/lit/ - Literature

>Like A Thief In Broad Daylight
>Power in the Era of Post-Human Capitalism

He's a neoliberal now. Read anything he was wrote in the past two months

>>11144214
examples? i thought he had been just sperging out about biogenetics, china and ecology for the last 10 years without elaborating with anything interesting or saying anything else of worth

I think he has been readin nrx and Land for a few years now and the influence is hinted at. But don't expect him to actually become some nrx doofus with a anime twitter account. Zizek has clearly been frustrated with his own side for a good long while but remains committed regardless. Changing of sides "I have seen the light" moments rarely happen at his age, it is more a youth phenomenon. Expect mild to low peripheral influence mixed with his regular schick concluding in an appeal to sit down and have a think.

>>11144250
It happened to Hitchens.

>>11144506
>It happened to Hitchens
An alcoholic without any strict convictions other than being an imperialist tool, how meaningful.

>>11144214
No, he's not. He's saying neoliberalism is slowly dying.

>>11144214
I'm pretty sure Zizek is a state-socialist, which would be pretty far from the brand of neoreaction you might get out of, say, Land.

>>11144250
I don't see the Left going anywhere in the long run. The Left in the real world is about expansion and centralization of power, but where can they go from here but towards a Chinese-style system of censorship coupled with mass immigration to secure their power?

>>11145269
Why would a Chinese style system need mass immigration?

>>11145324
I only mean the censorship bit, Western countries wouldn't do away with democracy.

>>11145333
>>11145324
Also, they need mass immigration because of TFR 1.3. Consumers are needed to prop up the economy and drive growth.

>>11145333
Would anything of value be lost with censorship? We would still have the classics to read, and it just might bring back civil discussion.

>>11145342
>tfr 1.3
Don't know what that is.

>>11145342
how can they consume if they earn nothing but what the government hands out?

>>11145342
not if they make enough kids

>>11145351
Well, many of our classics might be considered racist, for example. The goal here would be a power grab, rather than to promote civil discussion. We already have enough calls for a struggle session surrounding the canon, I don't see why that trajectory wouldn't continue.


>>11145356
Fertility rates (of native populations).

>>11145357
>how can they consume if they earn nothing but what the government hands out?
If Sven would save his money, but Mahmoud would spend it, more economic activity and thus growth is achieved by taking Sven's money and giving to Mahmoud, no?

>>11145363
After 3 generations of TFR 1.3 you are looking at a population reduction of around 73%. The young will be crushed by the weight of elder care. The current incentive structures do not promote fertility, let alone eugenic fertility. Back in the day, you would have Harvard graduates with litters of 10 kids, now you're lucky if you can get them to marry at all.

>>11145374
>The young will be crushed by the weight of elder care.
Unrelated but this is already happening in Japan. I'm genuinely curious to see what they will do in a couple of decades.

>>11145384
Japan's leaders aren't insane, so they will ride out the downturn and use automation to the fullest extent possible. Maybe the elderly will walk into Aokigahara and die to avoid being a burden, like a good Japanese.

>>11145374
>If Sven would save his money, but Mahmoud would spend it, more economic activity and thus growth is achieved by taking Sven's money and giving to Mahmoud, no?
by that logic the government could buy stuff directly and burn it in a pile in the city square, it achieves the same consumption without bringing people who will never work and earn anything

>>11145395
Mahmoud can also take on debt and drive up housing prices. He can also vote Social Democrat.

>>11145409
>He can also vote Social Democrat
i guess that explains it, it will be fun when the % is high enough that they start forming their own parties, like it already happened in Belgium, leftists will learn that they can't brainwash foreigners by giving them a 4 hour language course

>>11145384
>Implying the young shouldn't support the elderly, as they have done since caveman times.

Fucking end it senpai.

>>11145418
Yeah, Mahmoud performs a number of useful functions. Another example is that Mahmouds can be used to purchase alliances - for example, the Turkish worker phenomenon in Germany started when the US wanted to cultivate Turkey as an ally against the USSR and Turkey needed a pressure valve for its unemployed. The US then forced Germany to take the Turks.

Similarly, the US allows Mexico to use the US as a pressure valve for its unemployed, puts them to work picking subsidized crops, and then dumps the crops on Mexico, thus throwing more out of employment and bringing them to the US... our governance is insane.

>>11145432
Should they? The current elderly have largely voted to destroy them.

>>11145437
>>11145432
To expand on this point, in the past at least, you had an incentive to raise your children properly, since you would have to rely on them to provide for you in the future. Why do that when you can eat them alive with Social Security and immigration instead? But hey, at least our property values are going up! The Asians don't do this shit.

>>11145432
It's not that they shouldn't you fucking tard, but If there aren't enough young people to milk how are you going to pay for the elders? Money isn't infinite.

>>11145432
Actually tribes used to just kick the old out, put them on chunks of ice and send it to sea, the apaches would when they got too old would wander off into the caves to die; mad cow disease in humans was discovered because of one tribe's practice of only giving the elderly brains to eat.

>>11145434
>unironically importing voters
what could go wrong?

>>11145449
Who knows, it's someone else's problem, In The Future. At least We, personally, won't be presiding over the problem. We can flee to New Zealand or Switzerland or something. The funny thing about all this is that many governments, probably rightly, fear their minority populations, but they don't have any other option but to keep importing more people if they don't want to see negative economic growth, but continuing to import people, especially shitty ones, will only make the problem worse in the long run.

Also speaking of Zizek, he hilariously defended this as our moral duty and praised Merkel for doing so. I, too, would like to take a few non-democratic actions in the name of moral values...

>>11145437
Brexit would imply that they have at least learnt something form their mistakes.
>>11145443
A slightly larger home is cheaper than two or three (depending on sets of parents forming family unit).
>>11145446
Perhaps its a regional thing, but i wouldn't take the apaches failed atempt at creating civilisation over evidence of europeans chewing food for elderly who hadn't the teeth to do it themselves.

I hope its just his breakdown of Batman vs Superman.

>>11145472
Aren't they about to have a revote on Brexit to try to stop it again? Besides, it won't accomplish anything. One of Britain's meme politicians, I think it was Rees-Mogg, defended Brexit on the grounds that it would lead to more Commonwealth immigration from places like Nigeria, and less from the EU. Clearly he doesn't get it. Britain faces the same TFR problem in or out of the EU. Whatever, I can only hope liberal democracy ends soon, I've had about enough of this shit.

>>11145472
>A slightly larger home is cheaper than two or three (depending on sets of parents forming family unit).
the fuck does this even mean you nigger

>>11145472
Life expectancy was not as long then as now and eating chewed up food is one thing but requiring a "thriving" old age full of crass consumerism is another.

>>11145472
>Brexit would imply that they have at least learnt something form their mistakes.
Brexit means nothing because democracy means literally nothing, Brexit is being dismantled as we speak and nobody that matters gives a fuck about the vote

>>11145525
Many things that people on the right today regard as democratic degeneracy (and thus bad), were in fact elite projects widely opposed by the masses at the time. For instance, something like 80% of people in the US opposed race-based affirmative action based on polling. Still happened. On a point-by-point basis the average Cletus might be a more responsible leader than the average Harvard-educated Cathedral functionary.

This is why I think the idea that people like Land have of giving absolute power to "the intelligent" is insanity, instead of stopping movement to the left as a result of secured power, they will double down. It's not just a bad incentive structure, the modern Anglosphere Left is more or less a religious cult with Maoist characteristics. Seriously, he's worshipping people whose businesses amount to data-mining to sell ads more effectively. Bell Labs, it is not.

Another strange thing about this is his love of diversity (in the name of elitism), whereas in Lee Kuan Yew's memoirs for instance, he talks about how things like hate speech laws and racial quotas are needed in diverse societies to preserve order. Oops. the Left understands this.

>>11144214
Meaningless word.

>>11145651
>This is why I think the idea that people like Land have of giving absolute power to "the intelligent" is insanity
The point is that the current elites have no skin in the game: they can bomb countries into "democracy", copy/paste people from the third world into the first world and expect them to function as if they were born here, play educational social engineering games and play financial speculation games. Whatever the result they are isolated from the consequences.

A true elite in the style of Land or Moldbug would suffer the consequences and have an incentive to avoid their country turning into garbage because it would be their property, not something that belongs to somebody else but that you still get to play with and make all decision about its future.

>>11145681
Neoliberal means "not left-wing enough".

>>11145685
Maybe. Lots of kings in the past started idiotic wars over religion, didn't they? I don't necessarily disagree with the prescription of giving someone monarchical power, mostly who they think it should be given to. The intelligentsia/priest-caste are the problem nowadays, giving them more power will make us into a full-blown Progressive caliphate.

>>11145706
>Maybe. Lots of kings in the past started idiotic wars over religion
name 1

>>11145711
Would the various catholic-protestant wars qualify?

If i must read only one zizek book, which one would it be? I only read In Defence of Lost Causes

>>11145351
Invasive censorship means that anything you do value (or come to value) could be arbitrarily removed or restricted. But the main issue is that all the data on everyone is not managed or stored securely, so pretty much any amateur with the will to do so can scrape up some data on millions of people from all sorts of places. The data is always there, permanently, and potentially in the hands of anyone who wants it. This means you're owned by corporations and governments, but it also means individuals can know of you pretty easily.

>>11145723
On the Sublime Object of Ideology.

>>11145485
He actually did breakdown the Dark Knight in Pervert's Guide to Ideology.

>>11145716
are those wars in any meaningful sense different to the capitalism vs communism wars of the last century or to the liberalism vs muslims wars of today?

>>11145747
Well, in both cases, at least one side is driven by quasi-religious fervor, in addition to material interests.

>>11145723
his essay on the jacobins to realize he's a lunatic
http://www.lacan.com/zizrobes.htm

or sublime object

>>11145432
Having a majority population of young people who naturally support their elders out of respect and filial piety is not the same as a huge population of privileged vapid old cunts who have destroyed the environment and the future of many countries' youth. And still actively work against them, riding out that privilege far beyond. It's very different. Presently, the elderly hold a blade at the throat of the youth. Previously, the elderly could easily be discarded without social pressure (respect, kinship, and filial piety).

>>11145734
You need a strong academic background to understand it - i.e. it's hard to read without some knowledge of the history of and Lacan etc.

>>11145802
too bad there's no decent introduction to Lacan framing him properly. Closest thing is Bruce Fink and even that is a stretch that won't get you that close and you'll have to piece things together instead from what you get here and there

pretty much a useless endeavor unless you want to actually be a psychoanalyst, and even then debatable

>>11145384
Japàan is a bad example because their pensions are shit. Rather than the youth being crushed under the weight of elder care it's elders being forced to work into their 70s/80s.

>>11145754
Yeah IDOLC is the most absurd book i've ever read. I just think he's very amusing. His prose and way of thinking are appealing in a weird way.

>>11145747
>liberalism vs muslims wars of today
"they hate us for our freedoms"

>>11145706
>Neoliberal means "not left-wing enough".
neoliberal means "not left wing at all"
the basis of left-wing politics is socialism/communism. neoliberalism has zero to do with that, it's capitalims on fucking steroids.

>>11145802
so what would you recommend?

>>11145971
i think that was the 2001 slogan, now it's something like, "poor people look how they suffer, let's throw some more bombs until they get to live like us :3"

>>11145987
The political spectrum is left-wing.

>>11146020
maybe if you go back 400 years
for fuck's sake

>>11146034
In no sense can neoliberalism be considered right-wing, since expansion and centralization of state power are characteristic of the left, and neoliberalism is nothing if not this. Every Free Trade Agreement expands the scope of the state, to name just one example.

Socialism is when the government does shit.

>>11146040
>>11146034
stop debating semantics. you're both retarded and have no idea of what you're talking about

>>11144214
He seems to have been quite opposed to the mass migration Germany unleashed on Europe in 2015.

>>11146053
No, he thought that it was not done in a sufficiently ordered fashion.

>>11145324
The left relies on mass immigration and bribery of browns to win votes to secure power.

When I say "left" I'm being extremely broad and addressing a component more rightfully know as "neo-liberal". They certainly want a Chinese style technocracy.

I don't know if they'll get it. The truly class conscious on the left (rare, but it exists) aren't on board with it, and obviously the neo-reactionaries are extremely up in arms about it.

There are many in the center swayed by "classical liberals" (if they're on the right) or identity politics (if they're on the left) who might be brought into line, so the outliers won't matter.

>>11146053
For completely different reasons than right wing though. His thoughts are a general view of the left over here in Slovenia, including for example Boris Pahor, 100 years old communist, but also a writer, a thinker, etc.

>>11146061
>I don't know if they'll get it. The truly class conscious on the left (rare, but it exists) aren't on board with it
Ask them if they're in favor of a deportation. It would offend their moral sensibilities to do so. This way, they can maintain a position of moral superiority while holding no power.

>>11145357
1. Redistribution. Increase taxes on those that hoard wealth.

2. This is actually a VERY valid question addressed by center right writer Douglas Murray. A lot of liberal economic models are based on this migration leading to economic growth as they contribute to the economy. However, at least in Britain, the mass migration from non-European countries has been a net negative on the welfare balance (not that they don't contriubte - but that they have contributed LESS than have taken out).

America has avoided this (and had MUCH bigger migration and more porous labour movement) because their laws don't allow migrants to consume as much from the state.

But in Europe this is a big problem that most Neo-Liberals are just kicking further up the road to let someone else deal with. Austerity measures aren't fixing it (and never would - they are so far in the hole, that saving a few bucks by having shitty schools and police services aren't going to correct the losses that have happened).

>>11146040
>expansion and centralization of state power are characteristic of the left
wrong, thank you for playing
>>11146045
enlighten me then

>>11145432
It is a two way street.

Kids looked after their parents, because their parents sacrificed to help their children succeed. That agreement has been broken. We now must rely on the state to both raise us and care for us in old age.

>>11146040
Neo-Liberalism is considered "right wing" in Australia and the U.K.

But it's such a mangling of terms. Our "Right Wing" party is led by a man who just spent months campaigning for gay marriage and the "right wing" party in the U.K. has spent years going hell for leather after Right Wing groups, while celebrating and advancing Islam (which itself is also a jumble of contradictions in the west) and mass migration and laws protecting the far left.

It's a just becoming increasingly meaningless to use Right and Left wing, since the economic policies are becoming so distanced from the social policies.

I mean, look at the U.K. - the pro-brexit party is led by a staunch anti-Brexiter. The pro-EU party is led by a staunch anti-EU politician.

It's a shambles.

>>11145384
Japan needs to open it's borders to immigrants. Maybe make a policy of giving decent immigrants citizenship. That could solve their economic and population problems.

>>11146062
I wouldn't say it's "completely different". Australia's left was "racsist", but it was racism prompted by far left unionist ideals. Again, I think a lot of the pleb right might say, "I don't like fucking brownies" - but the motivation might be closer to what non-plebs on the left can more accurately articulate.

>>11146070
I mean, that's an argument that's just going to get you lost in the weeds.

>>11146040
>expansion and centralization of state power are characteristic of the left, and neoliberalism is nothing if not this
How can you be this retarded?

>>11146080
Our Mexicans are also a net negative on the welfare balance, the difference is that they also do manual labor like construction and crop-picking. The US has already done what Europeans are trying to do with replacement migration, the difference is that Mexicans are much more functional than Arabs and Africans. In both cases more consumers are needed to prop up consumption-driven growth. Actually, all non-Latino ethnic groups in the US have sub-replacement fertility.

>>11146094
All Anglosphere governments have one policy, which is to sell out the country to foreigners (whether it's rich Chinese, Israelis, Saudis, or Mexican day-laborers) to enrich themselves.

>>11146107
Is the State more powerful under neoliberalism than, say, before FDR, or isn't it?

>>11146053
He has praised Merkel for her courage and thought we should take in more.
His criticism is limited to how it was handled, not to that it was done.

>>11146119
>Is the State more powerful under neoliberalism than, say, before FDR, or isn't it?
it's less powerful than it was before neoliberalism which is the question you should be asking instead of this dishonest "say, before FDR" shit

>>11146040
>In no sense can neoliberalism be considered right-wing, since expansion and centralization of state power are characteristic of the left
the government is a tool, not an ideology

>>11146119
>Is the State more powerful under neoliberalism than, say, before FDR, or isn't it?
The whole agenda of neoliberalism was to free up the hold of the state on important things. Liberalisation of the market, privatisation of the public sector, freeing up the capital to move from one place to another, making unions useless, less control of the state over the market and national economy etc. How can you not know this? It was kind of the exact opposite of the new deal and Bretton Woods system.

>>11146124
Interesting. I saw an interview where he said much different things to that, speaking directly to the ability of Islam to be absorbed by Europe.

>>11146061
>They certainly want a Chinese style technocracy.
>I don't know if they'll get it. The truly class conscious on the left (rare, but it exists) aren't on board with it, and obviously the neo-reactionaries are extremely up in arms about it.
what? that's literally what the neo-reactionaries want. The problem with the Cathedral is not that it's too centralized, it's that there's no accountability because it's an spontaneous phenomenon emerged from democracy and nobody with power takes actual responsibility or suffers any consequences from any shit that happens

>>11146141
Neoliberalism is an ideology, not a tool.

>>11146155
It's exactly the opposite of what Neo-Reactionaries want. You either don't understand the term, or are being disingenuous.

>>11146153
That's his criticism of how liberals have failed to integrate immigrants in Western society. He wants to be ruthless and ask all types of questions to the west and the immigrants both. In spite of it all, he supports Europe opening the borders to immigrants.

>>11146157
>ideologies aren't tools

>>11146169
>opening the borders to immigrants
Has he said this? In the talk I was referring to where he praised Merkel for her decision he seemed to believe that the people coming were actually refugees.

>>11146187
When you're coming from Africa everyone is a refugee. Fleeing other Africans makes you a viable claimant to refugee status.

>>11146175
Tools of what? Of who?

>>11146192
>tools aren't ideological

t. Killer "NRA" Mike

>>11146187
Yeah I meant the refugees and not immigrants.

>>11146187
No, he didn't. In a recent article he said the mass migration was essentially importing the proletariat and that it was dangerous.

>>11146187
>>11146206
Many economic migrants just tear up their papers and claim that they're Syrian. Someone like Zizek would never accept deporting these types of people because it would be an affront to his moral values. So much for ruthless questioning.

>>11146119
>Is the State more powerful under neoliberalism than, say, before FDR, or isn't it?
it's bigger and way more inefficient, take it however you want

>>11146216
>way more inefficient
hard not to be since back then it didn't do shit

>>11146206
>importing the proletariat and that it was dangerous.
That's not what he said.

>>11146164
who are you calling neoreactionary? the populist, nationalist right and the neoreactionaries are not the same people, Moldbug, the patron saint of neoreaction literally wanted the government to be run as a corporation by a CEO without any input from the people

>>11146187
>he seemed to believe that the people coming were actually refugees.
come on, nobody can unironically believe this anymore

>>11146208
He seems to be horribly naive about some things, I was quite surprised. I expected more from such an educated man.

>>11146221
>hard not to be since back then it didn't do shit
except for literally forcing you to die for it, i guess it didn't do shit

>>11146230
People can easily believe this, but whether it's believable that a man as educated, learned, travelled, experienced etc. as Zizek apparently is should believe that?
It's at least what he seemed to be saying.

>>11146231
>guillotining people for being 'reactionaries'
I sleep
>deporting an arab who might lying about refugee status
REAL SHIT

>>11146241
What qualifies you as refugee if not fleeing a war zone/disastrous economic situation?

>>11146250
being white enough

>>11146250
>disastrous economic situation
this can mean anything

>>11146250
The latter doesn't qualify you as a refugee.
Nor does the former apply to anyone coming via Turkey, Tunisia etc. or leaving Greece/Italy except through resettlement programs.

>>11146250
the entire African continent is a disastrous economic situation.

>>11146208
He’s said many times that we should never try to play the game of trying to pretend that refugees are all great people who can do no wrong. they shouldn’t be helped because they are ‘good’. They should be helped because the least we can do is provide basic human rights. We should help people, not just ‘good’ people. The problem is Zizek does not think this is a problem to be solved on the state level (although he does credit Merkle for what she did) but instead something which should be handled by some higher superstate or global governance authority

>>11146263
The most efficient way to do that would be to colonize them and then bribe them to stay put.

>>11146250
>disastrous economic situation
qt ukranian refugee grills when

>>11146276
They're waiting for you in Poland.

>>11146263
>The problem is Zizek does not think this is a problem to be solved on the state level (although he does credit Merkle for what she did) but instead something which should be handled by some higher superstate or global governance authority
because he's not an idiot and knows you and your kind for what you are

>>11146263
>but instead something which should be handled by some higher superstate or global governance authority
so he expects the US to take responsibility for it? lol, that won't happen>>11146270

>>11146250
I mean, your definition of refugee just immediately became so broad, that you may as well say;

>What qualifies you as a refugee if not wanting to migrate to another country

Refugees are meant to be fleeing immiment physical harm from organizations, states or war zones.

Being poor and wanting more money was never traditionally viewed as grounds for being a refugee. Let alone "being middle class but wanting more money" - which is why Merkel and friends just stopped pretending at a certain point that they were dealing with refugees.

>>11146270
>The most efficient way to do that would be to colonize them

>>11146228
Fair enough. I WAS talking about the young Neo-Reactionaries stemming from the populist/nationalist right.

>>11146263
>should be handled by some higher superstate or global governance authority
That talk was very enlightening in exposing Zizek as a person who hasn't thought it through. Varoufakis has and Zizek wants to get there but then he just shits over Varoufakis.

>>11146255
>this can mean anything
So? What qualifies you as a refugee?
>>11146259
Syrians Iraqis amd Afghans come via Turkey. Nigerians (boko fucking haram) come via north africa.
>>11146261
Exactly though. What qualifies you as a refugee?
Also is the implicit statement here that you can live in a foreign country only if you're a refugee?
What about a guy who moves from the village to the city, or an American who moves to Europe because he feels the cultural atmosphere/scene is more suitable for him? Is he not allowed, then?

>>11146285
>Merkel and friends just stopped pretending
Source? I still hear "Flüchtlinge" (or worse, "Geflüchtete") often enough to drive any thinking person into despair for this country.

>>11146287
It would, though. Guest workers earn so little in places like Germany that the State has to pick up the tab, so it's cheaper to just bribe them to stay there, since those Euros go farther in Nigeria than Germany. The real problem here is that Africans are mostly fleeing each other.

>>11146270
>The most efficient way to do that would be to colonize them and then bribe them to stay put.
This would be you when Chinks, Poos and Latins take the front stage in around 50 years.

>>11146293
>Varoufakis
Even more dreadfully naive. What exactly has he thought through? Certainly not the "migrant crisis", unless he's made an 180 since I last heard him denounce 'the racists' and call it 'common sense' to 'help people who are in need'.

>>11146294
>So? What qualifies you as a refugee?
i'd say danger of dying or receiving severe bodily harm if you stay in your situation

>>11146283
>superstate
>global governance
>US
It’s been a long time since 1950 anon

>>11146304
Why would we need to be paid to stay in a Western country when Poos, Latins, and Chinks are coming to us?

>>11146321
If you're African this is basically day-to-day life.

>>11146321
If an economic situation is so bad people are starving to death, does that count?

>>11146328
>If an economic situation is so bad people are starving to death, does that count?
No, that sounds to me to be Not Real Communism and the refugees are reactionary imperialist opposition.

>>11146307
Thought it through in the sense that he, just like Zizek, realizes that this problem can't be tackled on state level and internationalism is the way forward. But since he can speak on both political and economic front, he goes to the end, unlike Zizek. Whatever you may think of his proposals in another thing though.
There are certainties which even a dense motherfucker should realize, things can't go the way they are and the best outcome would be to accept the least disastrous solution because there never will be an ideal one.

>>11146285
>What qualifies you as a refugee if not for wanting to live in another country?
That was my point btw. All this talk of categorising legitimate refugees as opposed to illegitimate ones is essentially a racist ideological discourse masquerading as realpolitik within the framework of capitalist realism.

>>11146348
It's only done so leftists can utilize guilt to smuggle in voting blocs to the detriment of native populations.

>>11146348
That so called middle class people are willing to live in the streets of Turkey, or jump on boats and risk their lives, just foe the hope of living in that great promised land (i.e. Sweden) must mean something. Either that the promised lands have occupied the minds of the poor 'orientals' to such an extent that they are sacrificing their lives for some delusional promise, or that they aren't really middle class. Not anymore, anyhow.

>>11146345
There are perfectly stable Middle Eastern states that could be used as models for Middle Eastern governance. The trouble is that they are monarchies, which is unkind to the leftist narrative.

>>11146348
The difficulty is that meaningfully moving past capitalism requires us to understand that condition of refugeeism is inherently illegitimate in the postcolonial world.

>>11146328
And don't forget, most of the disastrous economic situations are in great part results of west fucking it up for everyone.

>>11144512
>without any strict convictions other than being an imperialist tool
what

>>11146374
well this is certainly a hot take

>>11146385
They're all soldiers in a postmodern war of conquest, and they're incorporation into our societies is the urge of our capitalist elites. They're God is money; they don't care what namenit takes.

>>11146378
In the Middle East this is largely the fault of Israel, who has bought out the US to use as its enforcement arm.

>>11146368
>stable Middle Eastern states
Yeah like Arab worlds? Where the wealth of the region doesn't go to the mass populace but the bankers in the west? Or maybe Israel is your ideal middle eastern country?

>>11146403
Would you rather take your chances with, say, King Abdullah in Jordan, or the clusterfuck in Lebanon?

>>11146328
>If an economic situation is so bad people are starving to death, does that count?
no, if the problem can be faster solved by sending food than by travelling thousands of miles to get a McDonalds

Why are people on this board obsessed with migrants? I thought this was the clever board.

the uber-rich are literally stealing billions and you are chimping out about the wretched of the earth working minimum wage jobs in your country?

If you genuinely think immigration is a problem for society, the why aren't you also attacking the <1% who are storing their money offshore and avoiding tax, thus breaking social systems?

Why are you fucking out of your chair screaming at how public money for schools and healthcare is being slowly funneled into paying the salaries of "senior leadership teams" who have never worked as a nurse, doctor or teacher but are walking away with salaries 5x larger for managing them!?

>>11146408
reminder that Lebanon can't even manage to get the trash collection done right: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lebanon-garbage/no-end-to-crisis-in-sight-as-lebanons-garbage-mountains-grow-idUSKBN1FO0F1

>>11146399
>da joos
I agree with you though, Israel is the fucking problem. But there are other states which west has sought to destabilize.

>>11146408
having visited both this is a terrible example. beirut is infinitely nicer and also wealthier and more cosmopolitan than amman. lebanon's political system is also remarkably stable insofar as it managed to function for years without a head of state. political paralysis isn't the same as instability

>>11146421
The main reason is that rich people do not shoot or stab or rape you at comparable frequencies.

>>11146421
>the uber-rich are literally stealing billions and you are chimping out about the wretched of the earth working minimum wage jobs in your country?
you are spiritually dead, wealth can be recreated, you culture once it's been overrun by a foreign mass of people is gone forever

>>11146431
>beirut is infinitely nicer and also wealthier and more cosmopolitan than amman
i guess we are starting to see what they meant with "the paris of the middle east", turns out we were looking at it the wrong way

>>11146421

People are terrified of migrants because while they have no economic power, culture is still understandable to them, and gives them commonalities with the ruling class. Actually, to a large degree, culture is catering to the underclass because consumption is the motive force of a lot of the economy. Also over time the upperclass has been perverted by the culture of consumption so occasionally it has to see eye to eye with the lower class.

If an ethnic group or an ethnic culture other than their own takes over, then they will be both impoverished and the world will be made totally alien to them. The morals in television won't be their own, the language will only sometimes be theirs, their purchase on life will be ever more precarious. There will be much less hope of upwards connection.

This is why a lot of conservatives crusade against SJWs as well. Once culture can be shifted by moral levers, all it takes is people with different morals.

>>11146481
>People are terrified of migrants because while they have no economic power, culture is still understandable to them, and gives them commonalities with the ruling class. Actually, to a large degree, culture is catering to the underclass because consumption is the motive force of a lot of the economy. Also over time the upperclass has been perverted by the culture of consumption so occasionally it has to see eye to eye with the lower class.

I'm wealthy, I'm against migrants because they are from countries that are bad, and recreate those characteristics once they move to the US for a better life.

>>11146481
doesn't make any fucking sense

>>11146487

Case in point exactly.

Here we have a member of the upper class who has bought into the same propaganda as the lower class.

This guy and Joe who works overnight stocking the supermarket would get along just fine at the bar or whatever.

If he was a muslim instead and thought all problems were caused by people doing a haram him and Joe would have nothing in common, and in fact the fictive muslim would want to pry out of Joe's hands everything he enjoys doing, like going to the bar. (And the propaganda is usually constructed by that.)

>>11146421
people generally aspire to be rich and tend to consider themselves as wealthy-in-waiting. people don't aspire to be poor migrants. guess which figure you are more likely to project vitriol towards

>>11146421
Because we want to be billionaries but we don't want to be refugees, as simple as that.

>>11146492
>it's happening but it doesn't fit my ideology so it's not actually happening
it's all so tiresome...

>>11146504
who are you quoting

>>11146499
I'm struggling to see how my life is made better by Juan and Dolores, in fact, it's quite easy to see how my life is made worse by them.

>Am I safer for having Juan and Dolores here?
No.
>Will my kids' schools be of higher quality thanks to Juan and Dolores?
No.
>Where will my tax dollars go now that Juan and Dolores are here?
Benefits programs and DEA expansion.
>Will I get more for my money because of Juan and Dolores?
Food's a little cheaper. But now my kids need to go to private school so they don't have to deal with Latino gang violence, and they might get denied a spot at a top school for an affirmative action project.

Hard to see the benefit here...

>>11146421
They're a sort of lovercraftian entity onto which they project all their anxieties.

>>11146195
>He wants to disarm the working class
the problems lies not in guns themselves, it lies in how absolutely retarded americans seem to be. I live in a third world hellhole that's been in a by-all-means civil war with druglords since at least the 80s and yet we don't have weekly cases of kids shooting up schools, mall shootouts and that sort of shit.

>>11146534
>no culture ever got whipped out
i guess nothing ever happens and only being angry at rich people being rich matters, what an easy outlook to life desu

>>11146552
what culture is there to be wiped out? lmao

>>11146563
>leftism gradually wipes out culture
>durr what culture is there to wipe out, we need to move left to fix this!
It never stops.

>>11146570
>leftism gradually wipes culture
and I'm the one with the easy outlook on life

>>11146570
No but seriously, how is your culture in danger because of refugees/migrants?

>>11146421
Thank you

Because status quo politics have successfully been framed within racial and national narratives so that overwhelmingly in the popular consciousness your attitude towards these issues are all that matters. It's wrong and it's ridiculous but it ends up making things feel like you can't oppose the existing order without being racist or hating immigrants etc, not least of all because immigration does create real competition and conflict for most people. I think it's just really hard for people to have the strong feeling that something is wrong but then subject that feeling to nuance and analysis instead of just reacting viscerally to ultimately peripheral symptoms. So you get "the liberal elites are importing low IQ brown people to replace us because theyre easier to control than noble, cultured whites" instead of the correct "capitalism thrives off of crisis, and the ongoing economic and political crises in the third world along with advances in transportation and communication create huge populations that are desperate to leave their countries, and first world governments welcome this influx of migrants because they offer cheap labor and undermine the existing protections for working classes, also conveniantly polarizing opinion in such a way that native poor and working classes distance themselves from leftism now that it becomes implicitly associated with racialist moralism, and the migrant minorities become a fetish for disgruntled natives to project their legitemate problems onto, as well as for the cosmopolitan liberals to ritualistically affirm as innocent and noble." Because it's an appropriately complicated explanation for a complicated world it arouses suspicions of being convoluted and disingenous when it's really the far more consistent explanation.

>>11146584
because people are not interchangeable, their culture is also in danger btw, you maniacs won't stop until you convert humanity into a grey mass of interchangeable cogs

>>11146589
nice wall of text, still there's literally no reason that borders could not be controlled if politically desired, that's what people are pushing for

>>11146591
>btw, you maniacs won't stop until you convert humanity into a grey mass of interchangeable cogs
that's capitalism you dumb shit

>>11146599
and leftism is the perfect ideology for the current stage of capitalism

>>11146589
>capitalism thrives off of crisis
what the fuck am I reading

>>11146609
meaningless leftist mantras

>>11146604
genuinely interested in hearing what your ideal world would look like

>>11146591
>because people are not interchangeable
Interchangeable in what sense?
>their culture is also in danger btw
I'm sure it'll survive in their native land.
Pathetic answer tbhpham.

>>11146421
40 years ago people said the same about mentally ill people, rich people put scapegoats in front of people so they can keep leaching out of society

>>11146604
>and leftism is the perfect ideology for the current stage of capitalism

>>11146625
probably nazbol?

>>11146598
>borders
Artificial constructs, spooks, mean nothing.

>>11146421
This is such a lazy analysis. The migrants and upper class are working as a cohesive unit against the native middle class of Western nations. The relationship between both groups is what makes them so horrifying.

>>11146589
>the ongoing economic and political crises in the third world


And just to add to this, these crises are literally caused by the West. Whether it's military intervention or forcing countries to open up their lands and resources to """"""free"""""" trade.

>>11146589
>Because status quo politics have successfully been framed within racial and national narratives so that overwhelmingly in the popular consciousness your attitude towards these issues are all that matters. It's wrong and it's ridiculous but it ends up making things feel like you can't oppose the existing order without being racist or hating immigrants etc, not least of all because immigration does create real competition and conflict for most people.
I mean, my life is objectively worse with more Mexican immigration, in terms of safety, housing costs, etc.and I don't compete with them in any way.

>I think it's just really hard for people to have the strong feeling that something is wrong but then subject that feeling to nuance and analysis instead of just reacting viscerally to ultimately peripheral symptoms.
Right, you don't have a secure power center with an incentive to not fuck up the country.

>first world governments welcome this influx of migrants because they offer cheap labor and undermine the existing protections for working classes
Marxists don't even understand why countries are doing this, they don't have enough consumers to drive growth without Africans and Arabs. The Mexicans, at least, work in America.

>conveniantly polarizing opinion in such a way that native poor and working classes distance themselves from leftism now that it becomes implicitly associated with racialist moralism
Well, if you're poorer and live in an area that becomes a migrant zone, your life is now objectively worse. There's a reason third-worlders flee one another.

This entire post is basically:
>It's complicated! We need to move to the left!
Many of these problems of course arose from previous movements to the left.

>>11146639
everything means nothing

>>11146421
>Why are you fucking out of your chair

typo, should be "Why aren't you..."

>>11146641
you realize you've just corroborated his point? cheap migrant labour willing to work for less than the native middle class is the wet dream of the capitalist class

>>11146648
so get out of there and let them take care of themselves

>>11146654
>Many of these problems of course arose from previous movements to the left.
well, but actual leftist academics paid no price for it, so lets keep trying their experiments, they are sure to work at some point

I think he's a bullshitter but his yellow book, I think called Trouble in paradise, was a really good distillation of all his popular stuff.

>>11146663
so by that logic a populist block against both of them is the obvious answer, not an irrational "obsession" as implied in his first sentence

>>11146609
Something really obvious and well accepted. What capitalists even deny this? An earthquake or a war destroys a city, destroying investments and properties but also opening up new competitive markets and investment opportunities. Put simply, since capitalism depends on endless expansion to new markets, and there is not endless space in which to expand or endless people to sell to, so the destruction of what currently exists is beneficial and often in fact leads to dynamic reinventions.

>>11146598
That's great, I agree, as long as that means third world countries have control over their own borders and aren't toppled every time they try to actually consolidate their resources instead of bending over for perpetual neocolonial looting.

>>11146663
Many migrants do not work. They are there to buy, not necessarily to work. Working is a bonus.

>>11146654
>my life is objectively worse with more Mexican immigration,


your life is also a lot more worst with millionaires and billionaires avoiding tax to an extent that not even the rightwing mainstream of the 1970s would have supported.

But you never see /pol/ get mad at the economic establishment, they only get mad at the "progressive" face of the elite, never the neoliberal side.

>>11146665
>make the situations unbearably worse by various methods
>profit from it
>chickens come home to roost
>lol it's time to get out of there and leave them be

>>11146638
i'm genuinely annoyed that nazbol is only a meme ideology. imo it's the only realistic version of socialism, and i doubt it's a coincidence that every socialist regime that ever existed was basically nazbol.

>>11146694
>your life is also a lot more worst with millionaires and billionaires avoiding tax to an extent that not even the rightwing mainstream of the 1970s would have supported.
they are literally irrelevant for my day to day life

>>11146421
>wretched of the earth working minimum wage jobs in your country
This is how we can tell you are a leftist.
Some people I never see getting rich is less of a concern to me than Eritreans on welfare shitting up the streets, making them unsafe, being noisy, dirty, making people uncomfortable.
>public money for schools and healthcare
I was never in favour of this in the first place. I wish they would stop taking my money away. But at least when the crooks in governmeng embezzle directly, I don't get the scum of the middle east and africa shitting up my town.

>>11146712
ahahaha, classcuckery runs too deep

>>11146692
Most third-world countries, especially African ones, would be better off under colonialism.

>>11146694
I'm one of the people you're bitching about. I'm not a libertarian, so I don't support tax cuts in and of themselves. I want the Apollo program, not food stamps for Dolores's children. Education and science have a long-run return on investment, welfare, not so much. Besides, the welfare system has largely given us the TFR 1.3 problem, so it was likely a bad idea in the first place.

>>11146641
>The migrants and upper class are working as a cohesive unit

To what end are they working as a cohesive unit? What's the end game here in your worldview.


The better analysis, which is what I said, is that the Upper class are exploiting BOTH the migrants and the middle class, to the end of making even more money and living luxury lifestyles.

Now tell me how you disagree with that?

>>11146693
>many migrants do not work
sure, given that we're talking millions it's inevitable some don't, but at least in the UK the unemployment figure for natives is marginally higher than it is for foreign-born (5.5% vs 5%)

>>11146727
>Most third-world countries, especially African ones, would be better off under colonialism.

oh no youre retarded

>>11146736
How many have a government job? We pioneered this trick in America, we disproportionately give Blacks government jobs and call it "the creation of the Black middle class".

>>11146638
lol

>>11146723
t. jealous good-for-nothing

>>11146712
You realise that tax pays for stuff like education and healthcare, things that if adequatly funded would lead to a better quality of life for the poor and thus a better quality of life for everyone, as there would be less crime if families weren't going bankrupt for going to the hospital for one.

>>11146704
>let's keep intervening, this time we have good intentions, we promise :3

>>11146692
anon, your stupid analogy doesn't work. economic crises don't "destroy" anything, they cripple the economy. what would capitalists prefer, a bunch of wealthy consumers or a bunch of poor consumers?

>>11146742
Maybe "rule by Westerners" would be a better term.

>>11146654
>Marxists don't even understand why countries are doing this, they don't have enough consumers to drive growth without Africans and Arabs. The Mexicans, at least, work in America.

What don't I understand? Cheap labor, usually willing to work cheaper than and without the labor protections of the native population. This competition with native workers also causes the push for less labor protections in general since theyre seen as stopping people from being able to compete with migrants. Like you said, bigger consumer base. Higher birthrate in general. Potential surge in a votes for parties that support the importation of migrants. This is all well understood by leftists like Zizek that arent bumbling retards tripping over eachother to fawn over a newly imported brown working class.

>>11146530
> so they don't have to deal with Latino gang violence,
yeah they'll be shot by some beta WASP instead like TRUE WHITE AMERICANS

>>11146730
>To what end are they working as a cohesive unit? What's the end game here in your worldview.
Many a reason. The upper classes profit. And the migrants get relatively higher standards of living and the opportunity to dominate their former colonial masters. For that they're willing to stand hand in hand

>>11146746
Get it through your thick skull: We do not want your happy little multi-cultural middle-class social-democratic utopia.

>>11146772
You'd have to have a lot more school shootings for those numbers to work out.

>>11146769
But Zizek supports importing more third-worlders for moral reasons.

>>11146421
>If you genuinely think immigration is a problem for society, the why aren't you also attacking the <1% who are storing their money offshore and avoiding tax, thus breaking social systems?

You know some of us do that, right?

>>11146665
my lad my country and many other countries in our region started doing well for ourselves only to be fucked sideways (once again) by american soft coups and covert embargoes, now everyone is slowly going back to shit.
I don't think you people understand how poisonous you are for the rest of the continent.

>>11146723
i'm not a wagecuck though, and i don't live in a spiritually dead city

>>11146763
>ignore reality and look at this "logical" argument made in the vacuum of my head! basic economics 101 kek!

>>11146736
>but at least in the UK the unemployment figure for natives is marginally higher than it is for foreign-born (5.5% vs 5%)
most countries don't count unemployable people that get forever paid by the government as unemployed though, so that number is meaningless

>>11146746
>You realise that tax pays for stuff like education and healthcare
i'd rather educate my own kids thanks, and we'd manage with healthcare in my own community too, thanks for the offer though, but you have nothing of value for me

>>11146779
But they're not "hand in hand". there's a massive massive power differential between the two.

>>11146817
yes! homeschooling and homeopathy!

>>11146783
>We

if anyone wants to understand the actual consequences of immigration instead of blabbling with /pol/ and /leftypol/ there's this 509 pages report which is pretty cool
https://www.nap.edu/download/23550

>>11146817
>we'd manage with healthcare in my own community too

How would you do that? I'm genuinely interested. I would think the way to make it work would be pooling funds and hiring competant professional for the community, right?

It's just that most sane people see their country as a community.

>>11146827
ops https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23550/the-economic-and-fiscal-consequences-of-immigration

>>11146769
>over eachother to fawn over a newly imported brown working class.
the only thing that literally matters to a leftist is whether something can be tactically used to achieve the revolution at some point in the uncertain future, they don't care about the brown people but as tools for their revolution, and they'll use them

>>11146817
My God, such Freedom.

>>11146772
american white gun violence is literally europe levels though, sorry

>>11146765
But that's the current situation. Look at Ghana, for example. 70% of the gold and oil wealth leaves the country to the West and China. The population consumes British and American goods. The Ghanaian government are just the de facto informal custodians of informal colonialism.

>>11146763
Completely depends on the circumstances. Poor consumers are also consumers without a choice. You dont think fast food industries benefit from so much of the population not being able to afford or have time for something better? Not to mention that poor consumers are also cheap workers and excercize negligible if any political influence.

>>11146787
>Zizek wants to import more third worlders

No, he sees it as a moral duty for the countries who wage war on the Middle East and subsidize and profit off of the exploitation of the third world in general to accept the consequences of their actions which means doing the minimum to take care of the displaced and impoverished populations created by these policies. He doesn't want the policies, intervention and exploitation of the third world happening in the first place, and if it wasnt happening there would be no massive influx of migrants so it would be an irrelevant question.

>>11146836
>It's just that most sane people see their country as a community.
why would i see my country as a community when i have less and less in common with it every day that passes? communities are formed around ideals, my country holds no ideal that i value

>>11146825
homeschooling is obviously superior to public school brainwashing yes, and homeopaths would get booted out of here fast

>>11146850
>The Ghanaian government are just the de facto informal custodians of informal colonialism.
No, I know, that's the problem. Do you think Ghana would be better or worse with formal governance by some Brits, or with informal governance by Ghanaians with formal governance by a corporation? When you put an organization with an incentive to maximize profit in power, you run into problems. When you put Africans into power, you get corruption. The obvious solution is to just put some Westerners into power and make them responsible for building up Ghana to a point where they can function well enough that immigration from Ghana is low.

>>11146842
not an amerimutt and i don't care about freedom

>>11146870
Yes my friend, the west doesn't actively try to stop pan-africanism and local african powers not alligned with the west to rise, it never did, it's those low iq niggers fault!

>>11146870
>When you put Africans into power, you get corruption.

Most corruption relating to africa is being done by Western companies exploiting resources and avoiding tax and western governments couping any leader who tries to build self-sustainability.

http://www.gfintegrity.org/issue/trade-misinvoicing/

>>11146870
>When you put Africans into power, you get corruption. The obvious solution is to just put some Westerners into power and make them responsible for building up Ghana to a point where they can function well enough that immigration from Ghana is low
yes, Westerners are known for their fair, transparent and not-corrupt handling of non-Western countries (or even their own countries)
this is truly the peak of dumb racism, blindly supposing that a westerner isn't corrupt simply because he is from the west

>>11146707
Nazbol only is a meme ideology in USA because in USA the right is economically liberal but in Europe people takes national bolzchevism very seriously because both the right and the left are economically conservative.

>>11146818
They're consciously working together against the middle class of Western nation's. Both sides know they need the other.

>>11146870
>When you put Africans into power, you get corruption. The obvious solution is to just put some Westerners into power and make them responsible for building up Ghana to a point where they can function well enough that immigration from Ghana is low.

This would have already happened if Nkrumah wasnt ousted by western corporate interests. In less than 10 years, even facing massive opposition within his own government still made up largely of colonial era politicians and police (where most of the corruption came from) he managed to build up better infrastructure than anything that came since. The Volta Dam he oversaw the construction of still powers most of the country and the neighboring countries of Togo and Benin. Thomas Sankara made similarly massive advanves. There is plenty of potential for effective home rule, it's just consistently undermined by western intervention that seeks to have Africa as a cooperative gold mine of resources and cheap labor. I suppose if there was formal colonial management you could stop emigration and theoretically encourage development, but why would you? The underlying motivation would still be profit and capital accumulation.

>>11146923
well thank god the rich and immigrants are doing at least something good, nothing is as useless as the middle class. The whole thing seems like a "Dinner for Schmucks" type of situation created by the bored rich.

>>11146870
so this is the power of the superior western mind

>>11146899
Well, Sankara was Russia-aligned, and Russia was the principal enemy of the US at the time, no? Can you blame them? We get righteously angry when the US installs puppets in the Middle East, but as long as Russia is installing governments, that's okay, because they're Communist. This is a perfectly viable point of view to have, but let's at least be honest about it.

>Pan-Africanism
As doomed to failure as Pan-Arabism.

>>11146905
In a sensible world you'd have the Queen or whoever enter an agreement with Ghana to assign some Brits to govern and build up Ghana in exchange for a share of resource profits.

>>11146914
Would you say that the typical African country is more or less corrupt than Britain?

>>11146810
>ignore reality
That's exactly what you're doing, retard.
>>11146850
>Completely depends on the circumstances
No, it's a simple law of economics. People don't spend money after economic crises, everyone loses.
>You dont think fast food industries benefit from so much of the population not being able to afford or have time for something better?
This doesn't make any sense. First, fast food is expensive compared to healthy food, so why would fast foods (but also restaurants in general) benefit from the population having less money to spend? Second you're somehow implying that industries who produce healthy food somehow aren't run by capitalists like those of the fast food industry.
>Time
Now this is something else entirely, I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but you're saying that capitalism thrives when people have less times for themselves? Because that's patently false: growth and reduction of the average working day have gone hand in hand for the last 60 years or so.
>cheap workers
I don't feel qualified enough to comment on this as I haven't studied the effects of the crisis on wages, but honestly the argument you're making doesn't make much sense.
>and excercize negligible if any political influence.
Debatable, the last year's have seen a prominence of politics of resentment from every western nation. Populism here and populism there.

>>11146959
which*
years*

>>11146870
>>11146905
And yes there is corruption by African elites, that's exactly how the system functions to keep the west in power.

Case in point, look at Bridge International Academies in Liberia and other African countries. They are a multinational corp that basically tells governments "we'll do your education for you". They are funded by Gates and Zuckerberg amongst others.

Their deal with the Liberian government was done without any transparency or bidding process.

Then they claim they are getting better results, but in reality they get special permission to have lower class sizes (and further stretch the public schools with the rejected students) and they get special funding from the government so of course their test scores will go up a little. The Liberian minister for education says "we won't do anymore private schools until results come in" results come in and they say "this isn't that great". What do they do? give Bridge more schools. And more money.

And this is all being supported by ARC, who are a western think tank going around the world telling poor countries to pay money to big business to take over their education systems, when the money could be spent on actually improving the public system.

>>11146947
>No, you see, it's ok to completely destabilize third world countries who get to ascend through their own means and their own people's sovereignity because they're kinda friends with Russia!
Iran, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Ghana, Cuba (lol failed on that one right), Burkina Faso and countless other countries send their regards, you cunts.
The different between these countries and puppet states in the middle East is that those countries walked towards socialism of their own will, while your puppet states were instated and enforced through military force and not the people's sovereignity.
You are truly a blight upon the world, I have wet dreams of going back in time and RPGing the mayfair.

>>11146936
>True to his electoral promises, Nkrumah went to work putting the economic and social fundamentals in place. This encouraged the people to work even harder. Nkrumah firmly believed that political independence was meaningless without economic independence. [7]

>Thus, by the time he was overthrown in the CIA-inspired coup, Ghana had 68 sprawling state-owned factories producing every need of the population—from shoes, to textiles, to furniture, to lorry tires, to canned fruits, vegetables and beef; to glass, to radio and TV; to books, to steel, to educated manpower, virtually everything![8]

>Nkrumah wanted to industrialize Ghana within a generation, and everything was on course until the Americans and their British cousins (according to their own declassified documents) used some disgruntled and self-serving Ghanaian soldiers, staged that terrible coup on 24 February 1966 that truncated Ghana’s progress. It was a major setback, not only for Ghana but the whole of Africa.

>But Nkrumah was overthrown, and we are now left with nostalgia and what might have been. After the coup, the IMF rubbed salt into our injuries by sending a delegation to Accra to tell the military junta to discontinue Nkrumah’s industrialization programme. And they did! And, as a reward, some of them got airports named after them!

So many stories like this.

>>11146947
You sound like an idealistic colonial era nostalgic trying to pass off youe nostalgics as pragmatism.

>but sankara was russia aligned!

Because it was the competing superpower of the time. He wouldnt need to be anything aligned if the US didnt have a history of destroying any sovereign nation that dare actually excercize their sovereignty. Ghana tried to stay non-aligned in the cold war, "we look not east or west but forward" and Nkrumah was still ousted.

>>11146947
>Would you say that the typical African country is more or less corrupt than Britain?
I wouldn't say anything since I don't answer to non-sequiturs. Your dumb fucking choice is to send fucking locusts into a place they don't give a rancid shit about AND where they can do whatever they like because they know nothing will happen to them, because noone gives a shit if you rob some African country blind.

>>11146899

>>11146967
The problem is that the same corporations are of course also ruining Western education. To be clear, I'm also opposed to the American government.

>>11146971
>popular sovereignty
No such thing. Russia financed a revolution. That's all well and good since that was standard operating procedure in those days, but it's a mistake to romanticize it just because it was Communist.

>>11146947
>in exchange for a share of resource profits.

I love it when rightwingers accidently end up supporting socialism because they were forced to actually think things through rather than be allowed to spew buzzwords.

>>11146999
all revolution were pretty much carried by a small aristocracy, "popular sovereignty" is just a meaningless meme that the left uses to justify its power

>>11147012
Yes, I agree.

>>11147011
Dude, I'm against the Enlightenment here, I'm hardly arguing for liberal corporate anarchy. All I'm arguing is that in a sane world, Britain or whoever could just recognize every state's sovereignty and trade governance and development aid for a share of resources from desirable partners, but this of course cannot happen because instead of an actual sovereign we have liberal corporate anarchy.

>>11147012
>>11146999
Mate in most of those countrie's cases there wasn't even a revolution, like, most south-american presidents couped for being too left wing were elected by popular vote. Just because your country cucks you out of your sovereignity because FREEDOM doesn't mean everyone else failed to understand representative democracy.

>>11147044
>in a sane world
>monarchist

>>11146991
F. He waa really too good for this world. Unfortunately you can normally measure the sincerity and effectiveness of a socialist leader by how long they manage to stay in power. Sankara and Nkrumah were overthrown within a decade and fucking Mugabe finally just got ousted. I guess Cubas for the most part an exception, the worst thing they did was dependence on Soviet aid leading to all the shortages in the 90s.

>>11147044
>the solution to the traumatic legacy of colonialism is to do it again but this time make it the royal neo east africa company

>>11147066
What's wrong with kings? At least you have a secure power in place, rather than corporate anarchy.

>>11147063
To be fair, if the US had set up its think tanks and installed a pro-American liberal democratic government into power through a color revolution, we would be blasting America for sovereignty creep on the rightful Russian sphere of influence.

>>11147093
>Capitalism is well, natural
>But literally any country that chose socialism must have been under Russian influence
mate does your diet consist SOLELY of pure ideology?

>>11147093
>At least you have a secure power in place
oh yeah I'd love to fight another 100 year war over dynastical matters

>>11147107
Well, I just said that implementing liberal democracy was in fact unnatural and done through CIA think tanks, since I don't subscribe to natural order in the first place...

>>11147112
How many years has the US not been at war? You should note that most leftist governments that succeeded had near-absolute power, yet you seem to chafe at the idea of someone actually having it.

>>11146045
>stop debating semantics
You're saying meaning doesn't have value?

>>11147093
>What's wrong with kings?
the fact they're kings

>>11147121
What the fuck is even your point then dolt, don't try to justify the monstrosity named USA foreign policy, the country is just a abnormal blob of retarded protestant exceptionalist shit and should have been nuked a long time ago.

>>11145269
>he hasn't read moldbug

>>11147121
>You should note that most leftist governments that succeeded had near-absolute power, yet you seem to chafe at the idea of someone actually having it.
how fucking dense do you have to be to talk about "absolute power" when we're talking about podunk countries that the most powerful nation on the planet has in theri sights, trying to crack them both economically and through coups/assasinations/funding terrorists

>>11147132
>don't try to justify the monstrosity named USA foreign policy, the country is just a abnormal blob of retarded protestant exceptionalist shit
That was their first mistake, yes. The American Revolution was a mistake.

>>11147138
No, I'm talking about, say, Russia or China. Stalin had an enormous amount of power. Same goes for Mao. In the Marxist interpretation, the historical development of the forces of production inevitably led to the couping of kings by the bourgeoisie, right? Maybe I don't believe in the inevitability part, but if we pretend Stalin is a Tsar for a moment, it would seem clear that Stalin checked capitalist-sympathizing reactionaries.

>>11147121
>How many years has the US not been at war?
A war on distant foreign soil, fought by people who voluntary joined the army, fought for economical and geopolitical matters because of neocon ideology, which never damaged one inch of american land is not comparable to a war that lasted a century fought because of dystanical reasons.
And no, "leftist" (do you get a kick of out saying this word? lol) governments didn't have absolute power compared to that of a monarch, you're grasping at straws.

>>11147162
and what happened after they died? soviet russia collapsed, mao's china became capitalist.

>>11147172
So, you would say Stalin had LESS power than the Romanovs, then?

>>11147185
Right, because you have an anarchy of factions fighting over insecure power. Despite seeming stupid, dynasties do neatly avoid this problem, provided the king can pump out a son or two. Xi today probably has as close as you can get to absolute power, so we'll have to see how that works out.

>>11147202
dynasties don't seem stupid, they ARE stupid, no matter how many times you repeat your refrain of "stability"
a woman chained in a basement for 10 years is in stable condition as well, doesn't mean it's fucking desirable

>>11147187
Ah lol, I thought you were talking about Obama. I'm not a commie.

>>11147234
Okay, so whoever controls information channels should rule instead? note that this is what happens in democracies like the US, voters are only as good as their information inputs. Of course research has shown that voter opinions are largely irrelevant to political outcomes anyway, so you're already in some sense living under the House of Sulzberger or the House of Murdoch.

>>11146053
He wasn’t, he actually said that Europe should accept more refugees.

>>11147267
>Okay, so whoever controls information channels should rule instead?
it's an apocalyptic option and still better option than your retarded idea of giving inbred idiots right to absolute rule over hundreds of millions of people

>>11145443
>Money isn't infinite.
Money is just a measure of a country's wealth. The more you produce the more overall money you have.

>>11145706
>Neoliberal means "not left-wing enough"
Neoliberal means economically right, culturally marxist

>>11148102
>neoliberalism is culturally marxist
this is a preposterous statement

>>11145706
>Neoliberal means "not left-wing enough".
Murikans...

The only difference between neo-cons and neo-liberals, is the first hates colored people and blacks, and the second just wants to exploit them - other than that, they are on the same page, point per point. Everything else your Republican Party advocates for (lower taxes, corporate rights, extreme austerity, union busting, free markets, an end to worker's rights, an end to welfare and an end socialism in all its forms) is neoliberal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

It's only that political terms are so charged and twisted in the US as to lose all meaning, more often than not meaning the exact opposite of what they once did. Something about the two parties swapping sides every other issue every few decades for political expediency.

>>11145773
>privileged vapid old cunts who have destroyed the environment and the future of many countries' youth
>implying they did so on purpose
>implying they did so intentionally
>implying they did so
>implying
shut up Cucky "soros unironically fills my brain" mcCuck

>>11146095
>Le paternalistic "X country needs" meme again

>>11146189
Will fleeing the africans soon make Sven a viable claimant to refugee status?

>>11146328
Do greek children qualify as refugees, then?

>>11146397
>their incorporation into our societies is the urge of our capitalist elites.
this

>>11146591
YES

>>11146905
>That image
and this is exactly what the EU is doing to the european south. Shock economy baby

>>11148102
>https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/progressive-neoliberalism-reactionary-populism-nancy-fraser

don't use the phrase cultural marxism if you want to be taken seriously.

>>11145432
plenty of cultures will just kill old people when they get too unproductive but keep telling yourself that everyone has always shared your values if it makes you feel better

>>11148443
yeah, ok, I was just trying to translate for dummies

>>11144202
right wing Zizek when

>>11147267
>Of course research has shown that voter opinions are largely irrelevant to political outcomes anyway
of course they are irrelevant, people voted for Brexit and for non-intervention in Syria, that didn't seem to work though

>>11147347
at least inbred idiots have skin in the game if the country goes to shit, everybody that is relevant and has power today is completely isolated from having to pay any sort of price from any fuckup they produce

has any of the social engineering games we've been playing for the last 100 years ever produced anything of value in the long term?

>>11150123
the answer is to create skin in the game for today's rulers or change the system in a way that ensures skin in the game for everyone, not to regress back to monarchy
how would you know what is of value? I don't trust the definition of "value" from a man who's jerking off to absolute rulers.

>>11150151
i wasn't the other guy, just this >>11150123 is mine, but democracy is by definition shared power, so nobody has to take any responsibility for anything, or just a small .0001% share of responsibility which means nothing

>>11150168
>democracy is by definition shared power, so nobody has to take any responsibility for anything, or just a small .0001% share of responsibility which means nothing
are you seriously presenting absolute rulers as people who take responsiblity and step down from their throne when they fuck up

Wew! People in this thread are in need of a good guillotining.

>>11145432
The contract between the young and the elderly has always been that the elderly build things to leave to the young when they are gone, and in exchange the young take care of them in their old age.
The last generation hasn't built anything and they have destroyed things built by generations previous. It's only natural that the young are spurning them.

>>11150185
of course, not step down exactly, but their neck is on the line because they literally have no one else to blame

i think getting stabbed in the face was the most common succession method during the roman empire

>>11150209
of course they have someone else to blame, pick a group - muslims, jews, gays, commies, liberals, deviants, whatever you want

>>11150228
that literally never happened

>>11150264
1. I think you're wrong, but I'm not a historian so I can't pull out proof
2. if you think that an absolute ruler would be somehow innately more moral than a democratic ruler and wouldn't use the deflection of guilt to keep himself in power then you are definitely someone I don't want in charge of creating a system of governance

has this reached bump limit? didn't expect it when i shitposted this

>>11144202
"In recent years, techno-scientific progress has started to utterly transform our world - changing it almost beyond recognition. In this extraordinary new book, renowned philosopher Slavoj Zizek turns to look at the brave new world of Big Tech, revealing how, with each new wave of innovation, we find ourselves moving closer and closer to a bizarrely literal realisation of Marx's prediction that 'all that is solid melts into air.' With the automation of work, the virtualisation of money, the dissipation of class communities and the rise of immaterial, intellectual labour, the global capitalist edifice is beginning to crumble, more quickly than ever before-and it is now on the verge of vanishing entirely.


But what will come next? Against a backdrop of constant socio-technological upheaval, how could any kind of authentic change take place? In such a context, Zizek argues, there can be no great social triumph--because lasting revolution has already come into the scene, like a thief in broad daylight, stealing into sight right before our ever eyes. What we must do now is wake up and see it.


Urgent as ever, Like a Thief in Broad Daylight illuminates the new dangers as well as the radical possibilities thrown up by today's technological and scientific advances, and their electrifying implications for us all."

Sounds to me like he's declaring a new era where old terms like communism and capitalism are superseded such that they become useless. I'd argue that we're already at that point but that it will slowly become so obvious it will become pointless to deny, well, for anyone paying attention anyway.

>>11148413
Boo hoo, after south europeans colonized and fucked up the whole of America they are sad they're being treated like a colony

>>11150844
>Italy and Greece fucked up america
oh come on now

>>11150844
>>11151144
Also,
>implying modern people are responsible for what their ancestors did 500 years ago

New thread on this when?

>>11152413
When you make it.

>>11146192
>Involuntary egoism
For shame

>>11146095
> 0.07 shekels deposited into your account.