/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Voosh may be a cringe dumbfuck himself (lets be fair: what leftoid isn't?), but he's right, you know.

I'm gonna steal that one - marxism-dumbfuckism has a nice ring to it lol.

Hey leftychoods

Let's play a game. I list a topic, you write a very short explanation of your line on that issue.

>Milgram's Obedience Experiment

>Green New Deal

>Bukarin's Confession

>Porn

>Crocs

>People waiting in line for the new iPhone
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

In which onion forum can secret intelligence exchanges be seen?

War always hurts civilians, fuck wars.

Was the internet good or bad for radical leftists and pro-revolutionarys? Before the internet you were say either in or out of the local groups, you disagreed with a few things, and you're kicked out, burn the heretic. This either led to people making their own group, conforming, or just abandoning theory all together, to become one of those people who called it just a "phase" now they happily vote liberal. The internet allowed these disgruntled and say vagabond, despised people to spread their books and pamphlets, now everybody interested could read what they had to say and those not possessed by the local mantra could become a follower. Everything said on here, the internet is nothing, it has no value whatsoever, irl groups had more power of course around town, but they're still as powerless as groups on the internet are.

So in Brussels (the capital-city of Belgium and the seat of many EU institutions) someone gunned down 2 people and injured a third. It was declared a terror attack, all the people had to go home and all the leisure activities got canceled. Many Politicians had to give speeches and so on.

If the media had more or less ignored this event, the damage would have been 2 dead, 1 injured and a few traumatized witnesses. However that shit got broadcasted everywhere and as a result probably millions of people got terrorized, subjected to fear. They ceased all their activities without a rational reason. Civilization ground to a halt by a small force that should'n've been able to do that.

Terrorism of this style only works because it can spread fear through the media. If the media did not do this, terrorism as a tactic would cease working.

Why is the media sending danger-warnings to people that aren't in any danger ?
Why are officials signalling "be afraid" to people who from a rational point of view don't have any reason to be?
Why isn't this treated like any other violent crime case, something the news mentions as part of a list of local happenings in between the messages about road-congestion and the weather-predictions ?
Why can one gunman interrupt a city of over 2 million people, when it should interrupt at most a city-block of a few hundred to a thousand?

Why isn't the major reaction to this an expression of defiant stoic indifference (even if it's not entirely genuinely felt) where everybody carries on as if nothing had happened. Terror attacks would cease if they can't elicit a reaction of fear and terror.

What would it take to change this ?

>Makes Work From Home in America permanent by dragging out the COVID pandemic twice as long as Europe. Europe returned to office 2 years ago
>Caused the Commercial Real Estate market to collapse destroying countless booj landlords
>Discredited American fascism to an entire generation of zoomers.
>Got hundreds of thousands of GOP voters to die by convincing them to not take the vax.
>The most prolifically successful double agent both for the Democrats and workers in modern history.
Dare I say that he's /ourguy/?

Western intelligence/media caught in another lie

>Assad did nothing wrong

Gender theory, the coof, the entire narrative surrounding Ukraine. Is there anything they don't lie about?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_of_1968

Was reading about the Jap student protests and the Yugo protests, and found out that they happened at the same time.

Jap, Yugo, French, and Czechoslovak protests all saw an appearance of the student's councils.

Jap, Yugo, and French were marxist inspired and anti-capitalist, while Czechoslovak were anti-soviet. Both were anti-establishment.

If we follow my theory that the Soviet system was another industrial class-based mode of production, then we can see mass protests against two different types of class society SIMULTANEOUSLY, that shared common characteristics.

So WTF happened in that year?

<Capitalism has already been superceded

Some sort of bureaucratic managerial mixed economy exists in all major developed economies today. It is the inevitable political development at this stage of history owing the the current level of the productive forces. The central economic impulse isn't the further development of the means of production in order to *produce commodities.* As it stands, only a fraction in the labor force is set to work in producing commodities. A larger percentage is involved either in the realization of value or the social maintenance of power - that it's to say, and increasing proportion of the population is as divorced as ever from production and increasingly devoted to employment in the tumorous and parasitic outgrowths of the economy. Likewise, an ever increasing proportion of the economic surplus is devoted toward the expansion of the infrastructure of services and, more importantly, control. An increasing social investment occurs in fields like marketing and sales, security (ranging from web3 doorbell cameras to rent-a-cops to state militaries), media in it's wide variety of forms, psychological and sociological research, and 'governance' on both a local and international scale. In Gramscian terms, this is an explosion in the size and importance of the state vis-a-vis and over the forces of the productive economy. That is to say, the *capitalists* (which developed and began to supercede the lorded administers of feudalism during the 16-18th centuries) have themselves begun to be superceded by a growing, new, highly technological, secular, and 'scientific' administrator and managerial class.

The primary aim is always power. For a brief period in history, the private ownership of the means of production - to be a capitalist - was the best means to amass power. However, in the sort of post capitalist future that is emerging, those who control (but perhaps not directly 'own') large levers of the economy and structures of control form a sort of oligarchy that simple seeks - directly - to expand its control.

This impulse is increasingly turned inward and against all forms of life, up to and including increasingly levels of power against it's own citizenry, with more and more elements of daily life intertwined with technology, control, and economy.

As a phase in the mode of production, this is a sort of toothpaste that's not going back into the tube. But it doesnPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>blast from the past

Remember when Amerikwas lamest geriatric 'communist' group joined the WHO-pharma fearmongering?

This ruined the credibility of the left for a generation