[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord

| Catalog | Home

File: 1678408906383.png ( 31.77 KB , 300x250 , h9LEsbjnAB-2.png )


Your lord and master has been reinstated on Twitter.

Bow and scrape, plebs.

I suppose this is also a good place to make a "Eugene general" to discuss your Lord and Master's received wisdom and awe in His magnificance. You are in the light of the new knowledge of the 21st century.

So you can check out my website and comment on my writings:


Since you all like talking about transhumanists all the time, I wrote an article about that on the website, and also a podcast on the incel thing which I linked before. As you can expect, sexual politics has always been a proxy for eugenics, and when push comes to shove it always comes out in these arguments.




When I saw
>he’s back
I was excited because I thought it was Pierre tru dank but it’s just a literal who


Your boy made an update:

Just rambling off the cuff about some things around the "virology debate" to set up for a series on the mechanism-vitalism debate and the resulting systems theory, and then the origins of medicine and how philosophical thought about the body contrasted with a mechanistic view of the body as if it were an engineering project.

File: 1678553418031.jpg ( 76.38 KB , 1024x768 , economic-systems4-l.jpg )


<centrally planned capitalism

Is this the solution to the problems that historical socialism faced. If so, to what end should capitalism be planned? How (or by whom) should this be decided and upon what administrative, legislative, or judicial basis?
7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Those sneaky eugenicists outlived Stalin. Impressive


Literally this. Cornholio took the side of the cyberneticists over OG Lysenko and wound up trying to plant in the fucking tundra, which the agronomists said would not work based on basic science and shit we already knew.

Repudiating Stalin was one of the worst things the USSR ever did, and it was initiated by people who wanted to pretend the Nazis were something other than what they were and play this moral equivalence game. It comes from not recognizing the centrality of eugenics to everything that happened in the 20th century, and it was done for the shittiest reasons. If you thought Stalin did bad things - and he did a lot of bad things as any ruler does - the secret speech was just a way of bending over to get fucked by American cock. You have to ask what motivated someone to do that, and the only real answer is that the global plan took precedence over any particular nation or the actual people involved. It wasn't as if workers forgot how to produce things, or didn't believe in the system enough. The ruling system failed them, and actors within it pushed along the dissolution of the USSR. Ordinary people, even if they didn't like the ruling system, had no reason to believe capitalism was some paradise. There was enough dialogue between the two superpowers to have a sense of what the other side thought, and it was the great game of mystification to break that understanding and replace it with the Nazified version of history. Eugenics by its nature does not allow history to exist except as a triumphal death march over anything that would stop it.


<Does this make sense to anybody?


>Does this make sense to anybody?
Sort off.
For example
I think "Cornholio" might refer to Nikita Khrushchev
He accuses liberals that equate Stalin with Hitler (and 20th century communism with Nazi-fascism) as attempting to rehabilitate fascism or obfuscate what it was.


>obfuscate what it was
A boogeyman used by capital to rally support from the nominal left?

File: 1678503043400.jpg ( 615.41 KB , 1260x504 , SpectrumStrikeLocal3.jpg )


We are well aware that trade unionism is in dire straits right now. The trade unions have all just gotten a terrifying kick to the teeth with the events of last December, and even the supposedly "strong" UFT has people admitting that they feel like its power is gone. How do we assist in the creation of new unions to replace the old corporate ones?


File: 1678028984956.jpg ( 91.32 KB , 563x565 , malev2.jpg )


>Super crazy idea
Instead of sperging out abt history and philosophy (dats dialectical materialist n sheeit, muh eugenics), why not just focus on appealing to actually existing people to unite against the actually existing ruling class? This might be a better foci for any proper left.
55 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.




Idealism is a system of philosophical thought that imposes ideology onto analysis of reality. Discussing how the ideas of various groups have shaped their praxis and the events of history is not idealist.

I'm not the guy who you encouraged to commit suicide for disagreeing with you by the way, you seem confused. You also make my stomach turn like the sight of an open wound or a collapsed, unresponsive loved one.

You have weird typing tics like replying twice, strange use of red text, that make me think you have serious psychological issues, something like OCD maybe, which is a life destroying and isolating mental illness that's torture to live with and I don't say it to mock you but because I see in you a fellow beaten down comrade stricken by a horrific illness and a tyrannical and harrowing situation.
I hope you grow something in a community garden this year, the smell of dirt is pleasant and can heal deep wounds.

I never explained my hypothetical idea so you don't know whether it's cockamamie, this is your pathological dogmatism showing again, the tyrant in your heart that I believe can be drowned in simple dirt. The tyrant that came from outside you, and was internalized through torture.

And I don't like all this talk of horses and carts, I don't like innuendo, innuendo is a linguistic style that tiptoes around responsibility and the specifics of a situation far too warily for my taste. Innuendo is a style of speech that has something to hide, it compartmentalizes like a gangster or spy, not so much to avoid detection but to assist in making the outcome of a legal battle favorable for the offender, to avoid anything being proved, to get a verdict of not guilty.

I think people do things, and that systems don't exist above and removed from them, but are extensions of their will, subordinate to their will or collective wills.
I think you have the ideology of learned helplessness with a garish marxish coat of paint over it.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


>more longer
I should have proofread longer…
please disregard that error I wrote one thing before writing another and didn't fully delete the first things I wrote.


I don't think that psychoanalysis is helpful. I just think he's the victim of ignorance and echo chambers and a society with atrocious values. He could stop being ignorant and make a few connections to eliminate the most obvious errors, but that is not easy when certain ideas not only run deep but are reproduced in society to reinforce failure.

With the really bad psych cases, the problem will not be resolved by any amount of "internal struggle". Therapy is a torture session - that's what it was designed for, to interrogate suspected criminals. If you wanted to help someone, you wouldn't make them destroy themselves and talk to space aliens. You would speak of things that are practical and real and you wouldn't act as if society is total and inescapable. That's what you would do to slaves, and most people in the therapist's office are slaves. The only values taught in therapy are how to kick someone else down to get ahead, and it's not surprising that the only successes in therapy come from embracing the total war against the weak. They basically tell people they can be "saved" if they hate the correct people, the Bad People. It's a sick cycle. I don't have that option, not that I would take it because I would not have anything to gain and nothing they say can be trusted, and they want me dead anyway.

I do think he suffers from some severe moral cowardice, which is common among his type, and that is not a thing you can fix by teaching the right ideas or conditioning someone to be good. In a society like this, though, moral cowardice is the dominant value, because brazen amorality is considered the height of ethics, and the only ideas of morality are tied to eugenics. If that is "help", insanity becomes normal, but there are no standards for comparison. It's why the institutions go out of their way to deny that there can be any fixed standards or consistency, and the law is written so that for the underclass, Oceania has no law. This is only going to be worse in the future, and all pretenses of the old law are disintegrating. With it goes all of the illusions that a democratic society is at all possible.

That said, there are things someone can do that are very obviously better for them, like not supplicating to this eugenicist death cult and not running away in fear from the name. It's the absolute terror and fear thatPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


Tfw autism shares its coke with schizophrenia


It's that time again comrades. A new Global Capitalism Update has dropped



Oh god I fucked up big red text. I'll never live this down.

File: 1678107901600.jpg ( 22.13 KB , 384x384 , aucDes-4.jpg )


>Chimp in state of nature never jerks off, but in captivity he does, wat does this mean? In state of nature he’s too busy, to put plainly. He is concerned with mastering space: solving problem of life in and under trees, mastering what tools he can, mastering social relations in the jockeying for power and status. Deprived of this drive to development and self-increase he devolves to pointless masturbation, in captivity, where he senses he is in owned space and therefore the futility of all his efforts and all his actions. The onanism of modern society is connected with its supposed “hyper-sexualization” and its infertility. It’s not really hyper-sexualization, but the devolution of the spirit to the lassitude of a diffuse and weak sexuality.

>Among your instincts you will find the longing for strong friendships, that the modern evil tries to snuff out. And they have good reason to try this, because every great thing in the past was done through strong friendships between two men, or brotherhoods of men, and this includes all great political things, all acts of political freedom and power. The modern zoo wants you instead to be a weak and isolated "individual".

He's kinda right


>doesnt blame the individual for social problems
>recognizes masturbation as a consequence and not a cause of undesirable circumstances
>unironically believes in the power of friendship
based and redpilled

File: 1677666514613-0.png ( 49.28 KB , 1299x1080 , Paul Cockshott value theor….png )

File: 1677666514613-1.jpg ( 301.63 KB , 4016x1000 , evolution of honda bots.jpg )

File: 1677666514613-2.jpg ( 66.22 KB , 1021x534 , dancing boston dynamics bo….jpg )


Lets discuss value theory.

Marx says the source of all economic value is because human labor is universal.

Marx says human ability to imagine and plan ahead is the source of universality, what Marx originally meant by that is somewhat unclear to me. I think this argument was tailored at countering a bourgeois retort that equated human workers with beasts of burden like horses.
Cockshott has IMHO improved Marx's justification by tying it to the universality of human labor-power. Humans can do just about any work task you can come up with.

I want to go one step further and say that human universality also rests on the ability of producing new humans. This gets important later.

The reasons why this argument exists is because the bourgeoisie tries to argue that economy value comes from capital. For example machine capital or land capital.

Today nobody seriously tries to argue that land produces profits, because the landed aristocracy isn't powerful enough anymore to command mental-labor for intellectual class-war in the realm of economic theory. But some still argue that machine capital is not just tools for enhancing worker productivity, but a source of profits in it self.

Some go as far as saying that capitalists can replace human labor with machines.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
67 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Touch pussy


If I remember correctly than Marx did not say that primitive human societies lacked social labor altogether. I somehow get the impression you might be talking about abstract labor.

Your main argument seems to claim that the universality of human labor is a figment of the imagination of managers.

I have to say that my experiences corroborate what >>466750 said
<There is a difference between individuals in how much effort is required to teach a particular human a particular task, not what task it is.

If you discount the inequalities that come as a result of negative environmental factors among the able-bodied, then it really does seem to be a matter of learning speed and difficulty rather than ability.

So I would say that human labor is very universal in a material sense.


Primitive (barbarous) and savage in that period meant distinct stages of development. The theory going was that savage man was solitary and the "nasty, brutish, and short" view prevailed.

>Your main argument seems to claim that the universality of human labor is a figment of the imagination of managers.

It's not entirely a figment of the imagination, in that you can manage labor this way even if no one thought to do it. The point I'm making is that labor in the abstract is only considered when exchanging it or managing it. If we were to judge the utility of all we produce, we wouldn't claim all labors are equal or all labors are valuable.

Arguing a hypothetical about the human subject, which relies on assumptions about a human nature that is fixed, doesn't answer the managerial task in the here and now. No manager has unlimited time and resources to train employees to their maximum potential, and managers have no interest in any thorough education or training, and definitely don't want the proles to learn independently. That's why it's the slow and stupid who always get fired first, and intelligence is primarily a measure of cunning and an ability to lie and deceive to win the struggle for life, rather than something useful in a productive sense. We have such distorted ideas of what intelligence and learning are that we value all of the wrong things. Any monkey can read a book and formulate theories or hack out code, and if we lived in a society that rewarded this initiative at all, we would have very different incentives. The incentive in this society, and especially in full eugenism, is maximal betrayal and backstabbing. The maladaptive traits of capitalism becomes absolutes and eviscerate all in their path. That's what is being defended, because eugenics won. There is only hell now.


I think you are too doomer-pilled, you create thinking that is no longer able to recognize the opportunities for material progress, which do exist.

While it's true that eugenics is still around in some form or another, and it would be foolish to overlook it as a threat, you have basically dropped the concept of class-war waged by the ruling class and replaced it entirely by warnings about eugenics.

The lack of class analysis is worrying.


What do you think class war meant? It wasn't about classes as essences fighting eternally, but institutions. Eugenics was class collaborationist - there were always scum willing to suck up to the ruling interest - and was offered as a way to win the class war by defining who was in and who was out. Those who ruled aligned with a middle class movement to oppress the workers, and found those of the workers and the lumpen who would be useful slaves for their world order.

This mystical treatment of social class is something that only makes sense in the 20th century. In the 19th century, social class was something everyone was aware of. If you have to ask who is a member of what class, your class analysis sucks. It's what fascists do when they argue about who gets to be white in their imagined race-theory.

File: 1659945389899.jpg ( 33.09 KB , 604x427 , Zoo.jpg )


Some clarification is necessary with regards to the Russo-Ukrainian War.
When Lenin quoted Clausewitz in saying "war is politics by other means", he should have appended "in capitalism" to it. Capitalism may generate crises that result in wars, but war is not about economic interest, nor is war merely a different expression of politics.
War is a political failure, appearing as one party (oftentimes the weaker one) using force to "negotiate" and to achieve their goals. War is ultimately a pseudo-politics that relies on morally blackmailing others to pick a side. It is pseudo-politics because politics is not about morality or justice, despite any such motivations, but is about freedom and power.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" applies in capitalist politics, opportunistically taking positions based on political clout. Of course a socialist movement should take advantage of divisions among the ruling class, but it should also point out the rotten and unprincipled positions that members of the ruling class tend to take in this context (bourgeois pacifism, bourgeois defeatism, et cetera).
Socialist politics is the class struggle, the struggle to organize the working class to seize political power without national boundaries; all other activity ought to be subordinate to this goal. Socialists ought not cede to capitalist politics by taking sides on capitalist wars.
We are constantly being manipulated by capitalist politics, making it difficult for us to imagine an alternative. Therefore, our first step should be to ask how we can organize workers independent of capitalist policy.
60 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1677814582475.png ( 209.69 KB , 356x445 , ClipboardImage.png )

>I can't argue the facts and I must sneed


Sorry glowfag, it's ober for u




File: 1677815982342.jpg ( 83.86 KB , 905x942 , spooked.jpg )

>Donbas belongs to Ukraine, not Russia.


File: 1677846253694.png ( 251.61 KB , 512x512 , 1663386189343008.png )


>Donbas belongs to Ukraine, not Russia.

File: 1676164012253-0.jpg ( 1.24 MB , 3840x2544 , 20200701146L-126250119.jpg )

File: 1676164012253-1.jpg ( 14.99 KB , 474x266 , th-3203390996.jpg )


This mother fucker is at least partially resposible (ofc along with the CEOs and board of directors) of for the derailment of those trains and cars in Ohio. He needs to get the same treatment Bush Jr got over the invasion of Iraq. What a fucking joke and the Media is totally silent over the whole thing. I hope this bastard gets cancer in his asshole.


Apparently a bomb was used to blow up the toxic spill, instead of doing clean-up, right in the middle of a town.

That's really crass, all the toxic shit got dispersed by the blast.
At which point are people going to realize how similar this is to chemical warfare ?



File: 1677608286302.jpg ( 304.98 KB , 1080x1151 , IMG_20230301_011726.jpg )



good those train workers were pussys anyway

File: 1677647858859-0.jpg ( 300.07 KB , 1080x1270 , IMG_20230301_120903.jpg )

File: 1677647858859-1.jpg ( 172.29 KB , 1080x635 , IMG_20230301_120919.jpg )

File: 1677647858859-2.jpg ( 111.25 KB , 1080x515 , IMG_20230301_120941.jpg )


Ya, I get it.
>Racial equality, social justice, blah blah blah
But here's the thing, by virtually every single other metric, quality of life has gotten drastically worse in South Africa. I can't help but think that ending apartheid was a massive mistake and that we are currently witnessing the inevitable consequence of putting incompetent people in charge of a country.

If you have one that's mildly coherent, I'm open to alternative explanations for why ending apartheid has ushered in the exact opposite of an abundant, harmonious society.
7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


>people 300 years ago should have had the moral sensibilities of people today
Leftychan never disappoints


>moral sensibility.
Even if you just look at this as a practical question, apartheid always ends up getting overthrown, hence it's not a viable system.


>Nothing lasts forever
Jeez, did you come up with that insight all by yourself?


It seems to be one that you are overlooking.


It's not really that they are incompetent (though they deff are) but it's also that, again, capitalism leads people to rob the coffers of what ever municipality they happen to be governing.

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
[ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25 / 26 / 27 / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 ]
| Catalog | Home