/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

How did this even happen? Did the US rig an election? I thought the Taiwanese had grown rather weary of saber rattling anti-China bullshit.

>>477583
>How did this even happen?
Last i checked up on this was probably half a year ago. And at that point it looked like the DDP was headed for an electoral defeat and independence/secession was off the table. I didn't pay attention so i can't tell you what happened in the meantime.

>Did the US rig an election?
Yeah that thought crossed my mind as well

>I thought the Taiwanese had grown rather weary of saber rattling anti-China bullshit.
That's still the case. People in the west are weary of the neocon's Ukraine war and the Zionists trying to genocide the Palestinians, but that shit continues none the less.

>>477583
The DPP only got 40 percent but thanks to Taiwans retarded election law the highest number in one round wins even if its not a majority

>>477615
No, credit where credit is do, John Mearsheimer's takes are grounded in reality, even if we don't agree on ideology.

>FFS you can be anti-Israel and also acknowledge that Hamas pulled some sick shit on October 7.
I'm not necessarily opposed to Israel, i'm opposed to Zionism, because its fascist(Marxist definition) in ideology and praxis. At least in theory Israel could be a "normal" country without the apartheid mega-death bullshit.

A violent reaction to the inhuman conditions in Gaza is universal to the human species, if there wasn't a Hamas there would be something else. Ultimately the Zionists created the conditions for OCT7 and i think they should get the blame. You certainly can't blame the Palestinians, they aren't granted rights and protections, hence they don't have obligations either. This is not a one-way street, the Zionists do not get to impose uncivilized conditions on Palestinians and still demand civilized conduct in return. If you create good material conditions for people you get peaceful people with a pleasant attitude. If you create horrible material conditions for people, you get violent and unpleasant people. It's not realistic to expect anything else. Consider that most Palestinians alive today, never experienced peace, their entire life has been war, their entire live has been an experience that political agency flows from the bomb-bay of a fighter jet.

There is another disturbing political current that i wish to oppose. There are people who try to harm others by weaponizing the environment, and that can't get a pass. A historic example would be Malthus from the 1800s, he advocated to create unsanitary conditions in the poor-people districts in order to encourage more death among the poor. The Zionists have also tried to kill Palestinians via a weaponized environment.

Of course I would much prefer if there was a secular communist resistance that embodied enlightenment values in Gaza instead of Hamas with backwards religious stuff. But there's no point in complaining, there already are more than enough armchair communists complaining about how other people are struggling wrong.

Also the Zionists went too far and they have now become "Tätervolk", and no longer count as "Opfervolk" in the Political framing.
"Tätervolk" translates to perpPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>477615
>citing a political scientist whose theories have consistently produced accurate predictions as a credible source
Time to move on from the Ukraine grift, anon?

>>477615
all settlers deserved it

>>477615
If I understand correctly, Mearshimer is saying that Israel killed (or fabricated killings of) it's own people while Hamas attacked, to make a claim that Hamas is unfathomable evil.

There is a pathological need to believe Hamas was "pressed to act", "triggered", or something that retains the belief that people are pawns to be moved by the system. There hasn't been "restraint" or "tit for tat responses" as if they were two entities at peace. We're past the point where there is reconciliation. That's over, and there was no reconciliation as far as the Muslim world cared short of Israel's dissolution as "Israel". So long as Israel exists, it would be a violent imposition on the region. The aim of the Muslims has long been to rid the region of that entity.

>>477626
>If I understand correctly, Mearshimer is saying that Israel killed (or fabricated killings of) it's own people while Hamas attacked, to make a claim that Hamas is unfathomable evil.
Not quite.
The Hannibal doctrine means that the IDF will murder with prejudice their own soldiers and Israeli citizens in order to prevent them from getting captured/kidnapped.
It looks like the IDF did that during the Hamas attack, which included kidnapping/capture of Israeli citizens and idf-soldiers. Later the Israelis claimed that Hamas had killed those people that in reality got "haniballed"
In addition to that Zionist propaganda also made up horror stories about decapitated babies and mutilations of women, in order to paint a picture of "unfathomable evil"
>There is a pathological need to believe Hamas was "pressed to act", "triggered", or something
Yes the Palestinians are very triggered about having to live under a Zionist occupation, and feel pressed to act towards ending that occupation. Human beings really hate being subjected to a brutal occupation force that stomps them into the dirt. And they will try to kill their occupies every chance they get. That's just how reality works. Some people a appear to have a pathological need to believe that there is an expectation that victims of such an occupation ought not to fight back.
> We're past the point where there is reconciliation. That's over
You're manufacturing consent for a regional war ? why ?
Sometimes i get the impression that we need more militant diplomacy efforts.
>So long as Israel exists, it would be a violent imposition on the region. The aim of the Muslims has long been to rid the region of that entity.
This isn't a war of civilizations. Israel could stop doing the retarded Zionist ethno-state expansionism bullshit and quit being the US imperial attack dog. Simply becoming a normal country of that region that has normal relations is an option.

>>477571
It's unclear. My impression is that causes of death vary, although the fact that they apparently told nobody about these graves and haven't kept open records of these deaths is incredibly suspicious. If it's not all murder, it's incredibly negligent at the least.

>>477572
Lol, yeah that'd be the head-line if it had happened in China

>>477573
>the fact that they apparently told nobody about these graves and haven't kept open records of these deaths is incredibly suspicious.
Yup, it sounds like the premise for a B-Movie horror film.

Should we expect to learn there was organ harvesting?

maybe they know too much

>>477575
I haven't researched the organ mafia in great detail, so take what i say with a grain of salt. It appears that they sort off "professionalized" and are no longuer operating in the underground where they get rid of bodies by digging ditches.

But you're hunch about it being some gruesome crime disposal-site, might still be true. Maybe it's cannibals. There haven't been scandals about that in a while.

>>477448
>>477451
Gonzalo Lira was murdered by the urko-regime.

https://farside.link/nitter/RealAlexRubi/status/1745863733438488629
<It is with great sadness I must announce that Gonzalo Lira @GonzaloLira1968, passed away in a hospital according to his father, who has been fighting to get his son much-needed medical attention for the past weeks.

<Here is a hand-written note from Gonzalo which I received on January 4: "I have had double pneumonia (both lungs) as well as pneumothorax and a very severe case of edema (swelling of the body). All this started in mid-October, but was ignored by the prison. They only admitted I had pneumonia at a Dec. 22 hearing. I am about to have a procedure to reduce the edema pressure in my lungs, which is causing me extreme shortness of breath, to the point of passing out after minimal activity, or even just talking for 2 minutes."

<"I cannot accept the way my son has died. He was tortured, extorted, incommunicado for 8 months and 11 days and the US Embassy did nothing to help my son. The responsibility of this tragedy is the dictator Zelensky with the concurrence of a senile American President, Joe Biden," Gonzalo's father wrote.

It's sad to see him go.

>>477549
Rest in peace, coach.

>>477553
Here's what Yves Smith wrote on nakedcapitalism
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/01/gonzalo-lira-is-dead.html

>>477549
Just a couple days ago his father did an interview with the Duran.

>>477564
Damn, that was just 2 days before Gonzalo died.

>>476557
NJP is cringy and glows (and Erik Stryker has unnaturally odd physiognomy), but they are edging toward based here

>>476558
I just like to see rightoid infighting

>>476560
Thank god the NJP is so laughable/cringe on it's own merits. Otherwise, they might actually be a threat, especially considering how the left does fuck all nothing besides online idpol and shill for the DNC

Rightoids are stealing a page from Mao and advocating for land reform.
https://newfrontierusa.substack.com/p/a-new-american-homestead-act

>>449782
you are a fucking sped, and half of the people destroying "le right wing neo nazis!!!!!!!" are also fucking idiots.

>>477511
I made a ZIP file of the website.

>>477515
ty

>>477515
>>477511
Hey uh I took the liberty of using pandoc to convert this to pdf and epub, without any guarantees of correctness.

>>477519
It's nice to know the approximate length of the book when published is around 760-800 pages. I didn't think it would be that big.

One thing about the pdf is that the footnote hyperlinks didn't translate.

And this is why I say, if humans are to do something different, it would happen under very different conditions, which we can only guess at today. We can see the kind of changes that would take place because some of them are happening now - the desperate attempts to break free from this trap that was set for us. What I can say based on that is that humans are very, very far away from conceiving of a different way to do things, let alone a markedly different world or a different entity we would call "post-human". I believe in the end humans cannot direct this change or struggle to make anything happen, but that the true change only happens when the world and the situation will allow it, and it will not be evenly distributed or "just" in any way. When it does start, it is more likely humanity will look to each other, ask "what was any of it for?" as so many have in the past, and see that what they've been made to do was ridiculous and never should have gone on the way that it did. But, the way out likely means that humans become very detached from past concepts of the political, while having a sense of the world that allows them to subvert the machinations that drag us back to this situation. Very likely, these people would have already, due to the misery humanity inflicted on others, lost interest in "life for its own sake", or the philosophy that struggling for life is the point. It's not difficult to see that the "struggle for life" is counterproductive, but to get past that requires getting past this imperial biological pseudoscience regarding evolution, and to use sense to reconstruct how something like evolution could even happen in the first place. That is not a difficult challenge, but eugenics is the holy of holies. They kill anyone who tells these Satanics they will be anything less than living gods.

Just getting rid of eugenics and its creed would improve everything drastically in obvious ways, even if humanity remains fundamentally evil. Given human history and what is likely, humans will abandon conceits about republican government and see that all such political forms are unworkable, which is already happening. This leaves only one real option as a true political theory, and those will be the conditions of humanity moving forward.

But, humans won't actually live in any "different world" or get over themselves for a very long time, if that ever happens. It doesn't even happen at a local level. The better of humanity just sigh and find some way to reconcile with the world, and keep society at a distance.

It would be better if anyone surviving the nightmare to come saw this for what it was, knew that modernity was a failed experiment, and learned the proper lessons from it. Perhaps, sooner than I expect, there will be a way forward to endure this. Humanity was denied social interactions worthwhile, but a dismal existence with a half-aware understanding of what might have been stays alive until the bastards snuff that out, and record recurs from the damned who carry on against a race that cannot cease its cycle. The world cannot change, and if humanity insists of following a crass interpretation of the world as the shortest route to political power, humanity too cannot change. Ever. But, humanity would not have grown into anything if such a foul logic were true. It would exist - humanity's origin is demonic and there is nothing to redeem it - but anything we would regard as good exists because the world allowed it to exist, because there were no malicious humans around to destroy or pervert it, and because of some decency humans inherited - which will never, ever be theirs - that suggested that allowing something better than the purest rot would be a good idea because this makes life easier for everyone, and pointless suffering and torture led to predictable results every single time their theories have been tried.

>>477507
Back again with your a historical retard hot takes I see.

>>477466
He was also using money y'know. & even invested all of the profits from one of his books into ComIntern Inc.
What a fucking cappie-kike, being a capitalist in a feudal shithole, surrounded by capitalist world ordnung, amirite guize?

Not even talking about how he made deals with Bri'ish Empire & their Iranian cocksock sheikh & also t*rkoid republicans, damning all the communists in these countries to death so he could get sum noice deals.
Oh, & RSFSR also supplied Arditi de Popolo with rifles. Y'know, the Italian popular fascists with death squadrons specifics who denounced that socialist cuck Muzzolini.

>>477476
>I think you distrust the proletariat too much which is why you don't want to give them high capacity fully automatic weapons. This is a liberal brain worm: a socialist state should not disarm it's own populace but instead eliminate the weaknesses of soft targets such as schools.
I agree that once we arm large parts of the population we have to improve clothing items and various other objects to have bullet-proof characteristics to reduce "the weaknesses of soft targets" as you called it.

I think the school shootings in the US are largely caused by capitalism degenerating the social fabric of society. My intuition is that socialism would likely not have that problem. However i still think socialism won't automatically cure all mental diseases and you'd still get some shootings. And for those cases it helps when the available weapons aren't bullet hoses. But my main objection is that it would be too expensive to produce enough ammo for everybody to train on assault rifles.

But you are not wrong, i do have sort of a prejudice against assault-rifles. I think they're kind-off aristocratic weapons. Akin to swords and bows during the medieval times. You have to train really hard to get any good at fighting with a sword or a bow. And you have to train really hard to get good at using fully automatic weapons. Most proles can't dedicate the time and resources towards mastery of a weapon like the warrior cast in a feudal society. What further raises my skepticism about assault weapons is that the people in the "gun-enthusiast spaces", all swear that assault weapons need to have lots of extra, complicated gadgets mounted to it. That makes it completely unusable as the people's weapon. We're not going to be able to pull that off at scale, these gadgets aren't really mass-producible. I consider simple weapons like revolvers, bolt-action rifles and shotguns to be prole-weapons because they don't have the aristocratic learning curve. Also look at the prices, with a few exceptions like the AK-47 or the AR-15, assault weapons are really expensive. The Soviets being able to pull off affordable, reliable and capable assault weapons, is more a testament to their engineering prowess than the weapon-type being inherently suitable as the firearm of the masses.

Now the political aspect. One of the reasons for aPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>477482
>ok so then my original point stands from a couple replies ago that you won't get an average joe to shoot that sort of projectile. If it's carrying all the extra fuel, it may be less recoil than a traditional projectile at that velocity but the amount of initial powder to spin that shit out of the barrel will have more recoil than an assault weapon cartridge like 5.56 nato
>Anything larger than a 140 grain projectile is going to be too much
But i've seen youtube videos of tiny women with spaghetti arms shoot enormous elephant hunting rifles, so what gives? I wonder if changing the recoil profile from a short spike to a more spread out curve makes it more palatable. We could add a simple air-friction dampener into the stock and go for a huge muzzle break that exploits Bernoulli's principle to reduce recoil by using scavenged waste energy. It would look like the nose of a hammerhead shark tho.
>let alone a likely unreliable sci-fi cartridge dreamed up for a boardgame.
I admit i haven't found a real world example of a Bolter, and yes it was dreamed up for the WH40k board-game. But adding a solid-fuel-motor is not really high-tech or scifi. Basic solid fuel rocket-motors were invented in the 18-hundreds. Those can be reliably triggered with simple shatter-glass-fuses using a chemical reaction timer. Basically the initial kick of the round being fired breaks a small glass container, releasing 2 chemicals that when mixed ignites the solid-fuel-motor. The speed of that Chemical reaction can be tuned like the speed of a old-school fuse-wire. Even in mass production runs the variation on those will be small and the rocket-motor will trigger within tight tolerances. If that doesn't satisfy you, we'll stick a magnet at the end of the barrel and trigger with a Hal-sensor, that'll get the variation down to a few nano seconds.

>I think you have some good ideas bro
thanks
>I don't think you have any practical experience.
Yeah that's true, but firearm permits are way to expensive where i live. That's a rich men's hobby.

>>477485
those fags pay thousands to boers to shoot on their land with their fag guns hopping out of their humvees with 20 pound rifles. This will never be practical for a militia. Mobility mobility mobility small arms should be exactly that with emphasis in being capable of reaching out practical distances: this could mean sub guns for city slickers but here in the country, someone needs 1-500 yards easily and that's where 5.56 comes in. Ammo weight is also a factor. I wish I could take you shooting out here in the west. it's really beautiful even in Jan out here in the desert.

It's funny how people think that "military training" is some arcane science accessible only to a few very powerful people, based on nothing really. The most effective armies in history were those that could mobilize a shit ton on men and machinery, usually because they had to and couldn't afford the usual bullshit stories that are told about it.

Everyone who is trained filters to the general population, and the basic methods of fighting are known enough - they're designed to be simple enough that it's impossible for a grunt to fail if they read the fucking manual. The real heart of the matter is that war implies a singular victor to be meaningfully war, and the victor of the present war is the institution against the people. It can only secure this victory through forced ignorance and degradation of the conditions of the people, and that is the war constantly fought - to degrade, denude, and prohibit any iota of independent action which is the objective of the present war. There wouldn't be a "civil war" here except by the choice of aristocracy to make one. It can end immediately if the bastards cease doing this, but if that ends, eugenics ends. The project ends, with the people remembering what was done to them and no violent recapitulation of the creed working to cow people into submission. It would then become the obligation of everyone not in the club to exterminate those in the club, by whatever means are suitable. There is no forgiving eugenics and what it did to us, and so the war will continue, absent any particular reason why this should happen.

What is really at work isn't "training" or some special knowledge, but a simple reality that wars have one victor, and an arranged "struggle" with preplanned outcomes is never stable, nor something that resolves with the victor unchanged and whole. The damned will either survive, or a new damned will appear for the same reasons that the old damned came to exist, and inherit the same struggle. Aristocracy cannot change under any circumstances, and it would be quite impossible for humans to abandon aristocracy in total. The closest they ever got was a genuine natural aristocracy, which will lose faith in its status within a generation and undermines its claim from the outset. For the damned, there is no reconciliation with aristocracy, or even "making a new aristocracy" in their own image. Were the damned ever to truly win this battle, they would probably see the situation, see humanity is Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>477486
Can you explain why mobility is important for a people's militia. If there's war and people go on a raid to harass a nearby hostile military formation, they wouldn't have to travel a great distance. Plus there are many pictures of these lets call em "fighter groups in the middle east region" that carry absolutely huge rifles. Pic related, looks like something originally intended to be mounted on a vehicle or something. They seem to manage hauling that stuff around somehow.

Maybe there is a design trick and these are lighter than they appear, if you make the barrel really long, you don't need as much barrel pressure, because a long barrel extracts more energy from the same gunpowder charge. Plus a long barrel has more cooling. Less pressure and less heat means less material strength is needed, and potentially weight.

If there is no "objective intelligence", then computability and any metric is impossible. Reality itself is impossible.

He knows exactly what he is saying. Just substitute everything he wrote with "you are retarded, hahaha". Satanics have a familiar script.

You can tell he's just recapitulating the eugenic claims about "inborn intelligence", and then states in the same post that "intelligence is a black box" - which is never how anyone believed intelligence or consciousness worked. This is purely a political and legal thinking that protects his favorite institutions, makes them sacrosanct and unmentionable. Eugenics relies on this controlled insanity. It's all so Satanic.

If you wanted to defend a failed theory that gives you a knife at the throat of everyone in the world, you would lie about everything and anything regarding intelligence, and claim "intelligence is subjective". It's the usual Germanic horseshit. He is only thinking "I am strong, he is weak, I push the button I was trained to press so I win, win, win". The idea that this turns on itself is inadmissible in his world-system. Like I said, it's all so Satanic.

>>477490
>this is not rocket science.
Because it's brain science. Btw. brains might be more complicated than rockets.
>about how middling intellects are comfortable in their stupidity as long as they have someone to kick down
Ironically enough that might be the primary application of EYE-Q tests these days.

>>477425
Hersh really fucked up recently regurgitating that fiction from one of his sources that the top Ukrainian general was negotiating with the top Russian general. I'm really surprised he got duped like that, and I wonder if anyone else in the past has tricked him similarly.

>>477424
>you don't have a "right to say whatever you like"
Fine there are a few edge-cases like you can't yell FIRE! in a crowded place, but those are very rare.
>you don't have a "right to truth"
It depends, in general people do have a right to lie, but when it comes to what powerful people do, yes absolutely people have a right to the truth, also scientific knowledge that seeks to approximates truth, you have a right to that as well.
>If you're going to think like a German
Dafuck does that even mean ? Stop speaking in riddles.

>If you're already invoking an idea of "protecting your sources" and the clandestine nature of your investigation, you're invoking the terms the national security state set.
Sneaky cloak an dagger stuff existed aeons before national security states did, so that attribution seems wrong. No matter, "protecting your sources" is meant literally, as in protecting the sources from persecution and retaliation. Keeping the sources a secret is just one strategy towards that end. But you are correct it would be preferable to do all that stuff in the open. But then it becomes necessary to organize sufficient force to frustrate potential threats to journalistic sources. Maybe you can enlighten us how to do that.

>Naturally, secret societies do not let you disrupt their mechanisms of action, or play by any such rules.
Your premise is that secret societies are powerful. Is that actually true ? The ruling class appears like an open conspiracy and they're not even subtle about it.

>Ultimately, you the subject
You're thinking in hyper individualist terms. Maybe it would be better to think about this in terms of base and superstructure to figure out what's what.

>>477426
>Hersh really fucked up recently regurgitating that fiction from one of his sources that the top Ukrainian general was negotiating with the top Russian general.
There probably was some background channel activity happening, there usually is during wars. So it's probably easy to get this shit wrong.
>I'm really surprised he got duped like that, and I wonder if anyone else in the past has tricked him similarly.
I don't know about tricked, but Hersh has gotten things wrong before, but you'll find very few journalists with a perfect record. But all things considered, he's gotten a lot of big scoops very right.

>>477427
>Fine there are a few edge-cases like you can't yell FIRE! in a crowded place, but those are very rare.
No, you don't have a "right to say whatever you like" anywhere in the history of American law, and this is all about subverting American law and replacing it with a Germanic impostor.
Really, saying "FIRE!" - making a false warning - has nothing to do with political rights one way or another. It's not inherently illegal or immoral to do things like that in a way that the state has any say in. A private establishment can enforce its own security, within the bounds of law, and so if a patron made a false alarm, the owner of the establishment would be the first to discipline that, for the owner's own interest. The state or society generally has no say in that matter. Pulling a false alarm is a dickhead thing to do, and nothing prevents a state from making such behavior illegal, but all of that has nothing to do with political speech or assembly. Such laws against doing that are numerous and are the rule rather than exception - that is, any magistrate which can pass laws has a lot of latitude to regulate speech. Free speech in particular mostly says the feds aren't going to smash your press "just because", and the feds aren't going to insist that everyone has to say the one acceptable idea. It has nothing to do with this Germanic "unlimited freedom" faggotry that derives from Kant and Hegel, which has nothing to do with freedom in the genuine sense or the legal rights. It is free assembly and political rights that were the more relevant part of the first amendment and similar laws of that sort.
The only reason this Germanic impostor is encouraged is to allow transgressive, Satanic people to conduct lawfare. Those arguments are routinely laughed out of court. Nowhere in American history has a "right to say what you want" ever been protected. All of those laws are about what the state will do to the press, what sort of laws against speech it can and cannot pass.
Making arbitrary laws against speech based on empty sentiment would be against the intent of society and the purpose of the law, for a variety of reasons, but again, that has nothing to do with a codified "right to say whatever you want". It would be understood that an arbitrary law like "you have to espouse the correct ideology in school or we will Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>477436
In any event, the freedom of the press in the United States was abrogated early when President Adams didn't like the press reporting on a scandal that was, you know, illegal. He got the law anyway, and while it was struck down and there was a pinky promise not to do things like that again, it has long been understood what lines the press can and cannot cross.

If you think the state has an implied regulatory power over speech - and the "lack of power" of the state to enforce speech implies really the opposite, that in principle the state's power is absolute if the state obfuscates and works through private interests - then nothing like a free press is possible. You can use endless reductio ad absurdums to say that "there is no such thing" or "freedom isn't free", and begin ridiculing the concept. Originally, the crowns of the conservative order could smash anyone's press, make it illegal to publish anything the crown didn't like, break up any assembly, and basically mandate what you are and what you will be. It is that sort of thing that the bill of rights and the concept of rights is intended to resolve - what the state can and can't do, and to whom the law applies. I've said before the real target of this is the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause - the part that doesn't allow broadly defined classes of persons to be designated as "possessing no rights" without due process. That was already effectively abrogated completely by eugenics - they can say anyone is insane without standards of comparison - so there's not really an argument to make about freedom. Without the dominance of eugenics, none of this discourse would be tolerated.

As for the original post about investigative journalism - the control of the press today doesn't take the form of legal punishments or smashing the press, which is what the legal rights originally referred to. People are allowed to investigate. The government will just refuse any inquiries and say "national security" on anything that is remotely real, and seed a bunch of bogus reports. The MO of the US has always been to leak through familiar channels bits and pieces of what actually happens, much like a secret society or a new religious movement gives away little bits as initiates climb the ranks in the organization. This method of disseminating information is very effective at controlling what anPost too long. Click here to view the full text.