/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17638696]

>thesis
Capitalism
>antithesis
Communism
>synthesis
?

[Anonymous No.17638732]

Fascism.

[Anonymous No.17638738]

>>17638696
Social democracy?

[Anonymous No.17638746]

>>17638696
Plato's Republic

[Anonymous No.17638754]

>>17638696
>thesis antithesis synthesis
Kys
>>17638732
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17638775]

>>17638738
This. And neoliberalism.

That particular dialectic has been over for decades.

[Anonymous No.17638876]

>>17638696
>Capitalism
this atheism
>>17638696
>Communism
still atheism
>>17638696
>>synthesis
can only be atheism

>>17638732
>Fascism.
still atheism

>>17638775
>>17638738
1005 atheism again

The great atheist fallacy is that people deeply believe there is a difference between all those atheist -isms

[Anonymous No.17638884]

>>17638696
thesis-antithesis-synthesis is not dialectics.

[Anonymous No.17638885]

>>17638876
Atheism is a synthesis

[Anonymous No.17638894]

>>17638696
communism is not the antithesis to capitalism

[Anonymous No.17638896]

>>17638696
in your heart, you already know the answer

[Anonymous No.17638897]

the Antichrist.

[Anonymous No.17638907]

>>17638696
Distributism

[Anonymous No.17638915]

>>17638746
see
>>17638732

[Anonymous No.17638920]

>>17638894
By all rights it is. It is the diametrical opposite.

[Anonymous No.17638923]

i love hegel because you can use him to justify anything

[Anonymous No.17638926]

>>17638920
it's not

[Anonymous No.17638929]

>>17638926
What is the opposite of capitalism then?

[Anonymous No.17638933]

>>17638696
It's
>capitalism
>socialism
>communism
Retard

[Anonymous No.17638955]

>>17638929
that's not how dialectics works

[Anonymous No.17638962]

>>17638955
uhh yes it is

thesis: proposition
antithesis: anti-proposition

[Anonymous No.17638963]

>thesis
your mom
>antithesis
me
>synthesis
you

[Anonymous No.17638969]

>>17638962
thesis-antithesis-synthesis isn't dialectics first of all that's a meme. dialectics is immanent critique.

[Anonymous No.17638977]

>>17638969
>source: my ass

[Anonymous No.17639218]

Is Hegel about coming to a realization of the absolute, or is it about a radical encounter with the limits of your own subjectivity (pic related)?

[Anonymous No.17639242]

>>17638696
>refutes Hegel
Nothing personal kid.

[Anonymous No.17639617]

>>17638696
Xi’s China. Also, read Kojeve.
>>17639242
Nah, Hegel’s philosophy accounts for Deleuze’s. Nothing escaped Hegel, you can either accept this or find ways to cope.

[Anonymous No.17639632]

>>17638696
Globalism

[Anonymous No.17639635]

>>17638696
How is communism the antithesis of capitalism if capitalism is supposed to naturally develop into communism

[Anonymous No.17639642]

>>17638696
Trannyism.

[Anonymous No.17639662]

>>17638696
Transgenderism

[Anonymous No.17639668]

>>17638696
HOW THE FUCK HAS NO ONE SAID NAZBOL YOU PEOPLE ARE FUCKING RETARDED. NAZBOL MOTHERFUCKING GANG.

[Anonymous No.17639679]

>>17638696
>synthesis
China

[Anonymous No.17639688]

>>17638732
Based

[Anonymous No.17639733]

>>17639218
Hegel is being a piece of shit and wanting to have a career by larping as an intellectual while not being viewed as a christian scholar, so Heglel had to find a way to get people believe that his work is ''verifiable'' like a scientific work.

The best way to do this is by being an atheist, ie a guy who is obsessed with the atheist society and crams as much logic and rationalism into this atheist narcissism.

Don't forget that this piece of shit of heglel literally wanted a new religion which was popular and rational. The asshole literally said this. Like any bugman from the revolution, he was very antichristian, something necessary to have a career.

Hegel the piece shit physicists literally said there can't be any more planets that was discovered at the time. This is the power of the atheist who fucking loves science and yet suck at it.

So hegel the subhuman being an atheist, he wanted to systematize all this shallow hype of rationalisms while still wanting be idolized, and of course he completely fails for anybody with double digit IQ.

Now wonder a jew neet like marx who fucking loves science and yet can't even understand derivatives idolized this piece of shit. Hence all this narcissistic crap about dialectical materialism.

Heglel is r8ddit. He is a pure product of the french bourgeoisie and the deification of the allegedly rationalist public servants.
The dialectics is atheism turned inwards, ie narcissism, thus all the neurotic teens here shills his brain turds.

The french revolution has been a disaster for the human race.

[Anonymous No.17639786]

>>17638884
It is dialectics, you fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.17640518]

>>17638696
Capitalism is synthesized by communism! Contradiction of capitalism that is solved by communism is the contradiction between worker and capitalist, which is capitalism, synthesis: Workers overthrow capitalism and collectively control the means of production.

[Anonymous No.17640536]

>thesis
your mom
>antithesis
me
>synthesis
a lot of sex

[Anonymous No.17640687]

>>17640518
But communism failed, so there must have been some antithesis to it, right?

[Anonymous No.17640748]

>>17638732
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17640754]

>>17638696
Salvation

[Anonymous No.17640764]

>>17639733
>Heglel is r8ddit
while using reddit spacing.

[Anonymous No.17640869]

>>17638732
Based
>>17640754
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17640886]

>>17638696
Nigganomics

[Anonymous No.17640950]

the antithesis is revolution, the synthesis communism.

>>17638732
thats just capitalism with more larping

[Anonymous No.17640986]

IF YOU SEE HEGEL KILL HIM

[Anonymous No.17641020]

>>17640986

[Anonymous No.17641037]

Do Communists actually believe that capitalism will develop into communism? I mean I understand that these people aren't that intelligent but this is just pathetic.

[Anonymous No.17641063]

>>17641037
Cope

[Anonymous No.17641111]

>>17641063
Communists are coping lmao.

[Anonymous No.17641127]

>>17641111
Checked
>friendly reminder that communism has never worked in real life

[Anonymous No.17641144]

>>17638920
Communism is ultra-capitalism. It's a complete corporate monopoly enforced via violence. I don't understand how people don't see the government as anything other than a corporation.

[Anonymous No.17641152]

>>17638929
Anarcho primitivism.
>>17641127
The chinese communist model is working extremely well. So well in fact that the United States is modeling itself after china.

[Anonymous No.17641171]

>>17641152
>China
>Communist

[Anonymous No.17641175]

>>17641171
>le no true scottsman

[Anonymous No.17641239]

>>17641152
>The chinese communist model is working extremely well.
No it isn't.

[Anonymous No.17641315]

>>17641239
Their gdp just surpassed the west while destroying all other economies via a virus they accidentally leaked. They elected Biden who immediately repealed the tariffs against them via an admitted oligarchy of the rich rigging the election. They're doing quite well.

[Anonymous No.17641335]

>>17641315
Oh I should also mention that they own the mineral mining rights to nearly all of africa and thus stand to profit most in battery manufacturing while westerners slowly ban fossil fuels.

[Anonymous No.17641378]

Keynesian welfare state

[Anonymous No.17641409]

>>17638696
Syndicalism

[Anonymous No.17641539]

>>17638907
thanks for the reading list Dave hope your hiatus ends soon

[Anonymous No.17641733]

>>17638696
peepee in poopoo

[Anonymous No.17641739]

>>17641315
>>17641335
Take your meds.

[Anonymous No.17641835]

State capitalism as the westerners like to call it.

[Anonymous No.17641839]

>>17639786
no it's not. see>>17638969

[Anonymous No.17641841]

>>17638696
Communism isn’t the antithesis of capitalism lol.

[Anonymous No.17641858]

>>17641152
>The chinese communist model
good to know that Communism allows having thousands of billionaires and a mostly private economy. If you guys were more clear about this I think people might join the commie team

[Anonymous No.17641915]

>>17641858
You already have anon.

[Anonymous No.17641916]

>>17638696
>thesis
capitalis
>antithesis
dictatorship of the proletariat
>synthesis
communism

[Anonymous No.17641920]

>>17638969
this

[Anonymous No.17641927]

>>17639786
it's kant and fichte dialectics, not hegelian dialectics, inmanent critique is the hegelian dialectics

[Anonymous No.17641971]

>>17641915
I have joined no team at all, and no team would accept me, I'd bring bad PR. If you would like to hire me to insult your team in a 'look how pathetic our enemies are' ploy I will work for a very reasonable fee, you can even just send me sandwiches twice a day

[Anonymous No.17642000]

>>17638732
fpwp

[Anonymous No.17642009]

>>17638696
Social Democratic Anarcho-Capitalism

[Anonymous No.17642016]

truly embarrassing thread. I thought it was good news that this board was getting around to discuss hegel more but I guess I was wrong to get my hopes up. If you think hegel or anything about dialectics involves "synthesis" you are beyond help

[Anonymous No.17642021]

>>17638696
>thesis
Paleocapitalism
>antithesis
Threat of Communism
>synthesis
Neocapitalism

[Anonymous No.17642024]

illiterate pseud thread

[Anonymous No.17642123]

>>17641315
>>17641335
The chink flu is a myth, Chinese couldn't have foreseen that the western governments are stupid enough to close everything down because of a harmless flu anyways. However, just before the outbreak, there were the Military World Games in Wuhan, and with the US participants being exceptionally and unexpectedly bad this year, one could also suspect...

[Anonymous No.17642348]

>>17638696
>thesis
Capitalism
>antithesis,
False communism, aka Statist single party vanguard of the proletariat
>Synthesis
Libertarian Capitalism
>antithesis
Libertarian communism
>Synthesis
?

[Anonymous No.17642537]

>>17642348
shut up vaushite lol
everything is just capitalism with different branding

[Anonymous No.17642547]

>>17638696
tl;dr.

[Anonymous No.17642578]

>>17638696
communism is the synthesis, the antithesis is the crisis of overproduction

[Anonymous No.17642593]

>>17642578
>the crisis of overproduction
how is overproduction real, just produce less stuff lmao, like nigga walk away from the factory

[Anonymous No.17642617]

>>17640687
Socialism didnt fail because socialism has an inherent contradiction that is synthesized by something else (especially not capitalism) but rather because the material conditions and political superstructure, political and economical mistakes led to developments that led to the fall of socialism.

Dialectal developments dont always have to move progressive and forward, you can also develop backwards, as was the case with the fall of socialism

[Anonymous No.17642664]

>>17641839
>>17641927
There isn't a mention of Hegelian dialectics in >>17638884. OP posted an image of Hegel, but never stated that he's talking about Hegelian dialectics. It's still a retarded post, but now you get to be retarded with it.

[Anonymous No.17642757]

>>17638696
Neo liberalism

[Anonymous No.17642802]

>>17639668
I'm glad you still remember :)

[Anonymous No.17642962]

>>17639679
/thread

[Anonymous No.17642979]

>>17642593
Market saturation is something real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_saturation
Combined in increase in productivitiy, which reduce value, it reaches a point where products cannot be sold anymore, capital cannot accumulate anymore, and the whole system reach it's contradiction.

Even if you produce less stuff, the value of each item will still go down through time, due to the increase in mechanization.

[Anonymous No.17642985]

>>17641037
Capitalism is doomed to fail. Firms will cease to be profitable, the environment is already collapsing. What is made of the crisis is up to us.

[Anonymous No.17642986]

>>17638696
To materialists ideology has no history and rather the dialect would be t-bourgeois class a-proletarian class s-negation of class struggle

[Anonymous No.17643015]

>>17638732
Fascism is what happens when capitalists start feeling threatened, so they murder everyone they don't like.

[Anonymous No.17643026]

>>17642537
When i said libertarian capitalism, it was used as a synonym of anarcho Capitalism. People are not ready for communism anyway. So better push anarcho Capitalism.

[Anonymous No.17643039]

>>17643015
Shut up, sóyjak

[Anonymous No.17643054]

>>17642979
Then that particular item won't be profitable and people will try to produce/sell other stuff

[Anonymous No.17643077]

>>17642985
Yes obviously. But i feel people are far from being ready. They can wake up pretty quickly, meaning, in a few decades, but as for today, they cling way too much to their shiny shit.
Until they realize that they have nothing, they will continue to cling to this dream that some day they'll have more.

[Anonymous No.17643080]

>>17643039
Prove me wrong faggot if you think you know shit about history

[Anonymous No.17643091]

>>17642985
>Firms will cease to be profitable,
proofs

[Anonymous No.17643092]

>>17643015
t. historically illiterate

[Anonymous No.17643094]

>>17643015
Not exactly this, but obviously, fascism is not what internet right wing think it is.

[Anonymous No.17643103]

(...)
Explanation (of the obvious).
Wages under Hitler stagnated.

[Anonymous No.17643108]

>>17643015
>start feeling threatened
I wonder why Germans in the 30s would consider commies a threat lmao

[Anonymous No.17643120]

>>17643026
this is retarded
ancap or accelerationism or whatever the fuck is for literal children
every market is was and always will be planned
>People are not ready for communism anyway
Do you mean individuals or civilization? Seriously go back to politigram or wherever the fuck you people find new lifestyle brands to cope

[Anonymous No.17643138]

>>17643054
You cannot continuously invent and sell stuff, especially if they are useless. Capitalism gave us coverage of most of our material social needs. Now the markets are saturated, the rate of profit is low, And there isn't much more social needs to cover. Even if some new social needs are found, the production of consumption items to cover them would quickly saturate the market, due to the high level of productivity. E.g: smartphone market got saturated pretty fast, in less than a decade:
https://www.intertrust.com/blog/is-the-smartphone-market-saturated-mobile-experts-answer/

[Anonymous No.17643152]

>>17643138
>You cannot continuously invent and sell stuff, especially if they are useless.
you absolutely can though, for one thing people will always buy stuff as a status signal if they can, that game is eternal, and you can also just psyop people into buying stuff with ads

[Anonymous No.17643154]

>>17643120
>individuals
Yes individuals. We see the mode of production, and it's obvious collapse. But they don't see shit. They just think we are through some difficulties, and that things might go better in a few years.
On the other hand, the "elites" push forward neo-feudalism (Klaus Schab, Great reaset).

[Anonymous No.17643176]

>>17643091
See attached graph of rate of profit.
The symptom of this is the growth of monopolization and rapid speculation. No longer is it sufficient for a firm to occupy a niche, it now must be everything, and the best at it. See Disney, Alphabet, Amazon, and the trajectory of every tech unicorn in the past decade

[Anonymous No.17643180]

>>17638907
give me a brief breakdown of that system

[Anonymous No.17643182]

>>17643152
I don't think it'll work. As time goes, people will see time, as the real value of life. Not shiny stuff. Thus they'll stop buying the most expensive shit, Even if Apple luxury product economy was a thing, it only delays the inevitable tendency of the rate of profit to fall. Even $6000 entry level mac pro will cost only $400 in a few decades. You cannot sell your product 10 times it's value, to make artificial profit. Value diminish with time, and the rate of profit with it.

[Anonymous No.17643223]

>>17643176
That shows it decreasing and seemingly leveling off

[Anonymous No.17643226]

>>17643182
It's been working for decades already, people's 'basic needs' were met a long time ago. The desire to make money and buy stuff is mostly to get into a higher social class, you can always have a bigger house or whatever.

[Anonymous No.17643232]

>>17643015
so neoliberals are fascists?

[Anonymous No.17643239]

>>17643226
>The desire to make money and buy stuff is mostly to get into a higher social class
MOst zoomers don't give a shit about this. All they want to do is play videogames and chill. At least the zoomers i know.

[Anonymous No.17643244]

>>17643015
based and parenti pilled
centrists and dishonest right-wingers wouldn't get it

[Anonymous No.17643255]

>>17643239
zoomers are 20 years old, they don't care seriously about anything, but even then it's not entirely true, they are still trying to get ahead as a whole

[Anonymous No.17643664]

>>17643255
we've given up on everything, consciously or sub-consciously

[Anonymous No.17643684]

>>17638696
Thesis: monarchism
Antithesis: populism (natsoc, democracy, marxism)
Synthesis: constitutional monarchy
Anything past this is an overcorrection. Hell, Kant recognized this and so did most of the enlightenment liberals

[Anonymous No.17643963]

>>17643154
the difference between "anarcho capitalism" and great reset neofeudalism amounts to a fine imaginary line determined by fantasy writers

[Anonymous No.17643982]

>>17643664
video games cost money

[Anonymous No.17643988]

>>17638696
Technocracy

[Anonymous No.17643996]

>>17643982
if only it was that. most popular games are f2p anyway

[Anonymous No.17643997]

>>17638696
Synthetic technocracy

[Anonymous No.17644392]

>>17639617
The refutation of the ontological argument did.

[Anonymous No.17644464]

>>17638876
god not real

[Anonymous No.17644469]

>>17638732
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17644594]

>>17643982
Open source games, unironically. Although it would be better if zoomers did things like sport, reading, outdoors activities, growing vegetables, etc...
>>17643963
Anarcho Capitalism, in my opinion, is possible throught decentralized finance, (DeFi), decentralized money, and decentralized services. Basically it's Capitalism without the State, because it makes the State redundant. I'm Libertarian Marxist, so i don't give a shit anarcho-Capitalism, and think it aims low, but if i'm honest, i have to accept that anarcho Capitalism might have a few decades of glory in the coming future.
>>17643664
Don't worry, you don't miss much. What did you give up exactly, a big car? A big house with a swimming pool? Holidays in the Caribbean?
If you want kids, it's cheap. If you want to learn, knowledge has never been so easily accessible. If you want nature, there is still quite a lot of it.

[Anonymous No.17644598]

>>17638696
Anarchism.

All the worthwhile aspects of capitalism:
- allows and rewards private initiative.
- that's literally the only good thing about it
All the worthwhile aspects of authoritarian socialism:
- collective action to solve social problems at the macro level (as opposed to hurrg durrg vote with ur wallet)
- No one marginalized or treated as expendable.

The dialectic, for me, goes like this: Both Cap and Com are attempts to dodge the same intractable problem: It's very hard to sit down with your peers and arrive at a consensus. We all got oversized egos. We all have our little narratives of how we want the assembly to go. But how it's actually supposed to go is that you shut up and listen for 98% of the time. That's real politics. The only real politics. Consensus government of sub-dunbar's number-sized communities.
The synthesis is humanity learning to grow up and face this reality. There are no shortcuts to this process that don't entail the dehumanization of a majority of people.

[Anonymous No.17644606]

>>17639668
see>>17638896
GANG GANG GANG

[Anonymous No.17644627]

>>17643244
but of course metrosexual trust fund kids do.

[Anonymous No.17644753]

>>17644598
Huterrites and Kibbutzim are sub dunbar number sized anyway.
Maybe we are going toward a longer path, but a unified humanity throught the network. Maybe sub dunbar's number is not what we really want. Capitalism is dissolving particularism, and people chosed it, and perpetually validate it, even today. Maybe, they truly want to become one. Exchange value is the bridge from primitive communist tribe, to unified communist humanity.

[Anonymous No.17644824]

>>17644753
Like I mentioned in passing, top-down structures are dehumanizing. Global communism under a central authority is maximum dehumanization for the maximum number of people.
It's very simple. Part of being human is stepping into your responsibility as a member of the human community. Under mama state we are spoiled, we don't need to worry about those pesky responsibilities. Under Papa state we get smacked if we try anyways.
Self government is simultaneously a duty and a privilege. We need to be free, you see it everywhere nowadays.

[Anonymous No.17644926]

>>17644824
>Like I mentioned in passing, top-down structures are dehumanizing. Global communism under a central authority.
That is not how libertarian marxists view communism. They were the first to criticize bolshevism, before, during, and after the fact. (Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Kautsky, Guy Debord...) Nobody seem to understand what it is. We don't want to force you, but to convince you. We want to push the proletarians to abolish wage labor themselves. Not to force them. We might get traction one day, but 2021 is clearly not the time.

[Anonymous No.17645040]

>>17641927
dunning-kruger

[Anonymous No.17645371]

>>17644926
If there is a "We" and a "them" that's already not revolutionary politics, tbqh.
Also, I'm not really drawing from any of those libertarian marxists you mention, you just kinda slapped that label on me. No one has a monopoly on anarchism.

[Anonymous No.17645986]

>>17642664
dialectics applied to social/culturals forms or goberment was a hegelian thing
>>17645040
go back to redit with your wikipedia memes

[Anonymous No.17646005]

>>17642664
the sad thing is that you think writing this fag shit makes you somewhat smart

[Anonymous No.17646018]

>>17638876
What the fuck are you talking about? How did you manage to drag God info this?

[Anonymous No.17646190]

Woke Capitalism

[Anonymous No.17647053]

>>17638884
Yes it is

[Anonymous No.17647121]

As a traditionalist who would be lumped in with fascism, I cannot understand why Marxists/communists or whatever, think that their accurate critique of capitalism has to have another form of materialism to counter it.
You know who isn’t controlled by bankers and companies and been completely subverted? People like the Amish, people who have had strict belief systems, groups that orient themselves to a higher purpose. They have full control over their lands and they maintain their own production, but they don’t need capitalism’s means of production or whatever.
The problem commies seem to have, is they have nothing to believe in (other than leftism itself) and they will not be content until they have everything that is a product of capitalism under their control - which will never happen. So reject it, and stop being controlled by materialism. Read the stoics or something, you whining pussies.

[Anonymous No.17647202]

>>17639733
retard take, go read Hegel's lectures on religion

[Anonymous No.17647214]

>>17642123
Foreseen? They're bribing for it to continue.

[Anonymous No.17647277]

>>17639733
do you truly understand derivatives, anon?

[Anonymous No.17647299]

>>17647121
It's not only about material. It's about abolishing wage labor, the society of the spectacle, alienation. commodity fetischism.
>The problem commies seem to have, is they have nothing to believe in (other than leftism itself) and they will not be content until they have everything that is a product of capitalism under their control
Why wouldn't the products of Capitalism not belong to proletarians? They built this world. These factories, made these products. These machines, weren't built by the owner of the means of production, but by the workers. The owner only "supervised" production.

[Anonymous No.17647305]

(...)
(Why wouldn't the products of Capitalism belong to proletarians?)

[Anonymous No.17647309]

>>17647121
Amish are capitalists according to commies anon. Anyone who isn't explicitly class-conscious and communist is an enemy of the revolution.

[Anonymous No.17647327]

>>17647299
>It's about abolishing wage labor, the society of the spectacle, alienation. commodity fetischism.
It's funny how reactionary communism really is when it comes down to it. You want to abolish all of these things, and replace them with... What exactly? Just a spiritual void where everyone "improoooves" all day, every day? Do you think that is going to be mentally or spiritually healthy for anyone? Sure, maybe you got rid of commodity fetishism, but what have you got now? Meaningless hedonism at best.

[Anonymous No.17647377]

>>17638696
Cultural Marxist Capitalism

[Anonymous No.17647390]

>>17639733
-11/10
worst bait in a long time

[Anonymous No.17647406]

>>17647327
>You want to abolish all of these things, and replace them with... What exactly? Just a spiritual void where everyone "improoooves" all day, every day? Do you think that is going to be mentally or spiritually healthy for anyone?
How can there true spirituality in Capitalism?
How can we be spiritual beings, if we are not even able to have production relationships based on equality.
Improving the social relation is indirectly improving spirituality.

[Anonymous No.17647471]

>>17647406
You're coming at this from the wrong angle, because your belief is that a meaningful life is impossible unless everyone is made the same, ie equal. In reality, it is the exact opposite. Meaning can only really exist by the quest of finding, or better yet distinguishing, one's place in a "hierarchy", not by chance or luck, but by the strength and determination of one's own character and individuality. Egalitarianism strips all of this potential away, and results in arbitrary social relationships based on nothing. People just share in resources, have sex, or whatnot, and voila, that is the extent of life. In my opinion, there are probably some people who would delight in this type of life, but I am not one of them, and I think it would be the lowest type of person. Anyone with a higher level of self-respect and ambition would find it trivial and insulting.

>How can there true spirituality in Capitalism?
You're partly right here, it just depends how you're using the term. In modern capitalism, with class conflict, capital idolatry, materialism, and so forth, you can't. All higher values are replaced by capital and money. Marxists are at least right about this much. The problem is the application of these observations to inequality itself, which is that saying that inequality itself is the source of these ailments, is false. The source is fundamentally what I would call spiritual, but what a more secular person would call psychological, cultural or even philosophical. Capitalism as we know it, in the modern age, is first and foremost only possible because we allow our minds to sink to that level. This is what communists don't get: You ARE NOT passive with respect to most of the psychological problems created by modern capitalism, you CAN, on a personal level, make them ineffectual and meaningless, thereby resisting the constant psychic warfare waged by capitalism. This is exactly what I've done. I hate consumerism, materialism, etc., but none of it effects me anymore even when it's spammed in my face. I don't hate it, I just don't think about it because I have control over my own mind. Now, if the highest and most intelligent minds in our societies had been capable of this, the philosophical and political thought which led to where we are now may never have eventuated, and capitalism as we know it would not exist. Thus, it's not a matter of extinguishing inequality, but radically altering our collective spirit. Do that, and crapitalism collapses by itselfs, because it is only the spiritual sum of its constituents.

[Anonymous No.17647478]

>>17647471
>but none of it effects
affects*

[Anonymous No.17647522]

>>17638732
LMAO leftoids seething

[Anonymous No.17647550]

>>17638696
capitalism and communism are not thesis and antithesis because they are both manofestations of capitalism, as such they are both fundamentally the same

[Anonymous No.17647569]

>>17638775
Neoliberalism is the antithesis of socdem

[Anonymous No.17647580]

>>17638732
Based.
Read Tomorrow We Live by Mosley, it'll help copers to understand.

[Anonymous No.17647760]

>>17647471
>You're coming at this from the wrong angle, because your belief is that a meaningful life is impossible unless everyone is made the same, ie equal. In reality, it is the exact opposite. Meaning can only really exist by the quest of finding, or better yet distinguishing, one's place in a "hierarchy", not by chance or luck, but by the strength and determination of one's own character and individuality. Egalitarianism strips all of this potential away, and results in arbitrary social relationships based on nothing.
This is not Marx's view of equality. Marx didn't believe in equality. Marx literally said in Critique of the Gotha program that law should not be equal, but unequal. It is just for convenience, and practicality, that in the lower phase of communism, law should be equal. By the way, Capitalism is, for the proletarian, an equal system. You can have the best factory worker of the work, he would be paid the same as a mediocre factory worker. if you exclude salary bonuses. Also, we never said that natural hierarchy shouldn't exist. It's hierarchy based on Capital possession that we don't like. In inferior and superior communism, project leader could be elected, and manage a project. They would be elected because they have charisma, or ideas. They wouldn't be in charge because they have a lot of Capital. Capitalism is a nest of lies. Lies about wars in the middle east. Lies about the Corona virus. False flags. I grew up in this society. Who would want this? The "leaders" cannot govern throught truth, because they need to make more profit. So they govern throught lies. In a non profit based mode of production, those lies wouldn't be necessary. Because the Capitalist class wouldn't have to maintain itself into place: it would not exist anymore. They lie because they are the first to want the perpetuate this mode of production. Proletarians still want, but could be open to new suggestion. The "elite", definitively isn't open to any classless society.
>Now, if the highest and most intelligent minds in our societies had been capable of this, the philosophical and political thought which led to where we are now may never have eventuated
Almost everyone wanted productivity enhancement throught Capitalism. Those who chose not to, disappeared, or are not much talked about.
>You ARE NOT passive with respect to most of the psychological problems created by modern capitalism,
Social relations have a lot of inertia. There take decades to fade away. Some still want fascism, which is itself something grounded ideologically in medieval times, that correspond to medieval relationship of production, based on land rent. In any case, i believe the relationships of production, determines the ideology, and not the other way round. You cannot swim against the stream, if the stream keeps everybody fed, warm and "happy".

[Anonymous No.17647816]

(...)
By the way, Capitalists (owners of the means of production) will, and are, trying to sabotage the natural evolution of the relationship of production. More time advance, more the mode of production should naturally morph into something more horizontal. But obviously, the owners of the means of production don't want this. So they create a false narrative, and give false solution. Great reset is about this. They want to artificially divert the natural course of history. Of course, it won't work in the long run, but they can use delaying tactics which would benefit their interests, and give us some shitty decades to come. These people don't want to work. They want to live from Capital gains, which is crystallized work, extracted from the proletarians. It's a system based on parasitism.

[Anonymous No.17647895]

>>17643232
yes

[Anonymous No.17647963]

>>17647760
>You can have the best factory worker of the work, he would be paid the same as a mediocre factory worker.
I find this thing actually quite hillarious. Back then under commies there was more inequality amongst workers within the same profession, as they could become shock workers, or Stakhanovtsi based either on their hard work or coming up with novel ideas to improve production process. And those shock workers would receive extraordinary pay, get paraded as local heroes and if they desired so even political advancement.

Honestly it makes me think that the question of socialism vs. capitalism is not "should we be equal or not", but rather "Who should be the heroes of our society? The kosmonaut and the scientist or the investment banker and the marketting specialist"?

[Anonymous No.17648018]

>>17638907
Based. Came here to post this.

[Anonymous No.17648040]

>>17638696
bussy gang

[Anonymous No.17648049]

>>17638732
fpbp, that was the whole idea, unfortunately you can't mix shit with chocolate to obtain edible shit only inedible chocolate, thus fascism failed and Hegel and Marx both got disproved beyond any reasonable doubt just like democracy separation of powers and checks and balances did recently.

[Tantra Anon No.17648090]

>>17643015
Nah. Fascism fucking kills capitalism. It's totally a military reaction against capitalism, since it rejects its progressive dynamics of internationalization and dependence.

[Anonymous No.17648095]

>>17647963
>I find this thing actually quite hillarious. Back then under commies there was more inequality amongst workers within the same profession, as they could become shock workers, or Stakhanovtsi based either on their hard work or coming up with novel ideas to improve production process. And those shock workers would receive extraordinary pay, get paraded as local heroes and if they desired so even political advancement.
Once of for all, get this straight: Libertarian Marxists do NOT endorse vanguardism. vanguard communism, Bolshevism, State Capitalism. Those bolsheviks weren't "commies". We have respect for the Paris commune (1871), some respect for the revolutionary Catalonia (1936-1937), the Budapest commune (1956). Personally, i have respect for the Israeli Kibbutz, or the Huterrite communities. Not for Castro or Lenin.
About what you said, of course, bolshevism wasn't communism, because the social relation, and the relation of production, were archaic, in this Russian country which only abolished serfdom in the 1860s. You do not abolish the social relation overnight with a law.
Competition, and hierarchy, in Capitalism or bolshevism (State Capitalism, vanguardism), were indeed hierarchy based on who can produce more, and/or more efficiently. It's not about wisdom, or spirituality. Today, the most real spiritual people get 10k view on youtube. Elon Musk gets millions.
It's not about the absence of hierarchy, it's about separating hierarchy relationship with money. How can you respect a Capitalist, who is high in the current social relation hierarchy, but who is a liar? The worse it gets, the worse they lie. Even some normies start to notice the lies.

[Anonymous No.17648120]

>>17648095
>Libertarian
You are an american, arent you? How disgusting...

[Anonymous No.17648329]

>>17643180
everyone gets a lil plot of land to manage and make a living on, fuck the state, fuck big companies.

[Anonymous No.17648340]

>>17648329
literally my dream

i would give up being a big brain and having the right to vote if it meant i could live a comfy life on a homestead with a wife and 8 children before i died at the age of 50 of dysentry and im not even memeing

[Anonymous No.17648345]

>>17648049
Fascism didn't fail though, it was destroyed by outside forces(alliance of capitalists and communists in ww2 that vastly outnumbered it). You can argue that it would have failed anyway but that's not what happened.

[Anonymous No.17648488]

>>17638732
Clearly the obvious answer. And it makes sense. Not that I buy the Hegelian dialectic

[Anonymous No.17648558]

The trouble with much of current socialist discourse is that while it correctly diagnoses the authoritarian and anti-democratic elements of Capitalism, it pays insufficient attention to the progress achieved by liberalism in criticizing state power. Earlier forms of Socialism like Guild Socialism or Syndicalism have greater promise, focusing on democratically controlled local institutions as opposed to the errors of liberal individualism and communist collectivism. Overall Marxism may have been a negative overall influence on the Socialist movement, being the primary cause of its current tendency towards bureaucracy, welfarism and totalitarianism. This is not to go to the utopian and idealistic extreme of advocating for the dismantling of the state - the point is simply that state power should be limited.

[Anonymous No.17648630]

>>17638696
There is no antithesis or synthesis to capitalism since it is an all encompassing economy of being alive. Unless you talk about communism of the spirit, however I don't see how that should be attached to our current notions of what communism is at all.

[Anonymous No.17648927]

>>17648345
Francisco Franco?

[Anonymous No.17649058]

>>17648120
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Marxism
I'm not, and some americans are okay.

[Anonymous No.17649082]

>>17648927
fair enough, it did fail that time

[Anonymous No.17649335]

>>17649082
Fascism is a restructuring regime. When Capitalism need it in troubled times, it use it, then dump it again.
That's what happened with Napoléon III, which was, in my opinion, a proto-fascist. That's what happened also with Mussolini, who had the back up of Capitalists.

[Anonymous No.17649338]

burgerpunk

[Anonymous No.17650505]

>>17638732
yes

[Anonymous No.17650909]

>>17638696
Accelerate.

[Anonymous No.17651217]

>>17638696
Neoreactionary feudal-cameralist anarcho-capitalism with absolute monarchist characteristics and ethnonationalist tendencies

[Anonymous No.17651988]

>>17643015
>Commies team up with capitalists to kill fascists
>"Fascism is when capitalism feels threatened"
???