/lit/ - Literature

>MT: Especially since Trump was elected, there's been a lot of this rhetoric that democracy doesn't work, that people left to their own devices make bad decisions, etc. As a result of this pessimism, a lot of people believe the road to progress is lobbying big companies like Facebook and Google and PayPal, and even MasterCard and VISA, to create the society that we want. How do you feel about that kind of corporate-based activism, lobbying corporations to exercise their power?

>Noam Chomsky: Lobbying corporations is activism. If corporations are doing anything, it's because they're under pressure to do it. A corporation has one purpose, to profit. There's variation, but very generally the fact is, that a corporation is following the principle that it should maximize its own gain and market share. Now, corporate executives are not stupid. If they realize that they're losing a customer base, they're facing what they call reputational risk, meaning, “The peasants are coming with the pitchforks, we better do something.” Then they'll react and maybe do something, sort of generally decent, within limits.

>But to ask them to do it on their own, makes no sense. It’s like asking a totalitarian state to be nice. The corporations are sort of being dragged along slightly, but the real activism is having other effects. I mean, take the most important issue we face, by far, destroying the environment. Well, change is not going to come from corporations. In fact, take a look at this morning's papers. Even with the pandemic and the reduction of economic activity, methane and carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere has increased. Because, for example, as oil prices have gone up, you're getting the automatic reaction, the fracking industry revives.

>One of Trump’s great deeds was to eliminate the regulations on controlling methane release, which is extremely dangerous, in the short term, much more than carbon dioxide. So they do that. They can make more money that way. You're getting more releases of poisons into the atmosphere, which reduces the time span that we have to try to deal with this. Well, that's the way businesses are going to behave. They can make more money doing something, they'll do it. You put plenty of pressure on them, or on the banks that finance them.

>But if you do things like what Sunrise Movement did, a young activist group, sit in, occupy congressional offices, get some support from the progressive legislators who came in, kind of on the Sanders wave, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, in this case, pick up some support from a long term Democratic Senator who was interested in the environment, Edward Markey, then you can get the idea of the Green New Deal, which is essential for survival, in some form.

>>You can get it from way off in the outer space somewhere, to the legislative agenda. Keep the pressure up, you can get something done. We can see it happening right before our eyes. Biden's environmental program, climate program, it's not what's needed, but it's much better than anything that preceded. And it's not because he had a sudden revelation. There are pressures constantly.

>MT: How about on the antiwar front? Is there progress there?

>Noam Chomsky: If you want to take, say, the protest about the Vietnam War that began in the late sixties, it became really substantial in the late sixties. 1967, 1968, you're getting huge demonstrations.

>Early in the sixties, couldn't get a whisper. I was giving talks in somebody's living room, you'd get three neighbors together, that's other people doing the same thing. When we'd try to have a meeting at the university, to bring in Vietnam, we had to have ten other subjects to bring somebody in. Well, it takes a lot of work like that, by lots of people, before anything finally breaks through.

>You may not see it for a long time, you may forget the people who were involved, but that's the way things happen. The same is true today. And it is happening on a lot of fronts. Take, say, the demonstrations that took place after the Floyd murder. Pretty astonishing. There's never been anything like that before.

>I mean, there was some real dedicated solidarity, black and white, all over the country, all over the world, in fact, enormous public support, way beyond anything that Martin Luther King achieved. That didn't come because one black man was murdered by the police. It came from years of activist organizing and education. The New York Times published its 1619 series. That wouldn't have happened a couple of years earlier.

He really is just a liberal, but he acts like he's something more radical.

>>18008684
Moldbug eviscerates chomsky so brutally it's not even funny

>>18008835
Did he address him in any specific blogpost or are you talking about his overall philosophy?

Yes, but a cool boomer.

>>18008684
Jesus Christ, as much as his stances interest me he's the only person who genuinely puts me to sleep from boredom.

>trump bad and climate change scary
Bravos, Chomsky!

>>18008835
Moldbug literally is Chomsky without the superficial leftism.

Great, we're living in a liberal boomer's idea of paradise. Why does it feel so much like hell?

>>18008684
>literally 0 arguments

Chomsky is wrong about some things, but what is he wrong about here? Do you genuinely believe political activism does nothing? Then have things changed?

> Muh violent revolution or nothing.

There's three kinds of political persons. Incrementalists/reformists, non-participants and terrorists. Unless you're actively planting bombs and blowing them up, and you don't think reforms are possible, you're a non-participant, and will forever be. Activism is fucking boring, inane and often fruitless, but not always fruitless, which is his point.

>>18008920
"Activism" and "organizing" are just words middle class failsons and faildaughters use to get pic related.

>>18008963
America needs to be stopped

>>18008920
>>>/r/vaushv

>>18008920
>you're a non-participant, and will forever be

As though a person cannot have a change of mind.

Oof.

>>18008920

Chomsky is swindled by modern corporate "activism." The "problems" being targeted are mainly neighbors and local businesses. They're taking out critics and competitors to resounding applause (of emojis.) This is no democratic process. A small minority of internet users and social hierarchy-climbing c-suite executives are the only ones voting.

The man rose Floyd above MLK for Christ's sake. A boomer venerating Floyd over MLK. Change for the sake of change.

>>18008963
>>18009025
So he's wrong about activism because...some activism is fruitless and retarded?
> A small minority of internet users and social hierarchy-climbing c-suite executives are the only ones voting.
As has been proven, yet you have the vote. You have stuff like fire departments, pensions, roads, police, etc. etc. Do you think it's because the powers that be wants these things? Course not, it's a compromise they make. They'd easily turn it into a Nozick hellscape or UAE if they could, but they can't, they're actively working in their interests. Much like you should be actively working in your interests, but isn't.

Answer this honestly: Why are so countries (Western Europe, New Zealand) better than others (US, Southern Europe, Gulf States) despite sharing a similar economic system?

>>18008994
is that some youtuber? I don't care.
>>18009021
The implication being "until you change your mind". Political action only works either through coups or compromise.

>>18009060
No he's wrong about activism because activism is in reality just a career move, it's not some kind of epic moral crusade.

>>18009107
Real activism. Identity politics shit doesn't change anything, and everyone knows it. But there's changes which can be made to break up monopolization, enviromentalism, healthcare, prison reform etc. Just because it's not happening doesn't mean it can happen. Biden for instance has the best enviromental plan of an us president so far, it's crap, but still the best. Do you give up or work for the next to be slightly better.

Again, the primary reason why the US is garbage is because Labor doesn't vote, because they've got nothing to vote on, and then act surprised when parties who are against labor shit on them. Like what the fuck do you think? Doesn't mean it's impossible, it's just fucking difficult. Third Worlders oust fucking dictators all the time, does that mean it's impossible to create a fucking labor party?

>>18008920
>Do you genuinely believe political activism does nothing?
The civil rights movement has become pro racial segregation. Feminism has devolved into mass e-prostitution and men in dresses. The antiwar movement has flipped over to enthusiastic support through "queer drone strikes" (look it up) and promises of resulting POC mass immigration waves to the West. The sexual liberation movement is a sanctuary for pedophiles, genital mutilators and coercive medication of "trans" (normal) kids.

The left has been so thoroughly subverted and co-opted the only thing one can do to help it is put it out of its misery. The people who call themselves leftists today are hypocrites, grifters and useful idiots. I spit on you.

>>18008835
>Moldbug
filtered

>>18009225

This is it.

>>18009225
> Waaaah waaaaah there are retards in the movement so activism is impossible
Those idpol views are extremely unpopular with modern people, it's just that modern people don't get a platform to speak. I thought people learned this when Oranje Man got elected. You know why those idpol views are prevalent? Because they exist within the Democratic party, a business party. Do you expect the Tories to be authentic working class next?

God I'm happy I'm not American, every single view in that wretched society is just awful. I honestly hope you all die and take your polluting military bases with you.

>>18009398
But democrats were chosen by the majority of people just a few months ago?

>>18009398
Im rather curious about whether you'll admit what country you're from

>>18009485
Because the alternative is le drumpf. People are generally pragmatic, not idealist when they vote.

Also, yet again like a third of the fucking country didn't vote. A third of the country which in other countries statistically would vote labor.

>>18009398
>retards are in the movement so activism is impossible
Unironically yes. This is essentially a -not-real-communism argument; you’re completely ignoring the hugely important fact that nearly all movement are targeted at the stupid and greedy to make the gears move faster, thus driving everyone with a brain into a spiral of cynicism.

This isn’t a nuanced take at all it’s just hunkering down into your own stupidity and plugging your ears to valid criticism.

>>18009225
>The civil rights movement has become pro racial segregation.
It hasn't, but politics have started moving past the colorblind approach on issues of race which is a definite sign of progress
>Feminism has devolved into mass e-prostitution and men in dresses.
Both of these are a better contribution to society than "feminism", so more progress
>The sexual liberation movement is a sanctuary for pedophiles, genital mutilators and coercive medication of "trans" (normal) kids.
>ie providing medical treatment to those who suffer from gender dysphoria instead of praying the gay away like clueless boomers

>>18009225
>The civil rights movement has become pro racial segregation.
>It hasn't, but politics have started moving past the colorblind approach on issues of race which is a definite sign of progress
>Feminism has devolved into mass e-prostitution and men in dresses.
Both of these are a better contribution to society than "feminism", so more progress
>The sexual liberation movement is a sanctuary for pedophiles, genital mutilators and coercive medication of "trans" (normal) kids.
ie providing medical treatment to those who suffer from gender dysphoria instead of praying the gay away like clueless boomers

>>18009565
>It hasn't, but politics have started moving past the colorblind approach on issues of race
lol you’re just a committed drone. This is just buzzword nonsense fed to you by your masters.

>>18009572
>what do you mean bro, it’s just “progress”
jfc the lack of anything happening in your head before typing this shit is palpable and frankly nauseating. kys bub

>>18009556
Real life example now, take a look at someone like Bernie, was he some weird idpol obsessed freak? No. Have any idpol obsessed freak reached the same popularity he did? No. Will they? Likely not.

I mean, just look at all the leftist intellectuals, pretty much all of them condemn idpol as retarded shit. Chomsky, Zizek, Varoufakis, Wolff, Fisher, Albert, Finkelstein, whoever. Which intellectuals are in favor of idpol? Butler? Other occult academics? Coates? Kendi? The media is idpol, the movement doesn't necessarily have to be, it's just that people are afraid of commiting because the media *will* shit on them.

Also this is not "le not real gobbunism" type shit, literally every western country outside the US figured this shit out, you're the only ones failing at it.

>>18009584
You simply lack the intellectual sophistication to understand the points raised, let alone provide interesting counters.

>>18009609
>doesn’t know what real life means
We’re you born yesterday? Not only does Bernie push the oldest scam in the book (socialism in America) he does bend the knee to BLM etc— there are ducking photos of this you ingrate.

honestly, you’re way too far up your own ass at this point. there’s really no having a conversation with someone this deluded/committed. Not even the blissful kind of ignorance; sad desu

>>18009616
lol no. keep coping kid.

>>18009609
>only the US falls for idpol nonsense
>but like when it happens here it’s just progress
not even clever sophistry going on here, just a long shitpost

>>18009627
ok Marxist boomer

>>18009572

>>18009623
If you're not bothering to engage with reality in lazy contrarianism, there's nothing to talk about. "oooohh everything is bad forever everyone are corrupt", that's just how a child sees the world. Again, welcome to being a non-participant.

>>18009640
Progress? What are you talking about? Anyway the US doesn't have a labor movement, and you argue it's impossible because idpol exists. Again, third worlders manage to topple dictatorships in countries where 90 % believe in witches and evil spirits and throwing fireballs, political change is possible.

>>18009688
bro you are literally disregarding actual photographed historical events to suit your narrative and then accuse me of being contrarian? nigger you need to see a fucking doctor lol.
also third worlders topple dictatorships that the CIA let’s them you fucking naive twat, read a book

>>18009708
> muh glowerinoes are behind everything
You're being intellectually lazy, but I think you know that. Do you consider any part of the world better than any other, or is it all just a black pit of despair to you?

>>18009729
>doubts CIA involvement in toppling dictators
no really: read a fucking book.
more importantly stop trying to so hard to have something clever to say on 4chan, firstly because you’re absolutely horrible at it, secondly because you are truly having a convo with yourself now, I don’t even know where the fuck you got this black pit of despair shit but from your own cavernous skull.
You are not having a discussion about politics, you’re just trying to impress yourself and it’s cringe af

>>18009225
Good take. I'd also add that uncritical anti-warism culminated in banishing the term "just war" from our common dictionary and is wholly unable to challenge actual dictators who infringe upon human rights

>>18009225
But leftists have always been degenerate hypocrites, grifters and useful retards

>>18009760
>challenge actual dictators who infringe upon human rights
Literally why would you do this? It's not your country, you're not some universal cop

>>18008697
>Lobbying corporations is activism.
lmao
senile fuck

>>18009803
>projecting
Dictators who infringe upon human rights can be the concern of other countries; Stalin basically fabricated an excuse to invade Finland, the Finns would have been right in trying to stop him on principle

>>18009755
Yeah very cool, everything is corrupt and all political change is cringe and bluepilled and overtaken by my heckin glowies. There's no viable strategy except shitposting about tranime and everyone who thinks there is are just a glowie themselves. Blackpilled = BASED aren't I right my dudes?

Whatever.

>>18009853
>still talking to himself
wasn’t joking my man, this is some pre-psychoses tier rambling shitpost. don’t take too much 4chan at once.

>>18009140
>Biden for instance has the best enviromental plan

It does basically nothing for the environment and hurts our economy in the process. It's idiotic and pointless.

American lefties/liberals have comical takes on the environment. You think you deserve praise for plans that address 0.000000001% of the problem and, as always, only require sacrifice from others.

>>18009867
Very cool my dude, I can't wait to be so heckin nihilist and deep into the world system

>>18009225
>>18009778
Based.

Leftist communities have always been a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

>>18009819
>Stalin basically fabricated an excuse to invade Finland, the Finns would have been right in trying to stop him on principle
They're right because it's their country. Your mindset is like you already own the whole world and if they don't do what you want you'll invade them

>>18009973
>more projecting
you don’t know shit about me or my mindset so don’t worry about that, what I’m trying to explain to you is that a dictator amassing power represents a practical threat to people outside of the country in question. It has nothing to do with owning any world and everything to do with self-preservation.
please don’t respond to this post, you’re being blatantly manipulative and selective in your understanding of something entirely non controversial; rest assured I don’t need/want your opinion.

>>18009995
And the US only invades in order to subjugate, like literally every invader ever. What's your point?

>>18010098
asked you not to respond and this pretty much sums up why. if you still can’t glean my point it’s a testament to your commitment to bad faith argumentation and nothing else.

>Lobbying corporations is activism.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA They're the one's who are controled.
The absolute state of american leftoids

>>18009995
>a dictator amassing power represents a practical threat to people outside of the country in question
No it doesn't, not until they actually threaten your country
>>18010137
>bad faith
yep it's one of these retards, just go back to twitter or reddit or wherever

>>18008864
Haha. Same. I appreciated him for his advocacy, but I never made it through a book of his. He is to anarchism what Bernie is to socdems.

Which is why James Herod speaks to me so well.

>>18009954
Haven’t you better get back to base camp, #300192-A?

>>18009954
>>18009778
>>18009225

>>18010147
>and still projection
here’s your (You), read a book

>>18010172
alright threads over, she found it
see you guys later

>>18010210
You're a faggot who can't even defend your ideas

>>18010147
>the USA invades just to subjugate
>but dictators do not represent a threat in principle
fuck you are stupid. like fucking god damn nigga you’re brainless

>>18010232
>nigga
>can't tell two different posters apart
I can't say I'm surprised

>>18010222
Out of the two of us I’m the o l’y one referring to historical precedent while you are actively contradicting yourself in the principle you suggest, so not really concerned with your shit opinion bro

>>18010241
lolol seethe a bit more faggot

>>18010147
failure to define threat: is someone amassing weapons across the boarder and spouting hatred for my country a threat or not?

>>18010243
I just made the rather obvious observation that if eg. Russia invades Ukraine, and you live in Mexico, this does not concern you. If Russia starts genociding its minorities in its own country, and you live in Mexico, again, doesn't concern you.

You have US-brain world-police mindset and think you're supposed to control the entire world, it's honestly creepy behavior

>>18009572
>moving past the colorblind approach
>moving past
This has quite possibly the single most destructive (to race relations) and short-sighted move from "the left" since ceding freedom of speech to conservatives.
How on Earth can you call that progress? It has failed completely.

>>18010259
>for my country
Then yes it is a threat to you, since it's your country.

>>18010264
first time you’ve ever mentioned a specific example which still doesn’t negate the principle that a dictator in country X presents a threat to citizens of other countries. And, surprise surprise, you still have to project.
stop posting idiot

>>18010217
>she

>>18010277
>the principle that a dictator in country X presents a threat to citizens of other countries.
Because the principle is incorrect. The country presents a threat to you based on its actions and stated intentions, which is orthogonal to whether it is a dictatorship or not. A democracy next door that is agitating against your country is a threat, a dictatorship across the world that doesn't care about your country is not a threat.

>>18010275
Then by that definition loads of country are justified in invading others, so what are you really getting at here? Is it an issue of proximity, power differentials, what? if I am now justified in intervening in a threat what is wrong by your standards?

>>18010284
>Because the principle is incorrect.
You haven’t done shit to disprove it, so keep at it I guess, I’ll check back later.

>>18010277
>a dictator in country X presents a threat to citizens of other countries.
In a sense I actually agree, the executive branch of US foreign policy genuinely ought to be killed for the protection of others, they're not dictators, but that's less important.

>>18010284
> A democracy next door that is agitating against your country is a threat, a dictatorship across the world that doesn't care about your country is not a threat.
both CAN be a threat. a dictatorship is a threat in principle because its whole design is to amass power. Power is a threat to others.

>>18010286
It's an issue of whether it affects your interests or not. Obviously if the country is directly threatening your country, then you are affected

>>18010291
I literally explained IN THAT POST why it's wrong lmao, you fucking imbecile
>>18010300
All political systems are designed to 'amass power', dictatorship is just one shape of power configuration.

>>18010309
Okay but now you just mentioned interests— is a natural resource I don’t have but still need an interest I need to protect? meaning am I justified in invading now just because it benefits my chance of survival? And then depending on how broad interests are, genocidal maniacs could be seen as justified if we take their concerns as justifiable.
we’re about to lose ourselves in fruitless discussion, I’m opting out.

>>18010317
> All political systems are designed to 'amass power',
not true at all. granting the immense nebulousness incumbent in the idea of a political system as such, not all political systems are international aggressors. saying a dictatorship is just like any other system because it’s all politics is just lazy and disingenuous.

>>18010329
>is a natural resource I don’t have but still need an interest I need to protect?
It is indeed but if you lay claim to it by invading another country then you will have to deal with other countries that are allied with it, this has to be balanced against the profit. The reasons for allying with a country are themselves defined by shared interests. 'protecting people from a dictator' implies you have sovereignty over the country in question because you are deciding the terms of its internal political structure, which doesn't affect your interests.

>>18010344
Politics are about power, what else do you think they're about exactly?. Dictatorship is just another form of power structure, one which moreover basically means 'new absolute monarchy' and isn't unusual.

You keep trying to draw some link between dictatorship and international aggression, any form of government can and has aggressed internationally.

>>18010371
> protecting people from a dictator
didn’t say that; wanting to help people doesn’t imply sovereignty over anything; and if we’re talking about people in MY country then all of this is irrelevant

>>18010392
Patently false. You can take issue with the fact that I’m using a more colloquial conception of dictator but it doesn’t change that there are vast predictable differences between aggressive countries and non aggressive countries, and further mot every government/country/society/etc is aggressive, if only because there are plenty of countries without decent military power.

>>18008697
>democracy doesn't work
It only doens't work because people don't vote, make voting mandatory and everything is fixed.

>>18010417
>challenge actual dictators who infringe upon human rights
This is the post which I first replied to and thus the position I have been arguing against.
>if we're talking about people in MY country
Yes I have repeatedly said this myself, it matters whether your country is being threatened, not whether there is a dictator, or what the dictator is doing in his own country, or in countries with which you have no dealings.

I think you very much overstate the degree to which you can predict geopolitical behavior based on some kind of formula of domestic politics. In fact I'd say this is just basically a delusion and there is no such predictive formula at all, history does not exactly provide the controllable and replicable conditions necessary for such a science. You even mention yourself military power, which is obviously a much better predictor of aggression than 'dictatorship', on purely logical grounds because it is a necessary requirement for successful aggression in the first place.

>>18010459
you didn’t finish your post.
I didn’t just mention military power offhand, I’d say that, while there is no precise formula, the closest thing to a guarantee historically is the amassing of military power, and from your post it seems like we’re reaching an agreement point if you’d just keep connecting the dots.

all in all I’m not advocating for shit, and we’ve definitely gone off course from the original post, but all I’ve ever really truly ever been trying to get across is that a threat is not not-a-threat just because it happens outside of your borders, and consequently not all interventionism should be seen as despotism and invasion, some is simply in the interest of self-preervation

>>18010485
>the amassing of military power,
But what does this have to do with dictatorship?

Interventionism for your own interests is one thing sure, but then admit that's what you're doing. eg. US did not got to Libya for human rights and dictatorship, it went there because Libya misbehaved and US considers Libya a vassal state. This is the honest appraisal of the situation. And it raises the related question, whose interests were really served by this, which tells us who is really governing the US. If we allow this to be called intervention for human rights we are mystifying everything.

>>18008963
Man, I could a billion dollars...
A single moment of pain from me is worth lifetimes of nigger crying and bloodbaths.

>>18010571
could use a*

>>18010555
Dictatorships usually imply either a taking of power by force, which consequently suggests a willingness to use said force against outsiders, or simply the configuring and consolidating of military forces to bolster the regime. I already mentioned I used it colloquially but I was confident people were familiar with the term “military dictatorship” but I suppose not...

As for the example, I don’t really disagree but I don’t think it has much to do with what I’m saying. I’ll grant the US is an international aggressor and they are unique in that they are not technically a dictatorship, but acknowledging this doesn’t change what I’ve said, at least as far as I am aware, but you can point it out if I’ve said something inconsistent.

>>18010603
I don't think that's particular to dictatorship, any change in form of government by definition involves taking hold of the military, and all countries are willing to use their military to defend their interests against outsiders. Military dictatorship to me means that the military takes control of the country in a coup, usually led by a general. This is a result of internal political turmoil, and does not necessarily mean anything for their international relations unless they are deposing what was in effect a puppet government of a foreign state in which case really it is secession from empire. Russia is not a dictatorship either let alone a military dictatorship and has also aggressed against foreign nations in the past few decades, it is fighting proxy wars with the US as we speak.

>>18010603
>I’ll grant the US is an international aggressor and they are unique in that they are not technically a dictatorship
It's funny how you talk like being an aggressive democracy is unusual.

>>18010650
>I don't think that's particular to dictatorship,
not saying it is particular, but that it is reliably associated with dictatorships. so not all military threats are dictatorships, but all dictatorships are military threats, with maybe a few rule-proving exceptions.
Further I’d say that while not every change in government effects the international status quo, when it involves military force it does, so then the real question is how often do governments actually change with/without military aide. I’d say rarely but it warrants some research, which frankly I’m not doing for a 4chan post so you go ahead and prove me wrong if you know one. And as for modern Russia, it like the US can be a dictatorship or not, what I’m looking for are examples of dictators who present no threat, not those who present a threat and who are also not dictators

>>18010715
The three aggressive democracies are US, UK and France. It is unusual.

>>18008835
Moldbug was eviscerated by Borzoi

>>18009572
>politics have started moving past the colorblind approach on issues of race
yes it's effectively done a 360 and now we're back at racism wrapped in a different guise... great work liberal-progressive activism!

>>18010808
So, every democracy that wasn't too small to be an international aggressor, was. Intredasting.

>>18010808
>democracies
>US
>UK
>France

kek
in fact political engagement has declined (or rather been neutered) to the extent that there is no real political discourse or political movements anymore.

>>18010417
yeah. 'liberal democracies' are the most aggressive, warmongering, imperialistic, and human rights violating.

>>18009060
>: Why are so countries (Western Europe, New Zealand) better than others (US, Southern Europe, Gulf States) despite sharing a similar economic system?
It's DEFINITELY not demographics. literally impossible for it to be demographics. just want to make that clear real quick

>>18009140
>Third Worlders oust fucking dictators all the time
They really don't. It's mostly a carefully manufactured facade for some western elite-backed regime change. The few times they actually do oust a dictator (Iran for example, ISIL in Syria, the Cuban civil war, etc.) it's almost universally condemned as a very bad thing to the point that even questioning this narrative of visceral condemnation will potentially have you socially and economically blacklisted.
SJW activism is just the same tactics applied against white people with an expectation of social mobility, as every normal standard of workers rights is technologically undermined in various ways.

>>18009760
Brainlet take. There are no 'just wars', just competing national interests. Sometimes there are justified rebellions, but those are still none of your business.
Mind your own ass.

>>18008684
I mean he literally is a baby boomer. What do you expect?

>>18011794
The idea that social democracy (frayed as it is now) in Western Europe is because "everyone is getting along" seems a little bizarre reading 20th century European history. These were highly polarized societies that fought two destructive wars which shattered their traditional societies, so the social welfare states that emerged in the aftermath if anything were attempts to create some semblance of stability. If the U.S. didn't develop a social welfare state like those in Europe, that's why.

I think American leftists look at Europe too much as a "model." Like "oh we want socialism... like in Europe." A lot of Europeans I see online think this is absurd. This feels like a hustle. The histories are very different. The U.S. to me I feel is more like a Latin American country that happened to get really big.

Noam "Vote for the establishment, don't do anything, mrnrnrhhhrrmhmm don't do it, buy my 804789897th book, mrrrrrhhrhnnnnhnmmmmm my assistants transcribe my speeches and edit them I haven't written a book in years" Chomsky

>>18012902
kek

>>18008684
>urbanite ‘anarchists’ like NC are a large part of the problem
The solutions against the ‘Cathedral’ will never, ever be found from within The Tribe — in the end they will always choose self-preservation & half-measures before stating the obvious

>>18008893
/thread

>>18008684
He's lovable

>>18009225
The people who have these takes are more often than not cuckservatives looking for gullible people to follow them on the pure basis of cultural issues instead of taxation and legal issues. The Anti-PC crowd is just filled with grifters pretending to have principles while they shill, and defend, sexual predators like Trump and Gaetz. You are nothing but controlled opposition, and I bet you voted for Obama in 2012. You're a Obama-Republican Qtard, not a principled person.

>>18008963
Who did the money go to?

>>18009106
>is that some youtuber? I don't care.
Careful, you might hurt your favorite streamers feelings! Would hate to tune in to his livestream only to see him blubbering into Highyena's fat chest for comfort. Of course seeing Hippy Dippy's debate champion in such a pitiable moment would forever tarnish all that associate with him. Destiny would probably love it tho and REM would jump with glee to see the tower of anti-intellectualism brought to his knees. The moment would celebrated by the breadtubers, Luna Oi, Emerican Johnson, and the rest of their ilk. Funny.

>>18009803
Are you including the dictators put or kept in power by the strongest country? Also how would Just War thinking fare in a situation where the dictator control a nation with the biggest military? Would the rest of the world really be willing to risk the damages all for "human rights"?

he's not entirely wrong, people go LE HECKING VOTING DOESN'T MATTER but like.... clearly it does or they wouldn't care about keeping the electoral college, for one ting

>>18010918
>Revolutionary
>Consistent poster on 4chan

>>18008920
> terrorism =/= political terrorism
Political terrorism is based and I ship that shit

Everyone left of Pinochet needs to be removed from Humanity. This thread fucking disgusts me. So many trannies.

>>18008835
isn't he the guy that totally fucked up Urbit and resigned in humiliation?

>>18014068
>sexual predators like Trump and Gaetz.

Why even come to this board if you are a walking media golem?

>>18009623
>there are ducking photos of this you ingrate.

Based and Shanannwattspilled

>>18009623
It's fun to pretend you're some sort of world-weary cynic but this cynicism only serves to protect the the status quo and the people that profit from it.

>>18016141
did you mean to reply to me? what about this post says world weary cynicism, or even misrepresents reality?

>>18009609
>Real life example now, take a look at someone like Bernie, was he some weird idpol obsessed freak? No
He became one pretty quickly. There’s no way of avoiding it if you want to participate in left leaning federal politics.

>>18016360
>He became one pretty quickly
Exactly. As soon as the millenial college kids started to flock to him an infiltrated his campaign he was forced to cuck out on guns and immigration (the positions with most cross aisle appeal throughout the working class). This is a pattern that repeats itself again and again in left-wing movements.
You must choose who to represent, the cosmopolitan college educated HR faggots or the working class. The class interests of these groups are directly antagonistic.

>>18010445
>america having bannana republic tier turnout for half a century
>most recent election
>country in lockdown from virus so people vote because literally no one has anything better to do on tuesday
>they vote for the guy that setup delaware corporations
>guy who talks about free healthcare during a health crisis that shut the country down and mainly affects people with health problems wasnt "relevant" enough
yeah, sure (((democracy))) works

>>18008684
>chomsky is literally too old to be a boomer

>>18009609
>Have any idpol obsessed freak reached the same popularity he did? No. Will they? Likely not.
AOC is an idpol obsessed freak who is as popular as Bernie was.

>>18015212
He created Urbit