>9725193 Incorrect. They just didn't have borders drawn to the inch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:06:26 2017 No.9725214 >>9725206 Other guy was talking about nationalism in response to Jewish internationalism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:07:26 2017 No.9725215 >>9725205 Because it wasn't a real question and has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:07:32 2017 No.9725216

>>9725193

Even if they didn't have nations they still had the in-group attitudes that today we would describe as "nationalist". Even if the technical concept of nationalism is relatively recent, that doesn't mean people were internationalist in any sense

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:08:00 2017 No.9725217 >>9725209 I think your claims are incoherent, and that you have no clue as to what postmodernity is and how and what is done in the humanities. You're just repeating talking points.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:08:10 2017 No.9725220 >>9725214 No, he said that communist movements had their basis in jewish internationlism. You're the one, for no reason whatsoever, who kept bringing up nationalism. Kill yourself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:08:41 2017 No.9725221 >>9725213 Europeans have a more prominent history of fighting each other and ruling foreign European territory than living with their own.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:09:25 2017 No.9725223 >>9725207 That is most certainly the case with the types who get stuck thinking in terms of communism vs capitalism. Or libertarianism, and so forth. This is about people, not systems.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:09:56 2017 No.9725224 >>9725215 Aren't you saying communism and nationalism aren't the same?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:10:11 2017 No.9725225

>>9725216
That's ahistorical. I don't think it's sensible to call, e.g European city-states nationalist in any sense whatsoever, nor can their relations be described as such. Nationalism isn't some abstract quality, it's socio-historically situated and contingent. Internationalism presupposes nations, of course they weren't internationalist.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:10:12 2017 No.9725227

>>9725217
>I think your claims are incoherent,
How so? I didn't really make any claim. The only claim I made, I guess, was "PoMo is nonsense". If you think that PoMo is not nonsense then I disagree with you.

>, and that you have no clue as to what postmodernity is and how and what is done in the humanities
Well then, enlighten me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:11:39 2017 No.9725228 >>9725227 https://monoskop.org/images/e/e0/Lyotard_Jean-Francois_The_Postmodern_Condition_A_Report_on_Knowledge.pdf

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:11:41 2017 No.9725229 >>9725210 Not really. The French Revolution spread a universalist message, not a nationalist message.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:12:16 2017 No.9725231 >>9725227 PoMo is fine when it isn't used by pseuds to promote their own twisted ideas.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:12:16 2017 No.9725232 >>9725220 Idiot: >>9725129

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:13:13 2017 No.9725234 >>9725224 Yes ... they are opposites.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:14:01 2017 No.9725235 >>9725227 >Well then, enlighten me. No kidding, this bozo came to his conclusions before being aware of any evidence either supporting or opposing his position. This is your mind on electrical engineering.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:14:29 2017 No.9725236 >>9725221 If that were the case they'd all speak the same language.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:14:53 2017 No.9725237

>communism is Jewish
>capitalist corporations are run by Jews
>EU is Jewish
>anti-EU socialist movements are Jewish
>the inherent racial traits of people with Jewish ancestry entirely determine their deep-seated urge to destroy western civilization, regardless of upbringing or views

At some point we need to stop arguing with these creatures and accept that mentally ill people can't comprehend genuine social analysis. This is complete lunacy, when is it going to stop?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:15:04 2017 No.9725238 >>9725234 Then how do you explain South American socialists nationalising industry in response to American global capitalism? It is related to the conversation.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:15:46 2017 No.9725241 >>9725224 Communism (not Soviet-style socialism) has to be global, otherwise, capitalism will crush it. Thereby it can't be nationalistic. Even if socialism in the 20th century was often nationalistic.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:16:55 2017 No.9725246 >>9725236 You do know why French is so prominent in the English language, yes?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:18:02 2017 No.9725249 >>9725238 What is the contradiction you think exists here? It makes sense to me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:18:19 2017 No.9725250 >>9725237 It's kind of fun trying to deal with fallacies but yes it is better to not respond.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:20:13 2017 No.9725252 >>9725246 Because of the Normans, but English is more related to German since the British Isles is where the Germans sent their prisoners. So?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:20:36 2017 No.9725253 >>9725249 That socialism can't be internationalist and retreating from internationalism in favour of nationalism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:21:27 2017 No.9725254 >>9725237 Are you trying to blame others for your inability to understand jewish behavior?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:22:19 2017 No.9725256 Wouldn't "post-nietzscheans" be a more fitting name for the so called postmodernists?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:23:28 2017 No.9725257 >>9725252 So Europeans aren't really content with just living with their own. They're as debased and mercenary as any other group.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:24:00 2017 No.9725260

>>9725238
Nationalizing industry and expanding public services are transitional policies in most Marxist movements. State capitalism by itself is not socialism, of course, but the idea is that it allows the economy to gradually include worker participation while defending their interests from counter-revolutionary forces with state power. Say what you will about Socialist countries in the 20th century, but they clearly had a large role for unions and worker bargaining power, even parliament representation. Look at how Yugoslavia's self-management functioned.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:24:54 2017 No.9725261 >>9725254 You are an example of what happens when the philosophy of science is neglected.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:25:12 2017 No.9725262 >>9725256 For Foucault, Lyotard and Deleuze maybe. But what about Derrida? Lacan? Butler? Badiou? In France the people who read Foucault don't read Lacan and Badiou. What about those who lump in the Frankfurt school in as postmodernists?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:26:24 2017 No.9725264

>>9725253
Try to look at reality instead of getting tied up in rigid, systemic-based thinking. Low IQ mestizos voting for nationalist and socialist policies to protect themselves from the American bloodsucking beast the international jew has created to control the globe is natural. Why would they do otherwise?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:28:09 2017 No.9725267 >>9725257 Europeans have a warrior spirit. That's a good thing unless it's being used and directed to fight cousin wars for jewish bankers and destroy Israel's neighbors.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:28:26 2017 No.9725268 >>9725264 Try to suck my dick instead of sucking my ass dipshit

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:28:39 2017 No.9725269

>>9725203
>in fact there is very little "comparative economics" unless you are literally an econ graduate

You're spot on buddy.

It's true, only econ graduates really get "down and dirty" with theories.

The most deluded, illogical defences of free-market economists I have seen come from econ undergrads, and I mean econ undergrads who are ONLY econ undergrads, who have not had the inclination (or maybe even the aptitude) to study economics further.

At the same time, I don't think more lessons into the "History of Economic Thought" are necessary, Ricardo and Smith and what not used outdated methodological tools (to put it simply, not enough mathematics, now that's a whole other can of worms).

I think the only reason econ undergrads are taught the most pro-capitalist and free market theories are because they're the only economic theories that use modern analytical tools and are simple to learn.

In my experience though, it's not that big an issue, other than comparative advantage trade theories and social surplus related arguments against government intervention, there isn't all that much pro free-market in economics courses, and in the aforementioned areas, it doesn't take more than a minute of anlaysis to realize the flaws in using those simplified models to make pro-freemarket claims (and usually your book or your professor will highlight these for you).

So, I think the idea that "studying economics gives undergrads a pro-capitalist bias" is not true in terms of causality, I think it's more so that "economics students generally have pro-capitalist biases". I mean, the same way most STEM students are pro-capitalist, it's more correlation than causation (except maybe that studying simplified economists can intensify your capitalist tendencies, but I highly doubt it can turn anyone pro-free market if they were previously neutral on the political spectrum and have an iota of passion of the subject).

But even undergrad economics is not as pro-capitalist as you seem to think, at more than the very 101-level. Different modern schools of economic thought are glossed over (particularly, Keynesians vs. Classicals).

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:29:33 2017 No.9725271 >>9725261 Are you saying the philosophy of science is the reason you don't understand jewish behavior?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:33:43 2017 No.9725274 >>9725268 You must be mestizo. That would explain why it was difficult for you to understand why Venezuelans would vote for free stuff.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:33:58 2017 No.9725276

>>9725269

I should mention here that, although I'm doing my graduate studies in the USA. my undergrad and postgrad were done in India.

Although I am aware of the undergrad syllabus in the USA (and am partly teaching some courses of course) I'm still new and haven't myself had the full undergrad experience.

So what I'm saying MIGHT not be totally applicable to the Western scenario but I think it's more or less right.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:35:15 2017 No.9725277

>>9725276
>my graduate studies in the USA. my undergrad and postgrad were done in India.

All in economics, an in non-heterodox sub-fields (so I don't specialize in Marxism/am not talking about the way things are done in hetero places in the US like New School or whatever).

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:37:19 2017 No.9725279

>>9725274
No I'm white, fag. I guess communism can be nationalistic after all, fag, and isn't a Jewish scheme towards internationalism, fag. So your fag idea of how the world operates is delusional and not consistent with literal history, fag. So you refuted your fag self when you're not moving your fag goalposts to preserve your fag dignity. Reply if you're a fag, you weak-minded fag.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 07:40:47 2017 No.9725284 >>9725279 As a white man, you should be ashamed of yourself. I hope you will educate yourself on the jewish problem so you can one day, with a little luck, be less retarded.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 08:38:08 2017 No.9725374
File: 200 KB, 5016x2508, mihermanos.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9724906
>The neoliberal triumphalism over the "failure of communism" is slowly degrading already and socialist ideas are returning in full force. I wouldn't be surprised by some leninist takeovers in the following decades.
HAHAHAHAHA. Eat shit neo-authoritarian swine

Marxist-Leninism is dead. Anarcho-communists are the new dogs in town, boy

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:12:31 2017 No.9725450
File: 261 KB, 596x432, macron-wink.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9724906
Neo-liberalism is the future, commietrash. Obama, Merkel, and Macron are some of the greatest politicians of our generation. Political parties all over the world have moved towards economic liberalism do to the vast success of neo-liberalism.
Eat shit, radicals

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:25:10 2017 No.9725485 >>9725450 You are right. The backlash will be even greater once Macron fails to "fix" things.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:26:03 2017 No.9725488
File: 25 KB, 600x300, 1460c484b446159e46220c7b346c3edf3dd71a0d61aeaad007a320a685aa4d28.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725374
MLism is a shitty distortion of Lenin's ideas, I never said anything about adhering to it. However, there was literally nothing wrong with the Bolshevik revolution, USSR went wrong after ~1928, partly for abandoning Lenin's project.
In any case, do you have a concrete program how to transition to socialism without taking over the state or do you just pick ideologies based on how acceptable and non-authoritarian they are (as if revolutions can be such lmao) ?

>>9725450
Yeah, it's so successful it has provoked ethnonationalist movements all over the west. Just a matter of time until liberalism seamlessly merges with reactionary sentiment to preserve its domination. Never trust reformists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:29:00 2017 No.9725499 >>9725488 >there was literally nothing wrong with the Bolshevik revolution There was nothing wrong with alien jews leading a coup against the Russian state and proceeding to murder tens of millions of ethnic Russians?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:32:31 2017 No.9725505 >>9725499 Serfs rose up to dethrone the Tzar who joined a war which caused millions of ethnic Russians to die. It is about conflicting interests, not about who was right or wrong.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:35:09 2017 No.9725511 >>9725021 Isn't precisely the opposite of how to think? I mean those in power sure would like to have those without power to think its pointless even trying to understand politics. Have fun being a slave anyway.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:38:21 2017 No.9725518
File: 13 KB, 642x591, 1467988196166-0.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725505
No, jews used non-Russians to overthrow the Russian state, put themselves into power, and then murdered tens of millions of Russians.

Are you jewish or some dumb kid freebasing jewish propaganda?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:40:21 2017 No.9725524 >being an unironic socialist in 2017 y tho

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:43:08 2017 No.9725530 >>9725518 >ethnicities without a nation-state of their own adopted an internationalist project more easily than those spooked by nationalism Incredible! It must be their mystical racial stats that were the cause.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:45:07 2017 No.9725534

>>9725021
>>9725021
Maybe if you actually gave a fuck you'd understand the impact mass revolutions can have.

Okay maybe America is far too stable for anything like that too happen since most of the population is very satisfied but the same cannot be said for a good chunk of the third world.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:45:46 2017 No.9725536 >>9725530 I'll repeat the question: >Are you jewish or some dumb kid freebasing jewish propaganda?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:49:13 2017 No.9725542
File: 304 KB, 722x768, 1498834207583.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725223
But people, a person, are homeostatic systems. What is known as the "self", the I, only arises because of our organism's identification with our cognitive model of ourselves.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:51:01 2017 No.9725545

>>9725518
>Non-wealthy Jews have to deal with discrimination because of Christianity, Islam, and European nationalism, because of the actions of wealthy Jews. >They live in slums and ghettos until they are kicked out altogether.
>An emancipatory project comes along which doesn't care about ethnicity or religion.
>All you have to do is become secular and fight for the working class.
>"Wow, these Jews sure like to become commies don't ya think? Must be a conspiracy!"

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:53:08 2017 No.9725548

>>9725534
>maybe America is far too stable for anything like that too happen
The ancestors of the jews who used useful idiot non-Russians in the bolshevik revolution and then murdered tens of millions of Russians now live in the west and are using useful idiot non-whites to try and overthrow the white majority. Kaganovich just morphed into Kagan. This is the jewish ethnic strategy: they use any population they can import or create against the native male population so they can put themselves in power. These are a twisted, murderous people.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:55:30 2017 No.9725551 >>9725545 Are you posting a wall of greentext because you're afraid to make an argument?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 09:56:05 2017 No.9725553

>>9724799
Equality is the religion of the weak

To allow or tolerate weakness is to allow poison to erode your resolve.

When the left makes a case for one of their views they argue from an externalized large entity such as 'the state' or 'the government' or 'society', 'humanity' etc. yet they advocate for 'individualism', at the same time they have also abolished all social and cultural cohesion within society by attacking religion, nationalism, advocating for ethnic diversity and making a mockery of western culture while allowing and promoting the practice of other cultures and religions.

Their convictions are merely a product of their fear and weakness, they need to lower the common denominator in the modern western world because they are running out of options to see themselves as being actually valuable within society.

They do not actually promote equality they promote weakness so they have someone to stand above, in order not be the on the bottom of the barrel themselves. That is the purpose of their 'compassion' and 'sympathy' for the weak and vulnerable within society and why they are becoming more ferociously sentimentally manipulative, it's toxic weaponized despair.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:06:04 2017 No.9725572

>>9725553
Absolutely. But "the left" are really just mimicking what the jews in charge of the west's post-WWII institutions believe. These jewish sentiments filter down through things like media and are strictly enforced through social incentives and fake moral fervor, and since most people want to get along and be seen as moral, they become, essentially, culturally judaized.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:06:37 2017 No.9725573 >>9725553 You should always try and help the weak become stronger though. If they reject your help then you're completely justified in forging on without them.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:13:34 2017 No.9725592 >>9725551 Infographics aren't arguments either. I never denied that there were Jews in the Soviet Union. Just denying that it is a large-scale Jewish conspiracy to kill Russians.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:17:02 2017 No.9725604 >>9725553 I am literally bleeding from this edge. Are you masturbating to aristocratic portraits as you type this?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:19:57 2017 No.9725616

>>9725592
So a tiny group literally known as "the tribe" used an ideology developed by a jew to overthrow the Russian state, installed themselves to all of the top positions, then killed millions of Russians ... but they didn't "conspire" while they were doing all that?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:22:44 2017 No.9725622 >>9725616 Are you this fucking stupid or are you actually unaware of anti-semitic sentiment which was common in the Party? Ever heard of Trotsky you fucking retard?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:23:28 2017 No.9725623 >>9725017 The "invisible hand" is a meme. Modern capitalism is wasteful as shit and produces worthless bullshit just because people want it, creating unsustainability.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:24:41 2017 No.9725628 >>9725622 What are you talking about? Trotsky was jewish.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:30:07 2017 No.9725639 >>9725545 >dude just bend down and accept being attacked because justice Slave moralist.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:32:07 2017 No.9725641

>>9725616
A tiny group of people with the same ideals used an ideology which promotes insurrection against oppressive regimes. That was created by secularist, who cut all ties with Judaism, who also had a Ph.D. in philosophy and was a follower of Hegel and worked together with a European, trying to analyze and critique capitalism (Marx doesn't promote SJW's or Jews in his works). But I guess that he created this because Rothschild told him to (even without getting funded by him). And somehow after the revolution, the person with the most power (Stalin) is not a Jew, how does that happen? Why did non-Jews start socialist revolutions? Why is the USA so against their Jewish Cuban friends??? What about the revolution in Ukraine or Yugoslavia? What about China, where they all Jews too? Stop being retarded and learn to grasp subjects from more angles than Jews, Jews, Jews.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:33:09 2017 No.9725644 >>9725545 The point is, if there were no Jews, Bolshevism wouldn't exist and millions of lives would have been saved. Jews are a threat to civilization.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:34:26 2017 No.9725647 >>9725641 Your entire post is a red herring.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:40:53 2017 No.9725665

>>9725641
Jewishness is biological, bud. And that "oppressive regime" extended more rights to jews than any other nation in Europe had at the time (big mistake, obviously). And how could Marx promote SJWs in his works when SJWs didn't exist until ~150 years later?

Other than that, you clearly don't understand the chronology of the Soviet Union. The jewish bolsheviks took over in 1917, murdered tens of millions of Russians, promoted Stalin to power due to his jewish wives/connections, but then he got sick of them and purged them in the 1940s.

Why are you pretending to understand the jewish role in the Soviet Union if you don't even know the basic chronology of events?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:48:55 2017 No.9725683 >>9725545 These anti-semitic trolls are so good, I'm not Jewish, not from the Western world and overall have absolutely zero involvement in jew-related politics and they still kind of trigger me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:50:36 2017 No.9725688 >>9725641 >What about the revolution in Ukraine You mean the recent revolution that put a small clique of jewish oligarchs into power? Starting to see the trend people are talking about here, numbnuts?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:53:14 2017 No.9725699 >>9725683 >I'm not Jewish Then there's no excuse for you not educating yourself on the jewish problem.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 10:58:37 2017 No.9725716 File: 39 KB, 137x190, exploding at bullshit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >can't have a discussion on 4chan without it getting derailed by people invoking "da jooz" to explain fucking everything

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:02:26 2017 No.9725732 File: 219 KB, 618x947, HanAssholeSolo-meme-618x947.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9725716 >thinking you'll understand anything if you aren't informed about jewish power

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:03:23 2017 No.9725735 >>9725716 Are you also a person that believes Philosophy is still a relevant field of study by any chance?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:06:51 2017 No.9725747 >>9725029 demonstrate it then

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:07:26 2017 No.9725750 File: 249 KB, 2000x2000, Antifa.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9725488 Doesn't matter if it works or not. Communism must be achieved and the state must be abolished

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:11:08 2017 No.9725761 >>9725750 >tfw antifa is funded by ultra-capitalists for the sole purpose of ensuring Socialism is unpalatable

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:17:41 2017 No.9725778

>>9725732
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
White people are pathetic. They can't even oppose a mere 2% of the population, even if most of the Jews are weak pansies. So much for white power. No wonder your women fall for Jewish propaganda and black cock when your men are so weak. Black men might not be smart, but at least they don't feel the need to blame Jews for their own failure. Such white self-important behavior is truly an attest to slave morality persistent in white people. Come back once you have found the real answer and stop sucking the nationalist Jew cock.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:29:46 2017 No.9725801

>>9725778
>Black men might not be smart, but at least they don't feel the need to blame Jews for their own failure
Jews are the reason for their success. Ultra-globalism is their end goal. When they finally break down the borders and allow the third-world leftists to flood white countries.
They won't stop until every black human alive has taken residence in a previously white country. This is why birth rates are exploding in Africa, Jews are upping their population to be able to take on the white nations (and most likeing China, India, and Japan in the future)

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:37:43 2017 No.9725821
File: 108 KB, 1237x1017, 1464557506644-1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725778
Dear non-white,

Jews succeed through parasitism and dishonesty. If whites have a flaw it's that we're too honest and good-natured to realize we're dealing with a tribe of lying sociopaths. Whites are responsible for 97% of scientific achievement and are therefore second to no one. You yourself are currently on a forum that discusses the white culture of literature so please take your anti-whiteness statements elsewhere like the worldstar forums.

Thank you.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:41:11 2017 No.9725834

>>9725182
Well, not him but I'm in health studies trying to be a doc (so really social sciences all day) and I agree with what he said. I mean, you go into my U and the first thing you see is a big photograph of Lenin and Stalin, and to the left one of Che Guevara. None of them knows what they really did yet they are placed up there in a status of a God. And I've been in humanities before,... man, I even heard Stalin legalized homosexuality in 1910 and Che as a symbol of revolution with peace and compassion. They don't learn anything as it really happened, they learn things as it should have happened to fulfill the desires of certain people, AND THEN present that "should" as an actually "did". Modern Humanities are corrupt.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:43:10 2017 No.9725839 >>9725092 >bolshevism = judaism because i feel like intellectually justifying my racism t. triggered jew

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:45:00 2017 No.9725848 >>9725839 "Racism" is a fake word and bolshevism was jewish. See: >>9725518 then gas yourself.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:47:23 2017 No.9725851

>>9725834
Which university do you go to? I would love to see that. Lenin and Che Guevara are very well known, I'm not sure why you think people, especially those working at a university, aren't familiar with them. Btw homosexuality was legalized in 1917 with the abolition of the Tsarist legal code.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:51:22 2017 No.9725866

>>9725848
i don't know what manner of mental gymnastics you went though to conclude that racism is a fake word of if you're even capable of defining what "fake word" means but prejudgment based on ethnicity/skin color by any other name smells just as intellectually indefensible unless it's strictly based on provable correlations and not feels and groupthink

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:52:59 2017 No.9725872 >>9725732 The reason Jews are often found in high positions is because they have the highest IQ of any ethnicity. It's not a goddamn conspiracy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:56:29 2017 No.9725882 >>9725834 I mean, you go into my U and the first thing you see is a big photograph of Lenin and Stalin Had a nice kek. Wish that was true desu.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:56:50 2017 No.9725885 >>9725834 Of course they know what they did, they aren't stupid, they're just immoral, modern philosophy is built around the idea that sacrificing the many for few is not only noble but necessary.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 11:57:26 2017 No.9725887

>>9725866
It's a fake word that was invented last century to make white people feel guilty for a natural human emotion. You cannot define or quantify "racism" because it is a normal and healthy instinct and not a bad thing bad people feel for no justifiable reason. You need to learn how to think critically if you want to understand the world you live in.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:00:47 2017 No.9725899 >>9725887 i half seriously mentioned mental gymnastics but god damn can you please define what fake word means before we proceed?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:01:09 2017 No.9725901 >>9725872 Jews in Israel have a mean IQ in the mid-90s and jews everywhere do horribly on spatial IQ tests. They obtain success through parasitic pursuits and nepotism. See: >>9725732 for an example.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:01:23 2017 No.9725902 >>9725882 It could happen in Russia I guess, they've still got a lot of USSR period stuff still around.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:03:48 2017 No.9725910
File: 85 KB, 900x1165, 6c038ebc0db2fec6a3876cb388ac0ec9fb80d28b7b6ef76113f4617a6ae32617-leftypol.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9725885
It's the opposite though, we want to destroy the ruling classes in favor of the proletariat. If you're the kind of faggot who cries over the poor opressed aristocracy as they're being beheaded, instead of recognising the necessity of abolishing indefensible social hierarchies, then you deserve what you got though.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:04:39 2017 No.9725917

>>9725901
the idea that jews are especially parasitic or nepotistic could only be seriously entertained by genuine basement dwellers, no one that experienced living in the real world, even someone that only started living as an adult for no more than two years, would ever hold such a naive view of people, jew or goy. nepotism is rare? people are honest? are we back in kindergarten?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:06:13 2017 No.9725920 >>9725901 http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:06:56 2017 No.9725921

>>9725899
The explanation I provided should suffice. But to elaborate, a fake word -- "racism" in this case -- is a word that defines something natural but is portrayed as something unnatural as a means of controlling people by making them feel guilty about experiencing the aforementioned natural reaction or emotion. Understand?

Now ... I know *you* think it's real, but I'm here to tell you it's not.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:08:39 2017 No.9725925

>>9725910
I know you aren't really a college liberal but I'm bored.

>It's the opposite though
They don't though, they actively fight against what what the majority of the populace wants, they want to sacrifice the working class on the alter of multiculturalism so the wealthy can import slave labour from 3rd world countries.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:09:17 2017 No.9725928 >>9724799 That's fucking stupid. He's a theory guy, nothing he did was pragmatic. It will never work for humans. When there's a totally obedient non-greedy robot race then there's a possibility that they will work

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:10:38 2017 No.9725932

>>9725917
Since you used the word "goy" I'll assume you're jewish and running interference for your tribe. That's normal. But it won't help validate your opinion. White are not nepotistic, that's why whites can build functional institutions -- we don't hire our cousin Moshe, we hire the best man for the job.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:13:13 2017 No.9725942 >>9725920 Do you know why Ashkenazim have high (excluding spatial) IQs? Do you know how that happened?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:14:11 2017 No.9725946 >>9725925 Socialists aren't struggling to pay their $350 rent in Arkansas but their $1000 rent in the bay area while refusing to cut down on their $22 avocado toast.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:15:30 2017 No.9725948

>>9725921
first of all, and just for the record, you have provided exactly 0 explanation of what the phrase "fake word" means in the precious post, other than the fact that you used it, and expected me to be able to read your mind and understand it completely from context. i understand what you mean by fake word now, and other than the fact that's it's the most retarded definition i've ever heard in my entire life(because words can't be fake, if they exist, it means they're used to convey meaning, this makes them as real as any other word used to convey meaning), the claim that "racism" is a "fake word" is false because pick up any dictionary and the word racism is explained with the utmost impartiality and cleanliness, as is par for the course for dictionaries. nowhere is there the implication that it's unnatural, the first google result for racism perfectly encapsulates this "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

and just to elaborate on my previous point, the word unicorn isn't fake either, because it expresses the idea of unicorns. if i asked someone to define what unicorn means, they'll just explain that it means a holy horned horse, and we'll have used the word even though unicorns aren't real.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:17:26 2017 No.9725954

>>9725928
You can't have read any Marx and Engels at all... Their whole project was precisely pragmatic. They constantly criticized utopian socialism, they dedicated their whole lives to creating a real labour movement with a clear program of economic transformation. "Marxism is only good in theory" is about the dumbest thing you can say about it, its whole POINT is praxis. There's a whole strand of Marxism called Praxis philosophy.
Read a fucking book, mein gott.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:18:30 2017 No.9725958

>>9725932
>White are not nepotistic, that's why whites can build functional institutions -- we don't hire our cousin Moshe, we hire the best man for the job.
you're too far gone. i honestly have no way of responding if this is what you seriously believe. in your spare time look up the bush or clinton families.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:20:22 2017 No.9725964 >>9725942 Well there is a theory that persecution of Jews acted as a selection mechanism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:24:19 2017 No.9725971 >>9724799 when i was 19, but then i grew up

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:25:12 2017 No.9725976

>>9725948
Someday, when you're older than 18 and have put your dick in something other than your hand, you're going to wake up and realize how brainwashed you once were. At this point in your life you can't think for yourself and make honest judgments about the world because you don't know anything about it and are just trying to become half-decent at repeating the things you hear -- the things that sound good and seem moral and right, because you want to be that kind of person and think you have to believe in and enforce the realness of words like "racism" to become one.

But until then, you'll continue to be a stupid kid. Enjoy the delusion, I'll see you on the other side.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:27:00 2017 No.9725981 >>9725958 Do you know how much money the Bush and Clinton families have received from jews over the years?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:28:15 2017 No.9725984

>>9725976
this is the most projection laden post i've read in recent memory. you've completely ignored every one of criticisms and yet you feel yourself to have someone bested me in the so called philosophical arena, isn't that completely shameless? for hates jews so much you sure are slippery. how old are you by the way?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:29:18 2017 No.9725990 >>9725984 somehow*

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:32:09 2017 No.9726003 Prove that Marx wasn't a Jew

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:32:38 2017 No.9726006

>>9725964
That's cute. No, they were selected for by inbreeding. Every jew is a 3rd to 5th cousin from every other jew. This is also the reason they suffer from so many mental and genetic diseases. But this was something that was done to them by their leaders to make them ruthless murderers who would never go against their own. This is a biological sickness we're talking about.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:35:23 2017 No.9726016 >>9726006 So your point is..?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:35:23 2017 No.9726017

>>9725981
seriously how old are you? i gave the bushes and clintons as examples of white nepotism and instead of either denying or admitting it contradicts your belief you're just giving me a meme response to change the topic like a fucking kike. am i arguing with a jew right now?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:36:29 2017 No.9726018

>>9725984
You are not saying anything of substance, so what am I supposed to respond to? You want to believe the word "racism" is what you've been told your whole life it is. Okay. Fine. I'm not going to stop you, but you obviously aren't ready for this stuff so I simply wished you luck and offered some perspective. Take it or don't.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:37:34 2017 No.9726023 >>9726016 Really?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:41:05 2017 No.9726039 >>9726017 You seem to be under the impression that the Bushes and Clintons nepotistically favored whites when they did the exact opposite ... with millions upon millions of jewish money.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:42:16 2017 No.9726050 >>9726023 It would help if you didn't speak in non sequiturs.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:46:00 2017 No.9726071 >>9726050 Did I not explain the answer to you?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:47:18 2017 No.9726076 >>9726071 Yes. What did your answer have to do with intelligence?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:48:34 2017 No.9726085 WHY DOES EVERY SINGLE FUCKING THREAD HAVE TO TURN INTO A RANT ABOUT JEWS EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TIME GO TO /POL/ AND KILL YOURSELF HOLY SHIT

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:49:36 2017 No.9726088

>>9726018
>You are not saying anything of substance, so what am I supposed to respond to?
l2read, then respond to

> it's the most retarded definition i've ever heard in my entire life(because words can't be fake, if they exist, it means they're used to convey meaning, this makes them as real as any other word used to convey meaning)
explanation:
basically your definition is stupid because your concept of "fake words" doesn't actually mean "words" that are "fake". what you're trying to say is that society has been deceived on a massive scale to believe that their intuitions about other races are wrong and/or immoral, but that has nothing to do with the word "racism", because the idea "it's immoral/wrong to be a racist" or if you prefer "it's immoral/wrong to make racially based prejudgments" is not included in the definition of the word racism. the word racism means today what it meant 100 years ago, it's just that the society has changed and now people use it with a certain negative baggage attached. the only thing you're opposing is that negative connotation, but your way of expressing it is so retarded that for a moment i thought you were making some kind of linguistic argument.

is that nothing of substance, or did you just conveniently decide to ignore it because you're a slippery kike?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:51:44 2017 No.9726094 >>9726085 Your on a board whose interests intersects with Jewry at a fundamental level, what the fuck did you expect?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:51:53 2017 No.9726095 >>9726085 Because 4chan troll culture was replaced by alt-right culture when political correctness and social justice started intensifying. The point being that it's very entertaining to troll PC progressive types with reactionary opinions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:52:03 2017 No.9726097 >>9725954 Pragmatic, in theory

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:53:49 2017 No.9726104

>>9726039
i was under the impression that bushes and clintons nepotistically favored the bushes and clintons, themselves white families, so both the benefactor and the recipient are white, but even if the clintons exclusively helped jews it would still contradict your belief that whites are above nepotism. the more you try to change the goalposts the more you reveal yourself

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:54:51 2017 No.9726105

>>9726076
They did not obtain high non-spatial IQ scores because they are some naturally savant class of people, they obtained them through a very sick selective inbreeding strategy to make them a hivemind of cousins that exist to increase the power of their group elders.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:57:56 2017 No.9726118 >>9726105 What's the evidence that Jews inbreed for those purposes? In anycase, lots of cultures do and did inbreed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:58:26 2017 No.9726119 >>9726095 >>9726085 You realize we had a board that was so intensively neo-Nazi it made stormfront look like reddit before /lit/ or /pol/ even existed right?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 12:59:51 2017 No.9726128

>>9726088
>the word racism means today what it meant 100 years ago
No it didn't, and it didn't even exist 100 years ago -- hence why it's a fake word. Please make concise points and use proper grammar. It's difficult to take you seriously when you refuse to even write like an adult and it's giving me a headache.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:04:07 2017 No.9726149

>>9726104
I never said all whites are above nepotistic behavior, I said they are far less prone to it than other groups, because they are. Plenty are easily corruptible and the Bushes and the Clintons are excellent examples of that. In a political system controlled by jewish money, those people become as powerful as we both know they are.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:05:17 2017 No.9726157 >>9726118 The 10,000 Year Explosion is where I'd recommend you start if you're interested in understanding jewish genetics.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:05:41 2017 No.9726158

>>9726128
a quick google search showed the word as used as early as 1902 and it's apparently the dominant narrative across multiple websites, i haven't made a thorough check so it could be a massive conspiracy by the reptilians but on the surface of it, looks like i had it right

>new words are fake
this is a new kind of retard i haven't seen from you before

and you haven't actually addressed my main point, you definition of "fake words" is misleading because it doesn't actually means words that are fake, so unless this is a popular turn of phrase that i just haven't seen before, you need to explain what you mean by it or else you're just deceiving people.

do you have low RAM? is it hard to keep up with my jewish intellect? why are you repeatedly so slippery, i have to forcefully get you to address something

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:10:42 2017 No.9726186

>>9726149
>I never said all whites are above nepotistic behavior, I said they are far less prone to it than other groups
what you actually said is
>White are not nepotistic, that's why whites can build functional institutions -- we don't hire our cousin Moshe, we hire the best man for the job.

i'm glad i could sufficiently box you in so as to get you to drop the retarded idea that whites are categorically incapable of nepotism, now if only you could apply that same finesse to the way you look at jews and stop making sweeping generalizations about millions of people you haven't met, but that would require a level of self discipline i'm sure you're incapable of, you're not even remotely capable of being intellectually fair to people you emotionally dislike.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:12:22 2017 No.9726190

>>9726158
The word "racism" was inserted into the English lexicon by jews who came west from Russia, after they murdered millions of Russians, for the sole purpose of using it against white people. That it was introduced for subversive purposes in the modern era and doesn't describe what it what it purports to makes it a fake word. Since you're admitting to being jewish it's also now obvious why you're semantically failing to pretend it isn't.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:16:52 2017 No.9726200 >>9726186 Whites as a whole are not nepotistic and providing two examples of corrupt politicians who have received most of their money from jews proves my point, not yours.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:27:52 2017 No.9726248

>>9726190
i've lost count of how many posts in a row you've ignored the main criticism i levied in favor of shit like how old the word is which you then get wrong anyway only to ignore the fact that you got it wrong and change the goalposts once more. i think you're trying to wear me down by making so many mistakes i'll be forced to ignore some of them. are you ever going to admit that your definition of "fake words" is misleading?

>doesn't describe what it what it purports to
it does.
this is wrong by definition, because a word always expresses what is meant of that word. the word racism only describes racial prejudgment or discrimination, that's an impartial definition. the word racism, in and of itself, doesn't carry the implication that it's a bad thing to be a racist.

>>9726200
i have never in my entire life met someone so comfortable with being wrong. i think part of why i'm smarter than you is that i'm bothered with making mistake and have a massive fear of public humiliation. i know i've said it multiple times but i still find pleasure in pointing out that you fit the archetype of a shameless jew, immunized from all criticism.

first it's
>White are not nepotistic
then it's
>I never said all whites are above nepotistic behavior
and now the latest addition
>Whites as a whole are not nepotistic

are whites "a whole", or are "whites" composed of individuals? are jews "a whole" or are "jews" composed of individuals? please make up your mind, it may very well make you a more moral person.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:35:57 2017 No.9726282

>>9726248
>it does.
No, it doesn't. It describes something fools like yourself think is unnatural and can be eliminated.

>a word always expresses what is meant of that word
I want whites to take note if this self-reported jews' semantic tactics.

>doesn't carry the implication that it's a bad thing to be a racist.
Just note the jewishness here. This is pure jewish semantics, nothing more. Everyone knows the only connotation for the word "racist" is negative. There is in fact no positive connotation whatsoever.

You're wrong, and you've been proven wrong several times now.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:37:51 2017 No.9726290 He's still going! >>9726190

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:40:27 2017 No.9726296

>>9726282
do you know what the word describe means? do you understand that when i call you stupid, i'm only describing you intelligence, so even though the implication that being a retard is reprehensible exists in my sentence, the word stupid in and of itself is innocent. in a different world where it's considered morally good to be an idiot, the word stupid would have the exact same meaning, it would describe the exact same thing, namely low intelligence, yet in that world would use it with a positive connotation. i don't thing teaching you linguistics (for free) counts as as semantics jewery, lad.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:42:15 2017 No.9726304

>>9726248
To nepotism. These jews are very petty. They will try to make it all or nothing but people exist on a spectrum. Whites are not nepotistic ... that is why whites are able to build highly functional institutions -- because they don't engage in nepotistic behavior. It's considered immoral in white societies and generally not good for business. This has to do with whites being highly individualistic compared to other groups -- like jews -- who are tribal and clannish and hire their cousins instead of outsiders, and are therefore much more nepotistic. This is why non-whites want to come to white countries, to rent seek off the institutions they're incapable of building.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:45:07 2017 No.9726321

>>9726296
(i think there's a kind of karmic law going on itt whereby i make grammatical errors in direct proportion to the logical errors of whoever i quote, i think god is punishing me for being rude to other people by forcing me to accept the humility of making an error, but even god almighty is incapable of making me make less than perfect sense so he settled for grammatical errors)

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:46:19 2017 No.9726324

>>9726296
Let me explain why you lost this argument: you're jewish so you bend the truth in your arguments and it backfires in your face. Calling someone else stupid when you issue walls of text without proper capitalization and grammar only makes this worse. You failed. Why are wasting our time now?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:48:40 2017 No.9726335 >>9726321 Chutzpah. You aren't smart, buddy. You aren't even good at faking it, never mind your poor grammar. Better luck next time.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:50:12 2017 No.9726344

>>9726324
explaining why someone lost an argument requires an explanation of the errors that they made, laying out their own mental process for all to see, and at that point it's called a refutation, but you're just saying i'm jewish so it doesn't count. it would only benefit you to make errors of the kind i make instead of continually evading criticisms, changing goalposts, and making up snowflake definitions like fake word

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:55:17 2017 No.9726358

>>9726344
You repeatedly lied, that's why you lost. I mean, not all connotations of "racist" are bad? Come on...

Now, I know it's too much to ask, but I hope you will try to understand why you are inclined to lie like you did itt. You carry a genetic sickness that makes you incapable of telling the truth, especially when it comes to defending your tribe. It's this sickness you have that is the reason your people have been kicked out of so many countries. Understand?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 13:57:42 2017 No.9726363

>>9726358
>not all connotations of "racist" are bad?
that is not what i said lad. the word racist doesn't have "bad" included in the definition. the badness associated with the word racism comes from the society and connotation with which the word is used. in a different world with a different society the word would mean the exact same thing but it could have a positive connotation, in both cases the word would be the same, descriptive of a certain type of behavior.
do you have to resort to making up lies now?

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:03:44 2017 No.9726388

>>9726363
It's almost sad to see you lying to yourself like this and ignoring what everyone in the world knows is common sense.

>the word racist doesn't have "bad" included in the definition
It obviously does. The relativism you're trying to pretend exists is a fantasy that stems from your inability as a jew to make honest assessments about reality. And that dishonesty stems from the mental sickness you carry.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:06:04 2017 No.9726404 >>9726363 There's no point. He's lost arguments before but he has still been posting the same thing with the same reasoning for about a month.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:09:04 2017 No.9726420 >>9726404 I'm glad I'm getting a reputation among the jews I've intellectually raped on here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:10:40 2017 No.9726423 >>9726420 Yes, exactly, you are getting a reputation for your delusions.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:10:53 2017 No.9726424

>>9726388
>common sense
kek

>It obviously does.
i'm confused, do you know what connotation means? you just used it in your previous post
>noun: connotation; plural noun: connotations
>an idea or feeling that a word invokes in addition to its literal or primary meaning.
a word's connotation is not it's meaning or definition, it's something external, subject to change. some people use fascist as an insult, others identify as fascist and use it to impartially describe their political position.

>>9726404
how are you able to identify him

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:12:36 2017 No.9726435 >>9726424 >how are you able to identify him He posts the same thing almost verbatim.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:14:34 2017 No.9726445 >>9726435 well now i know ;_;

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:20:47 2017 No.9726462

>>9726424
"Racism" has a negative connotation, definition, and meaning. Arguing otherwise makes you the one suffering from delusions. Please stop. You crashed and burned, Schlomo.

>>9726435
No, I'm highly original. But I want jews like you to understand that your people are a sick and destructive force that doesn't belong in western nations. This is an important message to get across. And you recognize me because I have no qualms about giving it to you straight.

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:25:33 2017 No.9726475

>>9726462
i feel like in order to reach someone like you and make meaningful impact i have to be several orders of magnitude smarter than them, tactically avoid angering them so that they won't get into emotional defense mode, and also pretend not to be jewish. i really did crash and burn in this one lad ;_;

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 14:33:01 2017 No.9726498 >>9726475 If you actually had any interest in bettering yourself, you would start not lying to yourself and bending the truth in your discussions with others. >and also pretend not to be jewish And here it is, folks... fin!

Anonymous Fri Jul 7 15:00:31 2017 No.9726585
File: 184 KB, 960x720, 1435928782667.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9724906
>we will rise again in a glorious revolution any day now
so these are the people I should be afraid of because they will seize the mean of production.

really makes ya think

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 15:38:29 2017 No.9726695 >>9725747 >haha if he cant do it then its wrong ahahah read a fucking book homie

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 16:11:49 2017 No.9726816 >>9724799 Marx, the fat bearded jewish antisemitic NEET that never held a true job but who knows that compromises are worse than a violent and inefficient revolution, and his acolyte Engels, the slim bearded NEET that never held a true job too

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 17:51:29 2017 No.9727158 File: 40 KB, 600x485, 1498152390006.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9726816 >jewish antisemitic

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 20:43:55 2017 No.9727711 >>9724853 >marx >metaphysics le lol

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 20:44:14 2017 No.9727715 File: 84 KB, 905x942, eaf82854b7588d1849de4c07bbe9833492f2a9ebc4c8ef11669c350f96e9c9b9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9724799 blocks your philosophy

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 20:49:33 2017 No.9727735 >>9725058 This doesn't need to be said but for the neophytes this anon doesn't know anything at all. He's a good example of a wikipedia scholar.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 20:53:43 2017 No.9727751 >>9725153 >You're totally right. Yeah so your objection to the LTV is BTFO, none of that shit you said was necessary. >marx and ltv not a science >is proven to be scientifically correct >haha well.... lets talk about something else

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 21:04:20 2017 No.9727782 >>9725113 How are these things contradictory?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 23:05:27 2017 No.9728129 >>9724954 i don't like commies either but you're probably a NEET or some loser wageslave. you're not going to be shooting anyone, let alone participating in any world events.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 23:08:37 2017 No.9728142 >>9728129 2bh he's the exact type of weak headcase to shoot up a bunch of defenceless civilians

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 7 23:24:14 2017 No.9728175 >>9725132 >like classical economics no discipline of economics is scientific

Anonymous Sat Jul 8 02:54:36 2017 No.9728692
File: 57 KB, 850x400, 22f442732c8205e25968536be717843beaceb05ffd45d2b96775f5a01d109485-leftypol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9728175
This. Economists are social scientists who pretend to be doing physics, it's far worse because their field determines economic policy, and therefore the circumstances of ordinary people all over the world. Every decent sociologist knows the limits of social science and acknowledges that a multitude of methodological perspectives can be used for the data.
Read Varoufakis desu

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 8 05:26:24 2017 No.9728961 >>9725761 gtfo /pol/

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]