/b/ - Siberia

Is this guy a narcissist?

So now that the 'socialism' fad is petering out, what will be the next outsider ideology to that captures the attention of disaffected western youth? Fifteen years ago it was 'libertarianism,' and fifteen years before that it was alter-globalization and anti-establishment anarchism.

What will the zoomers and their progeny believe in? Esoteric fascism, a resurgent Kaczynski-inspired primitivism, or some other as yet unimaginable set of principles?

collectivise the means of reproduction. The traditional solution where you could marry at most one person at a time solved everything at once. it paired people off to similar smv rank. this meant while unattractive males would get unattractive females which is a slight loss, but they would get to reproduce which is 99% of the value anyway. i rather have an incel takeover where the rankings are shifted. Ultimately normies are inherently immoral and instead of pretending to have some moral value to shift power from them, might as well just be a villain from the get go and focus on ripping away all their power.
This is the only type of marxism that I support. Redistributing (virgin) women to men so that all men who desire have an equal access to a partner is a moral imperative. Until cloning is cheap, we should have state assigned girlfriends.

NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO DEVELOP A HEART

How would it look? How prevalent would it be in response to a WWIII type of scenario? How about a major attack on the U.S? Invasion?

Some places I came across said we had over 3.5MM military personnel in 1968. Post-9/11 we didn't see a major increase in levels, levels have kept a little above or below 400k since then.

Ukraine does not appear to be as technologically advanced as the U.S. BBC reports say the draft process still uses physical papers instead of a centralized database. 2:50 mark. Would the U.S., having an essentially digital tracking capability on every citizen, be more successful in getting folks to appear for service if drafted? Would there be vans pulling people off the streets, or would people simply be arrested for draft dodging?

Are left or right wing parties more corrupt in your country?

Never in the history has there been that Rightards far ahead of the rest of the world.

But keep getting them.

Also YouTube: Hey let's run a bunch of scam-adds on the platform since we can!

So you want to collectivise the means of reproduction?

In order for socialism to be possible, it must have some degree of support from the majority of the population. This does not mean that it's necessary for most people to become committed socialists. That's impossible, because most people are always apolitical, in any system. The only thing that is necessary is to have a majority of people that are willing to give socialism a shot, or who are at least not opposed to socialism. This kind of majority opinion does exist today in many capitalist countries.

Broadly speaking, there are three strategies that socialists have used or proposed for gaining power:

A. Build a socialist political party, compete in regular elections, and win.

B. Build a political party or organization focused on winning support in the streets and operating outside the framework of the existing state. When there is a wave of discontent against the existing capitalist system, organize marches and protests. If you can gather enough support for your cause to ignite widespread protests around the country, lead your comrades to break into government buildings, arrest the current leaders, and take over the state.

C. Build a trade union-like organization and, once you have enough members, organize a general strike and take over the factories and other workplaces.

Strategies A and B have been used successfully at various points in the past. Strategy C has never worked in the past, perhaps because it requires the most active involvement and carries the greatest risk for the people involved. Notice that although strategy A requires the greatest number of people to sympathise with the socialist cause, the only thing they need to do is vote - and that's a very easy, risk-free one-time deal. Strategies B and C actually require smaller numbers of sympathisers, but those sympathisers need to be a lot more actively involved - and take more risks - than in strategy A.

Of course, it's possible for the same organization to try to pursue two or three different strategies at once, and see which one seems to work best at the moment. That's the approach I support.

However, gaining power is only half of the problem. The other half is what to do once you have power. Many different socialist groups have won power in many different countries in the past, but none of them have succeeded in creating a stable socialist economic system. There have been two types of failure (again, broadly speaking):
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.