Which (leftist) critiques of capitalism are there other than Marx's?

File: 24 KB, 448x314, karl-marx-hip.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:02:56 2011 No.2011424 [Reply] [Original]

Which (leftist) critiques of capitalism are there other than Marx's?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:03:56 2011 No.2011426 >>2011424 Lenin

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:04:56 2011 No.2011429 >>2011426 O.K. Do you know critiques which aren't Marx-like?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:05:56 2011 No.2011431 Hitler >>lol

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:06:56 2011 No.2011434 >>2011431 O.K. Do you know critiques which aren't Marx-like and bullshit?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:07:56 2011 No.2011438 >>2011434 >>2011429 Nope, they all take from Marx.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:09:56 2011 No.2011442 >>2011434 I know of some, but they're not leftist.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:10:56 2011 No.2011447 >>2011442 The 'leftist' adjective was written between parenthesis, so gimme gimme gimme :)

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:10:56 2011 No.2011448 >>2011429 Utopian moralism, anarchist power analysis, anarchist cultural class analyses, instinctive radical labourism. I take it left wing means revolutionary here. Captcha: Syndicale icrelrFo

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:12:56 2011 No.2011452 Citizen Kane, mothafucka

>>	sixty-ten !KMh2W9cfgQ Mon Aug 15 01:13:56 2011 No.2011454 File: 49 KB, 300x300, 189273498623.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011424 bakunin

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:14:56 2011 No.2011456 accelerationism: speed it up until it goes beyond itself, hopefully the better for us...

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:14:56 2011 No.2011458 File: 77 KB, 399x219, 38d3n2jckd0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011448 >I take it left wing means revolutionary here. why would you assume that?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:16:56 2011 No.2011460 >>2011454 anarchist nothx

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:18:56 2011 No.2011464 The 19th and 20th century indicate that class collaboration is doomed to fail. If you support capitalism, you're not on the left.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:18:56 2011 No.2011466 >>2011464 What does that have to do with OP's question?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:19:56 2011 No.2011467

>>2011447
there's a pretty long-running conservative critique of unrestrained capitalism on the grounds that it's incredibly corrosive to communities and traditional forms and institutions. there's also a critique on almost spiritual grounds, because capitalism is offensive to human dignity, which is often made by catholic conservatives. a lot of these critiques don't really get made by people who are within the academic mainstream though. maybe there's some of this in niebuhr, it certainly exists in abundance in chesterton.

>>	sixty-ten !KMh2W9cfgQ Mon Aug 15 01:22:56 2011 No.2011472 File: 13 KB, 230x260, 19862398523.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011460 So, do you actually know anything about anarchism or are you simply dismissing an entire political theory based off of the propaganda you have been fed?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:24:56 2011 No.2011476 File: 19 KB, 460x276, 1303007710235.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011467 >there's also a critique on almost spiritual grounds lol'd hard

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:25:56 2011 No.2011477 >>2011467 I see! >>2011472 OP totally agrees with you.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:26:56 2011 No.2011481 >>2011472 Anarchists are retarded, this is coming from someone who was an anarchist for ~5 years.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:28:56 2011 No.2011484 >>2011481 Can you elaborate on that? I mean, can you explain, in a coherent manner, why you think that the idea of having a leaderless society is retarded?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:30:56 2011 No.2011486 >>2011484 In the absence of leadership, humans just kill and fuck each other. Government sucks but we need it.

sixty-ten !KMh2W9cfgQ Mon Aug 15 01:31:56 2011 No.2011488

>>2011481
>anarchists are retarded
I don't care about anarchists, I care about anarchy.

"Lifestyle anarchists" make up a good amount of so called anarchists and are political dilettantes at best; a residue of a socially minded sect of hipster culture in the 2obscure4u vein. These are the types of anarchists which I wouldn't hesitate to call retarded, but the philosophy they allegedly subscribe to is certainly not so.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:32:56 2011 No.2011489 >>2011484 >leaderless how do you define anarchy? As in, it has no government, right?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:36:56 2011 No.2011499 File: 14 KB, 338x383, 1294305307504.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011486 >In the absence of leadership, humans just kill and fuck each other. Government sucks but we need it. looks like you've thought about this long and hard

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:36:56 2011 No.2011500

>>2011486
I was going to ask you to provide evidence to support your claim, but then backward countries like Somalia came to my mind. I think your claim is correct if anarchy is introduced to a society which hasn't developed a high level of collective social intelligence. At any rate, there are also many cases (the Paris commune, Catalonia, etc.) where people didn't kill each other under anarchy. So I guess it all depends on the society.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:36:56 2011 No.2011501

>>2011486

Because you need someone to hold you on a leash in order to not kill everyone you meet

Because you can't walk into a store without wiping your dick on someone's shoe.

Because the police are there at every waking moment to stop chaos from happening on it's own.

Because for the thousands of years without police humans murdered each other like they were part atomic bomb.

Because herpderp

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:38:56 2011 No.2011508
File: 8 KB, 240x182, 123975023652.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2011486
propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda propaganda

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:39:56 2011 No.2011511 autocracy is more viable than anarchy even my cat knows that. wait, i don't have a cat

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:42:56 2011 No.2011525 The main problem I have with anarchy is this: Who protects you from getting screwed by other people? (how will you punish murders? what if someone doesn't hold their part of a contract? would there even be contracts?)

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:47:56 2011 No.2011546 >>2011525 basically, mob rule. Also, any contracts that get broken would probably result in a pretty crappy lifestyle for the contract breaker (because reputation as contract breaker/other part of contract trying to kill/get even with them)

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:49:56 2011 No.2011551
File: 41 KB, 250x250, 1308028275121.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2011511
>autocracy is more viable than anarchy
No shit. The ease in which a set of political ideas can be implemented into a populace has no relation to legitimacy of those ideas.

Certainly, no form of government (or organization of peoples) is objectively better than any other, but there are some which lend themselves to establishing a more universally humane society. Is that objectively better than a society in which 99% live in squalor? No, but I personally would gain more enjoyment by striving for a society whose goal is maximal freedom and fairness, no matter how difficult it is to implement.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:51:56 2011 No.2011558

>>2011525

Well first you have to look at the main causes of murder. Poverty breeding ignorance, hatred, and all around shittiness is a fairly major factor.

When you minimize poverty, in such as providing everyone with sufficient food, shelter, and general well-being, you solve a large part of the problem. There's really not much to be pissed off if you can be garaunteed food and shelter.

Then you also look at the fact that everyone is free to be able to defend themselves. Nothing stops you from walking around with some from of protection such as a gun or knife. I mean you likely won't really need to, but if you feel the need, whatever.

But there will still be murder. You can't really prevent it, even with a all out police state, it'd be impossible to stop. The thing is it will be much less common place when you eliminate the reasons behind it.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:53:56 2011 No.2011563

>>2011546
What if the contract breaker is walmart? Do you honestly think that a single person who gets fucked by walmart would have the same pull as walmart in image upkeep?

Also, saying "basically mob rule" is not very comforting. It seems like it would make it way easier for groups of radicals to get together, get powerful (because no one has a right to disturb them) and then take it out on the people nearby.

>>	Gozer !!PJZO93aXoUv Mon Aug 15 01:54:56 2011 No.2011570 >>2011429 Go for the left-anarchists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 01:55:56 2011 No.2011571 >>2011563 Walmart breaking a contract would be a problem in anarcho-capitalism (which isn't proper capitalism in my book). There wouldn't be a Walmart to start with in a proper "socialist" anarchist society.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:04:56 2011 No.2011592 >>2011571 what would stop companies from existing and expanding?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:06:56 2011 No.2011599 >>2011592 Because most anarchist models are socialist, in the sense that private ownership of means of production are abolished.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:07:56 2011 No.2011601

Hey OP,

If you want an incredible read check out both Karl Polayni and Joseph Schumpeter (listed respectively). The former concentrates on Capitalism's unethical transformation of the relationship between market and society. The latter critiques Marx and Capitalism (big C) heavily while sketching out an alternative socialist plan.

http://www.amazon.com/Great-Transformation-Political-Economic-Origins/dp/080705643X/ref=pd_sim_b_7

http://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Socialism-Democracy-Joseph-Schumpeter/dp/0061561614/ref=sr_1_1?ie=U
TF8&qid=1313388338&sr=8-1

>>	Gozer !!PJZO93aXoUv Mon Aug 15 02:07:56 2011 No.2011604 >>2011592 No accepted common currency, private ownership of the means of production is abolished, and a ton of other things.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:12:56 2011 No.2011613 >>2011604 how would a computer get made in this system? (computers just an example, I don't understand how production would work)

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:15:56 2011 No.2011622 >>2011613 There would be factories which would produce computers, only those factories would not be owned by anyone and would be directly run by the workers who would like to work there.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:20:56 2011 No.2011629 >>2011622 how would the factories get there? Also, how would you get the materials to build a factory/computers? And would you just give computers away all willy nilly... or trade them for other items directly...?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:22:56 2011 No.2011634

>>2011629

They could either take over already existing factories, or if they build a new plant, they could contact a construction organization.

Goods (at least in an anarchist communist society) would be given to whoever needs said goods. Any limited supplies would be rationed out. Basically the idea is that the community will provide for you so long as you provide for the community in some fashion.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:25:56 2011 No.2011638

>>2011629
There are many proposed models for economies not based on markets (anarchism being one of them). Anarcho-syndicalism proposes having syndicates to run everything. I myself forsee a society based on a non-centralised digital currency (like bitcoin) to represent units of value produced by workers where the economy is run using the model proposed in 'Towards a New Socialism' (available online http://www.helmutdunkhase.de/new_socialism.pdf)) until the society achieves a higher collective consciousness and efficiency where money would not actually be needed.

I am intoxicated, excuse my typos.

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 02:33:56 2011 No.2011647

>>2011634

To bad that without the proper functioning of supply and demand via some system of currency, or alternatively, a fuck tonne of bureaucracy, the whole thing is nonviable.

What are you going to do when you have millions of people who want to provide certain services, and no one who wants to do the shit jobs? I anticipate you might answer my question by noting that those who are unskilled will do the shit work as is the case now, because what else are they gonna do, right? The problem is though, that even then, you will still get gluts of certain work (particularly middle-range shit) and certain production of goods, and shortages in others. Markets fluctuate - but oh look, we won't have a market so the fluctuation in supply won't be matched with a fluctuation in value, which would ruin any form of economy because there would ne no way to ensure goods go to those who can best make use of them.

Unless of course you resort to some horrible bureaucracy to regulate it all, and oh look! You have an easily corrupted locus of authority that provides no intrinsic value (not to mention you no longer have anarchism).

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:39:56 2011 No.2011655 >>2011647 Science is the answer, comrade! Mathematics (system theory), computers and computer networks can easily and more efficiently replace bureaucracy. Look at a project like Wikipedia!

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:40:56 2011 No.2011659 >>2011655 wikipedia is a pretty bad model for organization man

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:42:56 2011 No.2011663 >>2011655 who will fund the researchers needed to produce these innovations?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:43:56 2011 No.2011666 >>2011663 i been spending a lot of money on your mother, why don't you ask her

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:44:56 2011 No.2011667 >>2011659 My bad! Look instead at the way torrent societies organize themselves and how the p2p protocol itself ensures efficiency. I am the drunk guy of >>2011638 so excuse me if my reply doesn't make much sense to you now, it does for me :)

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:46:56 2011 No.2011671 >>2011666 my mother, much like me, does not subscribe to technological determinism, and so the question is probably something she's never needed to consider.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:47:56 2011 No.2011673 >>2011663 The needs of almost everybody would be met, so you should be asking "what would motivate the researchers to carry out research" rather than "who is going to fund them". The answer is simple: most researchers do research because they enjoy it!

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:49:56 2011 No.2011678 >>2011673 where will they get the equipment to do their research? Who will produce it, and why? I'm talking about world-class laboratories and such. They don't appear out of thin air.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:54:56 2011 No.2011688 >>2011678 Consider the current society with corporates replaced with syndicates (for example). Everything would run as (if not more) efficient than a decentralized managmental model replacing the market.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:56:56 2011 No.2011693 >>2011678 As for why people would even care to manufacture the goods the need, the answer is simple: because they need to! Besides, everyone would be free to do what he pleases. For example, I would both repair bicycles and do mathematics.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 02:59:56 2011 No.2011697

>>2011688
But how do you organize the syndicate? You've got a bunch of researchers at the top and then you've got the janitor who cleans the toilets. Why should you or I want to be this janitor, when we could be something else? Especially when we're "provided for"? Or will we not be provided for if we don't work? And if that's the case, what of people that cannot work, such as the injured or retarded?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:00:56 2011 No.2011699

>>2011647

Most "shit jobs" can be heavily automated or even done by machine. You could communicate needs between different groups through worker's councils what things are in demand and need to be made.

I would make a more elaborate post, but it's late and I'm too tired.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:03:56 2011 No.2011701 >>2011697 Divide janitorial duties evenly. Toilet cleaning rotates between everyone who uses the toilets, etc.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:08:56 2011 No.2011707

>>2011697
>>But how do you organize the syndicate?
Through direct democracy, ofc.
>>Why should you or I want to be this janitor, when we could be something else?
Shitty jobs can, and should, be automated. I can picture a robot janitor, toilets which clean themselves or cleaning utensils which are so easy to use that the researchers would use them to get their mind off the problems they would be working hard at *and* enjoying.
>>Or will we not be provided for if we don't work?
It depends on the implemented economic model and the level of development of the society. At the beginning, I think there would be some sort of vouchers that represent the amount of value one produces that would replace currency. At a later stage, most people might not need to work at all and they would do it just for fun.
>>And if that's the case, what of people that cannot work, such as the injured or retarded?
They would be provided with their needs. There is a difference between not being able to work and not wanting to work, at least at a stage where work does matter.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:11:56 2011 No.2011714

>>2011701
in doing so, you sacrifice efficiency as you have scientists cleaning toilets. It promotes equality, but it sacrifices efficiency.

>>2011693
As for this: what about food? Say I don't like ramen. I don't need it. I just want spaghetti all day every day. Will we produce ramen or spaghetti? The example extends to xbox vs ps3, televisions, and computers. I don't need any of these things. Why should I produce them, or help produce them?

What I'm getting at here is that anarcho-syndicalism seems to me to presume all these things about human economic activity without having a viable approach that isn't technological determinism (we'll automate everything!). I mean, for fuck's sake, if everything is automated, it doesn't matter what economic system you have.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:11:56 2011 No.2011716 >>2011707 how does it feel knowing that the majority of people fear change more than they fear a life of drudgery and economic serfdom

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:12:56 2011 No.2011719 File: 32 KB, 330x357, feels-bad-man.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011716

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:16:56 2011 No.2011726 >>2011714 If nobody wants raman, then nobody would make raman. People who want these things will take part in the production of them.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:16:56 2011 No.2011727

>>2011707
>>2011699
look guys, I know you mean well, but I can't be sold a political and economic theory that's based on technological determinism. It's like saying everything will be perfect eventually because SCIENCE. It's a little more plausible than the Rapture, but it's still not a "solution", any more than "wait a long time" is a "solution" to the political and economic problems of today.

And how about this? How would an anarcho-syndicalist society distribute scarce resources such as rare earth metals and such?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:21:56 2011 No.2011731 >>2011727 I assume anything in scarcity would be rationed out.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:22:56 2011 No.2011734
File: 88 KB, 320x302, Indeed tea.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

what are some great 21st century anarchist manifestos? always been interest in anarcho-syndicalism/ it's left wing elemnts/ everything about it but have a hard time looking for new modern works/ authors

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:22:56 2011 No.2011736 >>2011731 Who does the rationing?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:24:56 2011 No.2011738 >>2011736 Who manages the resources (bandwidth) in a p2p network?

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:26:56 2011 No.2011741 File: 59 KB, 281x263, konata sweet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011734 I'd love some anarchist fiction

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:27:56 2011 No.2011744 File: 7 KB, 314x324, download2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011738 never has this image been more applicable you wouldn't download bread either, as much as you might like to

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 03:31:56 2011 No.2011751

>>2011707

Not all shit jobs CAN be automated though - there are plenty of things that are extremely valuable economically that no one would do but for financial incentive.

You want to automate everything? You want high class scientific and industrial research? Good. You need smelters and refineries, you need mines, you need oil rigs. You think anyone is gonna work on an oil rig or operate dangerous machinery in the Australian desert for the sheer joy of doing so? You think Dairy farmers and forestry workers do what they do because its oh so wonderful to get up at 4am every day and do backbreaking work till 6pm?

Further, even if you eliminate the shit jobs problem, that doesn't solve the problem of desirable jobs. There is a glut of people who do BA degrees - this shows us that currently, given the chance, many many people would like to be academics, teachers, etc - however most end up doing some shitty clerical job thanks to good ol' supply and demand; only the cream rises. You eliminate this system, have fun with your horribly imbalanced society.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:32:56 2011 No.2011754 >>2011734 http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/conquest/toc.html I don't know if you consider it a manifesto, but it's a great read either way. Although it was written in the early 1900's, it's still actually quite relevant.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:33:56 2011 No.2011758 >>2011751 in their eyes it's already horribly unbalanced so it's all the same to them

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:33:56 2011 No.2011759

>>2011744
I meant that efficient order emerges in the p2p networks by itself, same way simpleton ants are capable of running efficient colonies based on a simple set of procedures encoded in their DNA. That 'efficient' set of procedures emerged through evolution and the process is actually 'mimiced' in computer paradigms as evolutionary programming, neural networks and ant colony algorithms.

Bread would be presented, as it is actually presented in the current system, as merely a variable in a huge (as per number of equations) mathematical model.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:38:56 2011 No.2011763 File: 24 KB, 400x300, freaks and geeks.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011741 All I've ever read is the V for Vendetta comic. anyone got something else?

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 03:42:56 2011 No.2011769

Well, I just finished reading down the thread, and it seems you pro-anarchists have nothing else to say other than "science will fix it"; "people that want things will make those things"; and "you don't need bureaucracy or central power b/c syndicates."

Here are some further points on which to ruminate:

1. You don't account for the greed and ambition of men. Men aren't satisfied with merely having their needs met. We want power, as a means to luxury, women, et cet. You say that an anarchist state can be self policing, people will band together to defend their person and property? Sure, but people will also band together merely to prosper via force. Either you'll get perpetual war, or you'll end up with a totalitarian victor.

2. So people who want things will make them? If they are the only one that wants those things, why will society support them in return for their making something society doesn't want? Given society traditionally resists change - there goes a large amount of technological progress.

3. Locally democratic syndicates (which isn't anarchism proper, anyway) are still less efficient than central government. A Westminster govt, with separation of powers is the logical, most efficient, endpoint. What you want to return to is little better than the ancient 'guild' control, with all its monopolistic stagnation.

>>	d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 03:47:56 2011 No.2011778 >>2011758 By 'balanced' I don't mean 'fair.' I mean stable, tenable. This is an important distinction to make. Any theoretical system must strive for the former, but always remain the latter.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:48:56 2011 No.2011780 File: 89 KB, 560x494, ___.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2011481 Why'd ya stop? Because you no longer despise the idea of authority, or because you realized fighting against all authority was too hard?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:50:56 2011 No.2011784
File: 8 KB, 278x181, cabal, argot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There is a lot of "anti-political" work out there, a lot of anarchist strains of thought (though not ALL of them of course!!!), nihilist communism, anti-civilization critiques of our world, and some anti-state communists stuff which I haven't gotten around to reading.
But anyway, google the article "cabal, argot".

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 03:57:56 2011 No.2011803 >>2011501 This. Just today I nearly murdered my friend because you know, I just felt like it, but thankfully the police saw me and shot me in the stomach.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 04:01:56 2011 No.2011809 File: 52 KB, 600x450, 1263874628375.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >this thread.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 08:39:56 2011 No.2012120

>>2011741
>>2011763
Cities of the Red Night, brohemians.
>>2011734
I'm probably gonna get crucified for this, but I actually thought Days of Love, Nights of War was pretty legit. Good for anyone interested in anarchism or situationism, or, you know, personal liberty.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 08:51:56 2011 No.2012138

>>2011467
Um no. Capitalism is freedom, plain and simple. What is corrosive to communities/traditions is government power and leftism.

>>2011486
lol

>>2011663
halp if guvment doesnt do it, who will???

>>2011707
>direct democracy
L o L o L

>>2011803
Did you get free health care to get you back on your feet?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 08:57:56 2011 No.2012145

>>2011558
Um, when you eliminate those causes you find that they don't account for SHIT, and that its race and genetics which correlates with murder rates.

It just doesn't make any fucking sense, why would being "poor" make you rape and kill? You could at the very least argue thieving, but being poor doesn't mean you are starving. Being poor only means you are below some arbitrary level of income.

>When you minimize poverty, in such as providing everyone with sufficient food, shelter, and general well-being, you solve a large part of the problem.
No. What you do is subsidize the rapid growth in population of "poor", and you forever entrench them in their poverty since working is pointless if they will be paid not to.

>>2011551
>maximal freedom and fairness
lol, stupid faggot spotted.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:01:56 2011 No.2012149

Anyways, socialism is not, in and of itself an evil thing. Of course all such central planning will result in big messes, but it's survival.

What isn't survival is that almost all "socialists" are really cultural marxists preaching international jewish socialism which involves the destruction of racial/cultural groups.

There is a reason why jews in the west almost entirely promote leftist views, while in israel they promote a militaristic right wing ethnostate.
One works, one doesn't.

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 09:06:56 2011 No.2012155

>>2012149

>There is a reason why jews in the west almost entirely promote leftist views, while in israel they promote a militaristic right wing ethnostate.

I never really thought about this before, mainly because I've always thought issues of 'race' sort of beneath me. But it is an interesting observation. May I ask though, where would you rather live? Israel or France? I just want to clarify which one works.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:09:56 2011 No.2012160 >>2012155 Whats the difference? all the major parties in france have jewish heads except the national front.

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 09:13:50 2011 No.2012165 [DELETED]

>>2012160

I seriously hope you aren't the dude I was responding to, because only ignorance of the conversation is excuse for being that derp.

>There is a reason why jews in the west almost entirely promote leftist views, while in israel they promote a militaristic right wing ethnostate.

The difference is that in France they do the Former, in Israel they do the latter.

In terms of my question, well there are obvious differences between France and Israel, aside from leadership, that would be relevant when deciding where one would rather reside.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:17:56 2011 No.2012167 File: 23 KB, 1012x1353, marx-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Any critique of Capitalism written after Marx will be very heavily influenced by Marx. Just read Capital.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:20:56 2011 No.2012171

RE: Shit jobs

I wouldn't underestimate the power of social pressure here. If everyone else if pulling their weight and cleaning the toilets every once and awhile, you're going to be perceived as a real dick if you don't as well.

Being a social pariah in a society entirely based on social relations is not a pretty prospect.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:23:56 2011 No.2012174

>>2012165
Are you fucking retarded? Jews are the eternal enemies of whites and promote ideologies which will lead us to destruction. It is not hypocrisy to want the opposite for their own people.

Why do you think jews were expelled from every single country in europe during the middle ages?

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 09:33:56 2011 No.2012189

>>2012174

No I am not fucking retarded. Just one of the reasons why I don't immediately but into vitriolic race-blaming bullshit. People who think like you are, generally speaking, pretty stupid... ignorant at best. I don't understand the desire to blame another race for your perceived failings. I can see how it alleviates personal blame and responsibility when "dem Jews is controlling me", but then you have the nerve to mock blacks for the whole "white devil keep me down" rhetoric. The truth is that it would be frankly embarrassing to believe that a small ethnic minority, that has been persecuted through most of its history, is covertly controlling us. I mean, come on dude.

I wasn't trying to suggest it WAS hypocrisy you fuckwit. I was legitimately interested in the observation, to the point that I was willing to overlook the racial undertones I find repugnant (that's open mindedness), but I thought I would point out that the "one works and one doesn't part" is shaky - given that Israel, your lovely military state, would be a horrible place to live.

This is all from me; I thought this could be interesting but you are clearly too rabid at the moment. Before you get all dark on me for being some leftist hippy jew-lover, I suggest you read up the thread, where you will find I am equally scathing of the far left.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:37:56 2011 No.2012197

>>2012189
I guess a fifth of congress spends their summer break in israel because it's such a nice place.

>given that Israel, your lovely military state, would be a horrible place to live.
Who gave you this idea?

>where you will find I am equally scathing of the far left.
You "moderates" are the worst and most despicable.

>overlook the racial undertones I find repugnant (that's open mindedness),
lol, Genetics determines who you are, race is trends in genetics which perpetuate by common blood/heritage.

It's crazy to suggest that rejecting the entire science of biology and genetics is "open mindedness". That's the big elephant in the room these days, race is basically everything but to talk about it is career suicide! What a joke.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:44:56 2011 No.2012207

>>2012174
>Jews are the eternal enemies of whites and promote ideologies which will lead us to destruction
as opposed to all the other shitheads from every race, creed, religion, ethnicity, and gender

go back to /new/ oh wait they deleted it

the only difference that jews have is that they can be labeled as a group so that it's more convenient for morons like you to hate them

why can't you get that angry at everyone who lies in the world instead of picking a race

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:45:56 2011 No.2012209 >>2012197 Race is mostly just superficial physical characteristics.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:52:56 2011 No.2012223

Anarchism and anything supported with it is the height of idealist fantasy. It assumes too much, expects too much and gives nothing in return. People don't function like anarchists want them too. Human society in it's absolute moral core and nature can not function in an anarchist state because it would be going agianst everything basic that has kept civilization going on for so long. I'm not even getting into the economic and serious social ramifications.

The Paris Commune? Yeah, it had no violence between the Marxists and Anarchists but they were beheading people left and right. It also failed massively because it broke apart after 2 months.
Why did it break apart? Because they had all this momentum with which they took power but once they got their. It was dicks in the wind.

Anarchism almost certainly implies that a violent revolution take place in order for a state of no government to be kept. Almost all major revolutions have been violent and almost all of them have failed. Most of that comes down to what happens after the revolutionary's take power, but in a lot of cases. If majority of the people aren't ready for your take over. You have no business starting a takeover coup style revolution. It rarely leads to nothing more then a tyrant at the wheel.

With that in mind, Anarchism would need the government and all of it's opposition to crumble and the anarchists would go about it in a violent way because in a state of no government. There is only a short period of time to establish some sort of new order. Anarchism aims to keep no order in a society that beckons for order, so it will be in conflict with groups left and right. Ultimately, that means in conflict with the people it's trying to "save".

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 09:52:56 2011 No.2012224

>>2012197

Your brain is so wormy that you can't even articulate yourself sensibly.

I looked into your Congress thing. You know why they go there? Politics you fucking moron. They are paid to go there by a powerful (Jewish) lobby group, and anywhere is nice for the rich and powerful. Why wouldn't they enjoy a free holiday and the chance to rub shoulders with powerful potential backers? Shit, to do that, most politicians would go on holiday in fucking Afghanistan.

Who gave me the idea that Israel wasn't a particularly nice place to live? Oh, you know, just fucking obvious logic. It's in the middle of the most politically unstable part of the planet: all the surrounding countries want to fucking nuke it, Palestinians fire fucking rockets at it, its in an arid desert wasteland. Fuck, I sure as hell wouldn't want my property and livelihood invested in that mess.

Why are 'moderates' the worst? You can't just make bald assertions unless you want to look puerile. Is it the whole Christian "neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm" thing? Are you just angry that we aren't as passionate about your bullshit cause as you are?

What the fuck do you know about genetics you ignorant peon? Genetics only partially determines who you are, and genes are complex, they work in tandem in ways not fully understood. Just because 'race' is trends in genetics, it doesn't mean that these trends have any positive or negative connotations. Further the idea that race is trends in genetics is silly anyway. Gene pools aren't static, they overlap, they shrink and grow; 'race' is an arbitrary, non genetic, distinction based on obvious differences in phenotypes. Its as redundant as phrenology. You need to learn about genetics before you invoke them as a defense, buckko.

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 09:53:56 2011 No.2012226

Finally: I never suggested that rejecting science, or even your perverted views of science, was 'open minded': I suggested that shelving my personal views on those matters to hear something I thought might be interesting, would be open minded.

You are a fool. And while I doubt I can convince you of this, it gives me solace that it will be manifestly obvious to whosoever bothers to read this conversation.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:54:56 2011 No.2012228 >>2012223 >Human society in it's absolute moral core and nature Could you let us know how you've gained insight into humanity's absolute moral core and nature? I think the rest of the philosophical and scientific world would find this useful.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:54:56 2011 No.2012229

>>2012209
What liberals believe, etc. This is also completely false.

>>2012207
It's a statement of fact, not "hatred".
Why do you get so mad over it?

Outside of liberal delusions, people act as groups. It is a "conspiracy" when women push feminism? The jewish religion teachs jews that non-jews are cattle.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 09:56:56 2011 No.2012232 >>2012229 >This is also completely false. Prove it.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:00:56 2011 No.2012237

>>2012228

I never said humanity. I said Human Society, the society you and i live in, is based on laws derived from a certain moral code or moral center. It wouldn't be just laws you are going agianst, it would be the morality of the nation. No, i'm not a absolute moralist. I'm just stating the facts and it's something Anarchists have a hard time dealing with.

That being said, you could pose an argument that society is becoming more and more amoral which would make keeping an anarchist state easier. To that i say this. If the people are amoral to all, they are only moral to themselves. It won't bring any benefits in the long run anyway. Only regression can come out of that.

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 10:01:56 2011 No.2012240

>>2012229

I just can't wait to see you apply your meat axe of a brain to my arguments given what a good job you've done thus far of picking shit out of context, misinterpreting, and when all fails, just saying "no your wrong lol."

"Race is mostly just superficial physical characteristics."

He's right, jackass. Any credible geneticist will agree. Even if you are right, and certain races are more 'evil' than others (whatever that even means), it doesn't change the fact that racial categories are decided based on arbitrary and obvious phenotypes.

My only real reason to interject again now is to inform you that you are sorely misinformed when it comes to Judaism. I'm guessing, like genetics, that you have never studied it, or even indulged a passing interest. I guess this is what happens when whitey gets all his edumacation from Stormfront.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:02:56 2011 No.2012241
File: 58 KB, 1047x775, pet-insurance-for-dogs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2012232
transracial adoption studies, studies on twins raised seperately, basic biology and genetics, etc.

Any doctor can tell you that racial differences matter, as they prescribe different things to different races.

Pic related, just a social construct right?

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:03:56 2011 No.2012244

>>2012237

"Human society" is not a constant. It has changed rapidly in our few thousand years of existence. It can and will change again.

Just because the society you and I live in is based on a certain morality does not mean a future society will be. Or that a past society was.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:06:56 2011 No.2012252

>>2012241

>transracial adoption studies

Link.

>studies on twins raised seperately

Link.

>basic biology and genetics

I'm going to need something a little more specific.

>Any doctor can tell you that racial differences matter, as they prescribe different things to different races.

That's why I said "mostly", there are some other small differences.

>Pic related, just a social construct right?

Those are two different species, not races.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:11:56 2011 No.2012265 >>2012240 >race is only phenotypes welp >>2012224 >It's in the middle of the most politically unstable part of the planet: Just because israel and it's puppet governments invade occasionally doesn't make it politically unstable.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:12:56 2011 No.2012271

>>2012244

Studying history brings with it a realization that humans have, for the past 2000 years, generally stayed the same. Little has changed in the way of how society functions. It's based and re-based on previous attempts, but above that. A large amount of the population have stayed uneducated and thoroughly ignorant. This gets into another huge brawl which i don't want to get into.

I forgot to state a huge reason for my dislike in Anarchism. It has leaders, and in itself is a huge walking contradiction. There is an illusion that you are getting complete chaos but it is still instigated but certain people and there are certain unacknowledged hierarchies in those Anarchist movements when revolutions occur. It is an idealist fantasy to think that a sort of democracy can run the factory from the inside. No body agrees with each other. Chaos guarantees that.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:18:56 2011 No.2012279

>>2012271

>Studying history brings with it a realization that humans have, for the past 2000 years, generally stayed the same.

Funny, because my study of history revealed exactly the opposite.

>Little has changed in the way of how society functions.

So why don't you go ahead and lay out how you think society functions.

>It is an idealist fantasy to think that a sort of democracy can run the factory from the inside.

Why?

d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 10:19:56 2011 No.2012282

>>2012265

Oh good work. About what I was expecting. It's nice to see you dignified by arguments with a proper critique rather than just being dismissive..oh, wait. I guess you just dealt with the bits that were on your level, and ignored all the difficult stuff. I don't blame you. The world must be pretty overwhelming sometimes eh bub?

>race is only phenotypes
welp

Good lack of context mang. What I actually said, is that racial definitions are based on tradition and arose out of distinctions made on the basis of OBVIOUS phenotypes (like skin pigmentation). This is absolutely verifiable. I don't even know why you would question the assertion.

If it wasn't unstable, why the fuck does Israel require so much US military funding and intervention. Why do you think that Jewish interests, and by proxy, US interests are so focused on the middle east? Because if Iran gets Nukes, or Pakistan goes postal, Israel could be wiped off the map overnight.

But those are both minor points, insignificant to my argument anyway. I'll take your failure to speak to the thrust of my argument as tacit acceptance that I am right.

>>	d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 10:21:56 2011 No.2012287 >>2012279 If you want some practical reasons why anarchism won't work, just read further up the thread.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:21:56 2011 No.2012289

>>2012271
Yes. Like i said before, some things work, some things don't.

We are in an age of degeneracy which is why things which don't work(all of leftism) is placed in such high regard.

This is how civilizations commit suicide.

>>2012252
>there are some other small differences.
It's much larger then "small".
>Those are two different species,
They are both dogs.
>Link.
Try google, obviously "environment" plays it's role. But genetics is who you are, genetics is why you are not a dog or a horse, why you look and think like your parents.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:21:56 2011 No.2012291 >>2012287 I've been keeping track of the thread, thanks. I have yet to see a persuasive argument.

>>	d4rk000kingof/mu/ !!TlP6M7PkNVH Mon Aug 15 10:25:56 2011 No.2012296 >>2012291 Fine. Ignore the chimerical issues of defining social values, and appraising history, and answer the following posts for me, if you don't mind, I'd be genuinely appreciative. >>2011769 >>2011751 >>2011647

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:29:56 2011 No.2012302

>>2012282
>why the fuck does Israel require so much US military funding and intervention.
It's not about require.

>Why do you think that Jewish interests, and by proxy, US interests are so focused on the middle east?
Because it's a holy thing to jews, and jewish interests firmly control US government.

Israel started all the wars with the arabs, not the other way around.

>Oh good work. About what I was expecting.
I have trouble responding to a tripfag because i hate you.
>is that racial definitions are based on tradition
No they come from heritage and ancestry and common blood. Skin pigmentation is just one of those irrelevant things that liberals like to blather about.

It is coincidence that race also can be define by phenotypes. It makes things easier for the most part. But then we must beware racial chameleons like jews who appear to look white but are not at all.

Anyways i do not respond because looking up studies and articles i've read before is a disaster of a chore, if not impossible. Always tell myself i should save them, but then i don't.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:34:56 2011 No.2012311 >>2012296 You think you have mystical insight into the nature of man. That's all that needs to be said.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:35:56 2011 No.2012313

>>2012291

Oh boy. Well, i don't want to do this right now. I'm going to cop out and recommend a movie which represents this pretty well. Andrei Rublev

>Little has changed in the way of how society functions.

What are you reading in this statement? Go study a certain civilization or government and see it's influences. The ideas have been the same for a while. We could go into Sociology and read humans through Freudian eyes. Again, go watch Andrei Rublev. I know it sounds like a cop out to suggest you watch a movie to get my point. Give it a chance.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:36:56 2011 No.2012316

>>2012289

>It's much larger then "small".

How big is small?

>They are both dogs.

There are many, many more differences between a chihuahua and a dalmatian than a white person and a black person. They're not different races, is the point.

>Try google

No, I'm not going to find your sources for you.

Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:39:56 2011 No.2012322

>>2012313

>Go study a certain civilization or government and see it's influences.

So you're admitting that ideas on how society is run change and adapt.

>The ideas have been the same for a while.

How can one society influence the other if their ideas were the same?

>We could go into Sociology and read humans through Freudian eyes

Go for it.

>Again, go watch Andrei Rublev.

No, I'm not watching your propaganda film.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:45:56 2011 No.2012333 >>2012322 >Andrei Rublev >Propaganda film I will no longer hold a discourse with you. You are a fucking moron.

>>	Anonymous Mon Aug 15 10:48:56 2011 No.2012341 >>2012333 You're appropriating it as a propaganda film. "Propaganda" doesn't mean "false".

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

/lit/ - Literature