/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10203691]

>current year
>not dialectically overcoming the dead-ends of liberalism and conservatism to reach anti-identitarian Marxism
>not constructing a genuine political economy to get outside the cancer of meme culture politics
What's your excuse?

[Anonymous No.10203710]

>>10203691
"anti identitarian marxism" that sounds like a hellscape anon, what would I even have to live for? some abstract philosophy dictated to me by the central comittee? some vague enlightenment notions about the progress of man? marxism is just as atomized and nominalist as capitalism is, i dont want to live in your dehumanizing secular nightmare.

[Anonymous No.10203712]

I like Asian broads too much vis loosening immigration restrictions as part of an ongoing """struggle""" as it helps raise discontent over capitalism is truly against my penile urges
sorry phamalam

[Anonymous No.10203713]

>I read a big book at an impressionable age and now I'm going to solve all the problems of society!

[Anonymous No.10203714]

>>10203691
also bampu cause im interested

[Anonymous No.10203723]

>>10203712
I also forgot to add that because of aforementioned penile urges I do not believe race is a spook and therefore any postulation on the concept of the base (relation to the means of production and states of ideological interpolation vis family, school etc) affecting culture, race, gender behaviour hence the elimination of the degenerated (influenced by capitalism) base leading to massive changes is false due to remnant super structures (see performance of Americanized Asians v East Asians v Avg American due to family).

[Anonymous No.10203724]

>>10203713
this

[Anonymous No.10203731]

Right wing movements, which are today's only real threat to globalization, have all been infiltrated by the globalized elite to spread misinformation. An exemple is their hostile attitude towards Marxism, which is one of the only coherent ideal to adopt to overcome liberalism. Doing so, they successfully neutered dissident right wing politics.

I'm making a case for right wing politics because the left wing has been desintegrated for over 5 decades (post 1968) and allowed globalization and liberalism to sprout from its cadaver.

[Anonymous No.10203737]

>>10203731
Globalism is an aspect of Marxism you fool

[Anonymous No.10203739]

>>10203731
I think we should stop worrying about movements and start acting by example. Right wing politics is the way to go, but its not just marxism thats a cadaver, its the society overall. tl;dr we have to live the tradition, anon

[Anonymous No.10203750]

Because Marxists always succumb to infighting.

[Anonymous No.10203754]

>>10203737
>Globalism is an aspect of Marxism
Name 1 (one) marxist philosopher that advocates for capitalist globalism.
And no, internationalism is not globalism.

[Anonymous No.10203770]

>>10203737
Does Marxism advocate for an elite/oligarchy controlled globalism? No. In fact it argues for the opposite. Why would US workers want their labour to be in competition with the labour of Indian workers? Why would workers avocate for their jobs to move overseas. When labour is owned by the workers, THEY get to decide what happens with it. Full blown globalism only works in favour of the elite.

See, this is what I was saying in my previous reply. Marxism has been tainted by the elite and marked as the 'real' ennemy of right wingers, because Right Wingers are indeed the most virulent and dissent political movement today. IF they all joined their effort agaisnt the elite, those at the top wouldn't last long. Don't let the oligarchy dictate your ennemies for you.

[Anonymous No.10203778]

>>10203770
Karl Marx was LITERALLY Jewish you know

And why are Marxists always talking about taking away national borders and "one race, one world" nonsense

[Anonymous No.10203780]

>>10203778
>it's yet another alt-right-memelords cannot even put an argument together episode

[Anonymous No.10203781]

>>10203754
>internationalism is not globalism
Ok fine, they're internationalists. So you admit they want to take away national borders and make the world one big inauthentic, soulless """culture"""

[Anonymous No.10203782]

>>10203778
>it's another "nazi brainlet thinks progressive brainlets are marxists" episode

[Anonymous No.10203791]

>>10203713
>>10203778
>they think this is an argument
And who are these ''Marxists'' you speak of? Names, please.
Unless you conflate any sort of socially progressive politics with Marxism, in which case just shut your mouth.

[Anonymous No.10203792]

The meme right and the liberal pseudo-left are merely reflections of each other, both of them fail at presenting a genuine socio-economic project necessary for a coherent political ideology. The "alt-right" is based around utilising transgression and outrage against what it sees as a hegemonic, oppressive culture. Said culture is transgressed by embracing a traditional identity, specifically racial and nationalist, to oppose neoliberal globalism and its perceived lack of stability.

This is not fundamentally different from the liberal left dating back to the 60s, the main point of which was to abandon genuine socialist politics and embrace the culture of identity liberation. The socialist project was either pushed to the side or presumed dead, and the "Left" would focus on radicalizing minorities and oppressed groups to liberate them from traditionalist, oppressive cultures. Essentially, both of them are identitarian politics feeding off of each other and utilising many of the same tactics.

The biggest victim of this whole conflict has been the labour-based communist project, appropriated as it was by some aspects of liberalism and firmy put on the defensive. The main characteristic of the remaining socialist camp has indeed been defensiveness - doing our very best to portray ourselves as liberal-friendly, non-stalinist, non-statist, supportive of the identity liberation achieved by the pseudo-left. Needless to say, defensiveness by itself is not an attractive political project, and people don't buy into it, especially when you don't have a coherent, unapologetic and confident stance on the USSR, Marxism-Leninism and every other sticking point that the liberals have with commies.

Ultimately, there has to be a real return to constructing alternatives to market economies and models for planned production-for-use etc., if Marxism is to have any kind of continuation. There has been work done on this topic, but it remains on the margins. Cockshott's model of cyberneric socialism is in my mind the most realistic stance, as it presents a reinvigoration of state planning and doesn't veer into utopias of decentralised direct democracy, but that's another matter.

[Anonymous No.10203793]

>>10203781
>take away national borders and make the world one big inauthentic, soulless """culture"""
That's what capitalism has been doing the last 50 years. Marxists want to get rid of capitalism. You do the math.

[Anonymous No.10203796]

>>10203778
How dumb can you be? Marx was of jewish ancestry, yes. But his dad (I think?) converted to the orthodox church. Marx himself said he was fully orthodox. He wrote a fucking book about the jewish question, and he isn't kind with them.

Throwing 'JEWS JEWS JEWS' around is so fucking stupid. Yes the globalized elite is Jewish. But did you even read my reply? What happens when labour is owned by the worker? Well it's not owned by the fucking globalized jews anymore. Smfh.

[Anonymous No.10203798]

>>10203781
>Implying greater international cooperation and opposition to war = taking away borders and homogenising culture

Many Marxists aren't internationalists anyway.

[Anonymous No.10203804]

>>10203793
I never advocated for capitalism. I'm saying that Marxism is not the answer to capitalism because they're two sides of the same coin. Both are fundamentally modern, materialistic systems that destroy culture and turn society into a soulless hell hole. Neither system takes the human spirit or the importance of culture and tradition into account. It's all just material goods and profit to them.

[Anonymous No.10203814]

>>10203782
>>10203791
Then explain all the progressive liberals on every college campus in America who worship Karl Marx as their hero.

[Anonymous No.10203824]

>>10203781
thats not internationalist.
You are making a fool of yourself.

[Anonymous No.10203838]

>Be Marx
>"Dude you create yourself through labor, the contradictions of the old world will lead in the new, and the new world will set you free! Be ware of the violence that will come from this though, human action can't be predicted."
>Be modern Marxist
>"REEEEEE kill everyone I don't agree with, violence will lead to a new world, ruling classes are inherently violent and oppressive, I am a tranny and you need to accept me I can't change it, power is always beneficial to the powerful!"

No thanks, I'd rather not join some retarded Marxist leftover theory movement that refuses to accept the fact that the thinks that they want have been thoroughly refuted by development, and even goes against what they believe in at several strata of their thinking.
When you're some edgy teen who thinks you are a slave in rebellion, when slave rebellions are extremely rare, and even think that the world world is part of this slavery, you might need to double-check your retarded beliefs.

[Anonymous No.10203841]

>>10203814
Americans are idiots and water is wet. Pretty much every major american political position is self contradictory to some degree because they're more interested in throwing shit at each other than developing a sound system. I could ask you the same about all those american """conservatives""" that want to preserve their tradition yet worship the free market.

[Anonymous No.10203843]

>>10203814
Because they never read marx as much as the alt right never opened a book either. Nobody reads. Not even the majority of this board.
The two books that opened my eyes were Das Kapital by marx and The Doctrine of Facism by Mussolini. Why would you let anyone else tell you what marxism and facism are all about when you can read the book by the guys who fucking INVENTED marxism and facism. I strongly advise everyone interested in politics to read these two. You're in for a surprise. Information is manipulated to an extreme. Don't ever let anyone dictate your views.

[Anonymous No.10203844]

>>10203804
>Both are fundamentally modern, materialistic systems that destroy culture and turn society into a soulless hell hole. Neither system takes the human spirit or the importance of culture and tradition into account. It's all just material goods and profit to them.
Oh fuck off. I get it, you read that one Evola quote and now you feel like a noble warrior priest in his fight against modernity. I hate to break it to you, but culture is the product of material processes. You deluding yourself into thinking reality don't real doesn't change anything about production relations, so you are effectively advocating capitalism. You're the same as bleeding-heart liberals whining about why people don't just stop being mean to eachother when our economic system actively encourages them to.

[Anonymous No.10203853]

>>10203841
Oh and this. Americans have been brainwashed for three centuries. I lived there and I've met incredibly smart and cultured people there, but they just can't grasp politics.

[Anonymous No.10203873]

>>10203843
>pretending you read Das Kapital
It's okay, we're all plebs here.

[Anonymous No.10203874]

>>10203844
So you are ok for instance with Mao fucking tibet and every monastery in china?

[Anonymous No.10203876]

>>10203853
Don't act like the progressive liberals haven't infected Europe just as much as America. We're in the same boat anon

[Anonymous No.10203877]

>>10203844
classic leftist narcissist, still drinking the materialist koolaid and making assumptions about shit you dont understand. And that is exactly the reason that marxism was, is and shall be an utter failure forever. Keep playing pretend radical though, im sure the revolution will come tommorrow

[Anonymous No.10203901]

>>10203876
European progressive liberals aren't that enamoured with Marx as far as I can tell. Although we do have our antifas.

[Anonymous No.10203917]

Don't you love how leftists have to curb their own progressive potential in order to be heard? Of course this isn't true only for our favorite simple image-based bulletin board, since despite all their efforts to convince themselves and others of the contrary, reactionaries are and have always been the establishment.

What the ''alt-right'' gets and bro-socialists don't is that identity is at the core of all politics and that similitude is what unites individuals. This is the insight of fascism, and yes the alt-right is straight up fascism, only barely rebranded. But since racial struggle is only an extension of class struggle (or rather, the same thing with different terms), the goal of the old-school Marxists and the civil rights activists is exactly the same, only neither realizes this and each has to adjust their views to what is considered acceptable, the former to frogposters and the latter to neoliberals and ancaps.

[Anonymous No.10203924]

>>10203917
>tfw to intelgent: the post

you are self delusional as fuck

[Anonymous No.10203929]

>>10203874
If Mao didn't do it, some other capitalist would've.

>>10203877
Pointing to the failures of Marxism is funny when you're literally advocating an ahistorical traditionalist fairytale that was never even as much as attempted IRL.

[Anonymous No.10203939]

>>10203929
im LITERALLY hitler for thinking "ahistorical fairytales" like tradition, religion, race, and culture are real? come on dude, youre the one who "literally" advocates communism and youre trying to pretend like the right is the one detached from reality

[Anonymous No.10203946]

>>10203939
>im LITERALLY hitler for thinking "ahistorical fairytales" like tradition, religion, race, and culture are real
Here's your (you)

[Anonymous No.10203954]

>>10203946
great response

[Anonymous No.10203963]

>>10203924
>it's literally ad hominem!
(You) could've told me what you think in the time it took you to type that shitpost.

[Anonymous No.10203964]

>>10203929
bullshit. they didn't fuck them in japan for instance.
Anyway I disagree with you , and >>10203877
, Marxism isn't about breaking cultures, thats Maoism, Stanilism, etc.

[Anonymous No.10203965]

>>10203939
>tradition, religion, race, and culture
things that changed one billion times during the history of humanity, as they are contingent on specific historical conditions.
btw I'm not the other guy and neither a commie

[Anonymous No.10203966]

>>10203691
>current year
>not wanting a dystopia

yeah I need an excuse, op...

[Anonymous No.10203977]

>>10203965
go back to reading guns germs and steel and tightening your cock cage buddy

[Anonymous No.10203982]

>>10203977
>no arguments
I've never read that book

[Anonymous No.10203984]

>>10203982
https://www.reddit.com/r/bugmen/

[Anonymous No.10203987]

>>10203917
>identity is at the core of all politics
citations needed

[Anonymous No.10203999]

>>10203987
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schmitt/#ConPolCriLib

[Anonymous No.10204008]

>>10203984
I've never been to reddit either. Still no arguments i see?

[Anonymous No.10204012]

Historical materialism is fundamentally correct, and every attempt to change "culture" in some vague idealistic way is laughable ahd doesn't alter the property relations of capitalism one bit. What the fuck do I care about muh white race if nobody can get a job, everyone's drowned in debt and every public service is gone etc.
Fuck every political ideology that doesn't center on the economic struggle, it's all cancer and nihilistic distraction. Best thing you can do is to shut off the news for a while and read Marx's critiques of political economy and people who engage with them in a serious manner.

[Anonymous No.10204050]

>>10204012
What a simplistic, dull, and soulless view you have. You just parrot whatever your masters tell you. You're an indoctrinated drone with no imagination.

[Anonymous No.10204076]

>>10203999
Thanks, I'll read it.
Is Schmitt the figurehead of this concept? Are there other thinkers who write about politics being based in identity?

[Anonymous No.10204119]

>>10204076
I can't think of any. The idea might have been watered down by other writers but it seems to be an exclusively fascist concept.

[Anonymous No.10204126]

>>10203691
you've been reading Angela Nagle haven't you OP?

[Anonymous No.10204131]

>>10203691
is dialectic just slang for "use these words that I've invented so that I can feel important, pls"

[Anonymous No.10204134]

>>10204050
>irony

[Anonymous No.10204144]

>>10204050
Nice argument nerd. Luckily I don't need my outlook to be hip and trendy and validated by the current flavor of contrarian conservatism. I live in Eastern Europe and let me tell you, there's nothing fun abd cool about nationalism and ethnic politics.

[Anonymous No.10204150]

>>10204131
of course not, idiot

[Anonymous No.10204173]

>>10204150
then why do people say things like "the dialectic of marx" or the "dialectic of Heidegger". Seems like a nice way of shaming people into learning definitions of words you made up so you wouldn't have to go through the effort of fitting your ideas into commonly accepted language.

[Anonymous No.10204175]

>>10204131
I think you's misinterpreting the dialectic, anon!

[Anonymous No.10204212]

>>10204173
>dialectic of Heidegger

[Anonymous No.10204234]

>>10204173
Stop acting like a typical butthurt anglo-analytic philosopher, the meaning of dialectic is not obscure and impenetrable. I always find it funny when anglos think their schools of ultra-specialized, university journal-based philosophy is somehow more accessible than basic Marxism. What do you think is more popular and widely read, Slavoj Žižek or whatever minor figure is currently fashionable in some analytic debates?

[Anonymous No.10204281]

>>10204119
It's not just fascists, SJWs also base their politics on identity. Both are ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.10204286]

>>10204281
you'd like /leftypol/

[Anonymous No.10204291]

>>10204286
No thanks.

[Anonymous No.10204294]

>>10204291
we have catgirls?

[Anonymous No.10204304]

>>10204281
Check out "The once and future liberal" by Mark Lilla. It's a liberal arguing against identity politics

[Anonymous No.10204329]

>it's a people with no political power who will never have any kind of political power arguing about politics episode

[Anonymous No.10204332]

>>10204329
the working class have political power, they just don't realise it

[Anonymous No.10204336]

>>10204294
This unironically is what my tulpa looks like, red scarf and everything.

[Anonymous No.10204337]

>>10204294
fuck off

[Anonymous No.10204346]

>>10204337
suit yourself

[Anonymous No.10204347]

>>10204119
>>10204076
The critical thinkers who were influenced by Schmitt: Giorgio Agamben, Hannah Arendt, Habermas... Lukacs wrote a critique of Schmitt which I haven't read yet. And obviously what he proposed describes fascism in general, including the alt-right. Whether they know it or not, these are the principles they're working under.
Overall, and I'm not paraphrasing Schmitt here, just spitballing, political discourse at its most basic level is always an attempt of a group (united by an identity) to further their interests, which is something to keep in mind in these days when Randian egoists and Nietzschean aristocrats try to talk us out of demanding our rights.

[Anonymous No.10204354]

>>10204304
Thanks, I will.

[Anonymous No.10204361]

>>10204347
Thanks, it seems you know what you are talking about. It's not that common around here.

[Anonymous No.10204374]

>>10204332
And they never will.

[Anonymous No.10204380]

>>10204374
we'll see when capitalism collapses, when the choice between socialism and neo-feudalism becomes impossible to ignore

[Anonymous No.10204399]

>>10204286
any /pol/ variation is disgusting

[Anonymous No.10204409]

>>10204399
Leftypol is genuinely the best place to discuss serious leftism right now, though. Once you wade through the memes, there are lots of well-read people on there who migrated from /lit/. If you don't understand Kapital you get laughed off the thread, as it should be.

[Anonymous No.10204682]

>>10204212

You laugh but dialectics is methodological; it is not determined by semantic content. In his essay "Essay on Metaphysics" for example, Heidegger dialectically (antithetically confronting the premises of philosophers before him) starts from the premise of nothing to establish a foundation for Metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.10204693]

>>10204409
>describing /leftypol/ as if it were /marx/

[Anonymous No.10204729]

>>10203691
>Anti-Identitarian marxism
what did op mean by this?

[Anonymous No.10204813]

>>10204729
what we've got now but with redistribution of wealth. except that redistribution of wealth will never happen, so it's literally just what we've got now.

[Anonymous No.10205116]

>>10204729
Marxism is not an identity movement. Marx didn't concern himself with the working class because they were an opressed group that held a superior moral position that needed to be expressed, or something like that. Marx & Engels both heavily scorned "ethical socialism". Rather, he was concerned with the working class because the objective structure of property relations which was developing with the growth of capitalism, made that specific class - defined by its historically unique role in production - a potentially revolutionary class. In other words, the contradictions apparent in capitalism were leading to a possible rupture with the existing economic structure, which was going to be led by the workers appropriating the means of production after their successful development under capitalism.
The failure of reformist socialism was predicted by Marx clearly back then. It's not like Marxists were just impatient and wanted conflict instead of peaceful transition, there are objective reasons why reforming capitalism doesn't work, which they explored in depth. Their economic analysis remains extremely important to understand our current position, have a clear perspective of the preceding labour movements and their downfalls, and ultimately seek new possible points of rupture to prepare for.

[Anonymous No.10205537]

>>10204012
but don't you first need a war of position on the superstructure, before you can enact a frontal physical attack on the state and on the economy?

your leninism only made sense before the state organized capital. And fuck, I can't even get the poorest least educated most exploited people I know to even form a bourgeois union!

[Anonymous No.10205556]

>>10205116
this is excellent anti-humanist orthodox marxism. But Marx didn't fully develop his theory of the state, and how it would serve the long term interests of capitalism as a relation by giving concessions to organize consent, thereby absolute weakening of the position of the proletariat as an inevitable, and revolutionary subject in history.

2008 was a big missed chance, as it was the time for the working class party to take control of the banks instead of bailingthem out. perhaps in 50-100 years we will have another chance, perhaps this time around the environment. Or of course, barbarism will be perhaps more like;y

[Anonymous No.10205978]

>>10205537
Well you are right in that the conflict expresses itself on multiple fronts, including the cultural one which still reflects the underlying social relations in production. I just don't see any kind of cultural force that could be galvanised for a worker movement right now though. Living in an ex-socialist country feeds my general pessimism.
>>10205556
2008 was barely a chance, the Left was utterly inert by the time of the crisis, deadened by decades of neoliberalism. The crisis has opened up a space to question the economic deadlock, however, and get some kind of process going. There does seem to be a lessening of the taboo on socialism, and a somewhat improved perspective on 20th century communism in the mainstream. I remain skeptical of it reaching beyond keynesian socdem reforms, particularly in major countries.

[Anonymous No.10206030]

>>10203691

maybe a few of you will grow out of your childish fantasies.

>pic related will help.
>try reading something that won't hit your confirmation bias so hard.

[Anonymous No.10206058]

>>10206030
nice meme

[Anonymous No.10206139]

>>10206058
>books about communism in action are “Just a meme”

[Anonymous No.10206150]

>>10206058

>only read things that confirm your super edgy belief system.
>come on guys people are genuinely cooperative not competitive


Lets just give it another try! Something something notrealcommunism.jpg

[Anonymous No.10206344]

>>10206139
>fiction books

[Anonymous No.10207271]

>>10203710
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.10207284]

>>10203781
>I learned about marx through /pol/ memes
lmaoing @ your life

[Anonymous No.10207308]

>>10206150
Stalin did the best he could, the USSR was a sincere attempt to achieve socialism with many notable achievements obscured by western propaganda, and its history and dissolution should be studied closely since it's far from being a simple case. If you're expecting typical socialist-lite apologetics about REAL communism and how Trotsky would have instituted a democratic utopia, you won't get it from me.

I recommend reading 1) Alec Nove's Economic History of the USSR ; 2) Socialism Betrayed by Keeran & Kenny. The former is a critical treatment, the latter sympathetic, both are very enlightening.

[Anonymous No.10207338]

>>10204012
Any curtailing of the free market would necessitate a command and control economy run by a central authority, which ends up impeding material progress and making things objectively worse wherever it's tried. You're basically upset that living in what's close to the best of all possible worlds still doesn't mean that economic concerns disappear entirely.

Also, capitalism is the only thing capable of getting us to a post-scarcity economy.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.10207347]

>>10203691
Even Marx understood the importance of culture. It's the soil of a civilization, and the only real bulwark against atomization and social dislocation. If we don't have common values the sense of community necessary to sustain the relatively corrupt-free government necessary for socialism (or any other economic system) isn't possible. Culture matters MORE than class, if anything.

[Anonymous No.10207355]

>>10207338
False, production of goods could be dynamically planned by cooperating industries represented by elected workers, and collectively agreed on via a parliament-like legal structure.
See: syndicalism

[Anonymous No.10207370]

>>10207355
>this hypothetical system with apparatchiks representing workers is less susceptible to corruption because elections always work
>introducing another separate hierarchy that's legally capable of controlling capital isn't going to lead to fuck ups
Good luck with your "dynamically planned" economy. Good luck finding a single economist who can actually model an economy.

[Anonymous No.10207373]

>>10203691
Hang yourself.

[Anonymous No.10207379]

>>10207370
There is no "capital" as such to control if the economy as a whole is based on the direct satisfaction of use-values according to social planning. Capital relies on a market exchange structure.

[Anonymous No.10207406]

>>10207379
>the direct satisfaction of use-values
You're on a literature board and you haven't read enough to actually understand what motivates human beings. Objects aren't always utilitarian. The accumulation of objects is often a means rather than an end in itself; a means of obtaining status or of satisfying an emotional need that only you understand. Objects are imbued with more obscure meaning than materialists are capable of understanding, hence the obsession men have with religious artifacts and great architecture. This is why people work hard, and what gets them up in the morning: to obtain objects that are exclusive and culturally significant. A world without that sort of striving is a world without people.

[Anonymous No.10207413]

>>10207406
Lmao, what a bunch of absolute horseshit.
Read Marx buddy

[Anonymous No.10207416]

>>10207308

i recommend reading a history book lmao

socialism has never won an ideological war in any place that mattered

[Anonymous No.10207420]

>>10207413
I have read Marx. Good non-reply.

People have inherent drives that are independent of their socialization. Once you realize this, all of the nonsense disappears.

[Anonymous No.10207728]

>>10207420
Marx explicitly addresses commodity fetishism and hoarding in the 1st part of Kapital,which you must have skipped over. This is another classic "human nature is x even though societies prior to capitalism functioned entirely differently but I haven't read an economic history" poster.

[Anonymous No.10207776]

>>10207728
Societies that haven't imbued objects with meaning never existed. It's the instinct that manifests itself as an appreciation for aesthetics and ritual. The early Marxist historians who pointed to societies that didn't have said appreciation were working off primitive archeology and deliberately interpreting data to fit their pre-formed narrative (Rousseau was especially guilty of this). Marx's conception of "commodity fetishism" really only works as descriptive.

[Anonymous No.10207847]

>>10207776
>"There are other types of fetishism so commodity fetishism is a human instinct"

[Anonymous No.10207862]

What if I don't want to be equal? What if I want more than someone else? I don't like most people, I have a competition in me. I just want to be on my own away from everyone else, you are forcing me to be social, you are forcing me into society. Just leave me be, let me hoard my money and anime and leave me be.

[Anonymous No.10207864]

I would be more down with this marxist socialism if I didn't have to share things with niggers and muslims.

[Anonymous No.10207867]

>>10207864
If the Jews share things with you, the least you could do is share them with your fellow subhumans.

[Anonymous No.10207870]

>>10207867
Not a fan of those guys either really. Maybe they should stay in Israel and share amongst themselves. God knows they've got enough money.

[Anonymous No.10207871]

>>10207847
Commodity fetishism is a manifestation of a human instinct as filtered through a particular culture, not a human instinct in itself. What i'm saying is that the notion that it arises entirely out of capitalism is dumb and simplistic. If that instinct didn't exist, we wouldn't appreciate architecture and painting as much as we do.

[Anonymous No.10207873]

>>10203792
good post anon

[Anonymous No.10207878]

>>10203710
well thats the end of the thread, boys

[Anonymous No.10207889]

>>10207864
Adolescent identitarianism detected. Go back.

[Anonymous No.10207902]

>>10203731
>Right wing movements, which are today's only real threat to globalization
lmao how does it feel to be stuck in polisci theory from 1999

[Anonymous No.10207904]

>>10207889
That's a whole bunch of names you've called me right there. I'm ascared :'( Perhaps you could provide one argument? Cheers cuck

[Anonymous No.10207909]

Marxism doesn't work.

[Anonymous No.10207915]

>>10207889
Wouldn't you believe that it's actually a huge barrier of entry for most people? I would be down to share if my society was homogenous.

[Anonymous No.10207917]

>>10207904
It's pretty simple - your post reveals you to be another dumb drone of identity politics, but ones on the right-wing. Radical feminism, postcolonialism, queer theory and whatever else triggers you, so you adopt race realism and nationalism. Wow, how bold and transgressive! That'll show those Internet feminists! My identity is better than yooouurs!

It's a retarded, contrived conflict to distract us from real struggles and has utterly no project to transcend "globalization", in other words the logical progression of globalised capitalism. You have no theory, no perspective, no sense, just desperate moaning. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.10207937]

>>10207917
The only "triggered" one here is you, my friend. I honestly don't give a shit about radical feminism or any of that other gay shit you mentioned because it has mostly evaporated from modern political discourse and now even people on the left (as evident by this thread) see it as tertiary or irrelevant to their more socialist agendas. In fact many of the theories you mentioned are seen as a symptom of capitalism if anything.
>"globalization", in other words the logical progression of globalised capitalism
Congratulations for defining globalism for me, I really needed that you fucking brainlet :')

[Anonymous No.10207948]

>>10207937
>communism means sharing things with niggers and I don't like that
>calls someone a brainlet

[Anonymous No.10207958]

>>10207948
>communism means sharing things with niggers and I don't like that
Pretty much, yes. I don't care for them, socialism requires that I care about people and show solidarity with them as my people. I don't have solidarity with Africans. Sorry!

[Anonymous No.10207964]

>>10207917
#HORSESHOE'D

[Anonymous No.10208061]

>>10207958
Who is "your" people?

Maybe the queen of england?

[Anonymous No.10208085]

>OP espouses non identitarian Marxism
>Entire thread devolves into idpol immediately
>It's another /pol/ is exclusively capable of thinking in resentment episode
You know it takes less than an hour to read the manifesto right?
You might avoid making such an ass of yourself if you had any idea what was being discussed

[Anonymous No.10209465]

>>10208085
>resentment is bad
Slave morality.