/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>472565
Most of the land ownership is now financialized via hedgefunds, and there's no real difference between land speculation and any other kind of speculation. I'm not really sure about theory in this case , as far as i understand it speculators are only supposed to cause specific price inflation for what ever commodity they speculated with. You're the first person to assert that speculation can cause general inflation. I think we'd have too look at the numbers to find out, i don't know of any econ-data source that publishes data about financial speculation tho. But this is definitely something worth considering.

However you are likely wrong about the role of money printing. The gazillions they printed to keep wall-street afloat in the last decade and a half. Well a bunch of that probably went into land speculation as well. Billionaires and big corporations have been busy buying up a lot of land recently not just for real-estate but also agricultural land.

The inflation in the US is among various reasons also caused by ballooning defense offense budgets. Basically the imperial business-model, of investing into means of war to extract loot as return on investment has probably turned a loss. The neocon's imperial project in Ukraine that's certainly a "failed investment".

But in general inflationary pressures are caused because capital invests into non productive stuff. Investments that reduce inflation are building newer factories with better machines that increase productivity, building new transportation infrastructure that's faster and more efficient and better social services that preserve the well being of the population.

At least in principle capitalism should have immunity against leverage from a landed aristocracy. Capitalists don't have to use land, they could build industrial parks in deserts or on massive ocean-rigs. Like-wise cities could be expanded into the ocean or downwards via "earth-scrapers"

>>472567
>99% of people do not own land. Land is owned mostly by large corporations and petty bourgeoisie fag.

Why do you think that is, moron?
They buy it up, it's profitable. They use it to extract rents. A few people own disproportionate amounts of land because everyone needs land and controlling the supply is profitable.

>It has nothing to do with the general economy and has nothing to do with inflation. It will cause the housing market specifically to inflate in value which we are seeing now.

Oh, yeah, because the cost of rent and housing has no impact on the rest of the economy… right… think about this a little bit. Who are these people who don't need housing? Where are these businesses which do not rely on land and natural resources?

Rents are a bigger expense for most storefronts in major cities than wages are, and even if they weren't, they would still represent a massive unnecessary expense paid just to banks and commercial landlords. How is this separate from the rest of the economy? It isn't. Almost all workers and even most capitalists pay an arm-and-a-leg to landlords, and the only reason that capitalists are mostly ok with it is because smart capitalists will also become landlords and exploit this so they can secure longterm wealth with even less risk.

>>472571
>Most of the land ownership is now financialized via hedgefunds, and there's no real difference between land speculation and any other kind of speculation.

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

>>472588
>We differ on the definitions here - I'm using 'land' in the classical sense to refer both to geographical land and to natural resources which have fixed supplies and haven't been created through labor. Everybody uses it, and creating large, fully-staffed industrial operations in the middle of the sea or on artificial landmasses is probably more difficult than just paying rents… and the capitalists who could conceivably have enough capital to do those kinds of massive projects are typically already in the land speculation game as well.
Sorry for repeating myself in this last paragraph, anon #2. I should really go over these for redundancies before I write a big piece-by-piece reply like this.

You all are retards. We have inflation because the growing capital stock requires more labor to maintain, and every person busy with maintaining and repairing existing capital stock still gets paid a wage that they can buy end commodities with.

So inflation is due to the growing ratio of population employed in maintaining existing capital stock to population employed in expanding capital stock.

>>472832
>We have inflation because the growing capital stock requires more labor to maintain
If you increase the capital stock relative to population, that decreases profits. But for inflation it probably does nothing. I guess that increasing machine capital stock might mean higher productivity, and that could increase the supply of goods and drive down prices, which would decrease inflationary pressures.

A worker puts more into the economy than they can get out via their wages. So from the point of view of inflation, employing more workers lowers inflation while laying workers off increases inflation. The reason for that is fairly obvious. Workers produce more than they consume and that means increasing the number of people employed in the economy has the effect of creating a net increase of available commodities, raising supply relative to demand and hence lowering market exchange-prices.

If you want to twiddle on the employment knob, then full employment will give you the lowest inflation.

Even if wages of workers rise they can never be the cause of inflation because under capitalism workers never get payed enough wages to buy everything they produce, the workers can never generate enough demand to buy up all the supply, let alone generate more demand than supply. Only capitalists can have enough money to do that.

Planet of the Apes but communist

>>472744
My default assumption is that all the strange stories about the Soviet Union are propaganda bullshit unless proven otherwise. So why again do you think this happened ?

Monkeys and humans don't have matching chromosomes, that means you can't fertilize the egg, in either direction. Maybe it would be possible to get around this with genetic splicing or whatever, but last century that tech wasn't available. That said there still are scientists trying to create hybrids, tho they want em for organ farming. They're injecting human stem cells into monkey babies, in order to grow human organs in a monkey body, they're also trying to do this with pigs, sheep and mice. It could be that lab-grown organs will eclipse this because synthetic biology has less contamination risks and ethical concerns.

>laboring race of chimp-human hybrids
Monkeys are 1.5x stronger than humans, but they have worse endurance, so i don't really see the point. A hydraulic piston has 100.000 times the strength of a human and never gets tired.

>>472744
Wtf why does he look like a human??

>>472797
>why does he look like a human
he doesn't, you're getting tricked by the pants and the upright posture

Black people know this is all bullshit and gave up. Very often they're disqualified from voting or chased away, and that was made very obvious in the past 20 years.

Whatever happens next year will be such a joke that no one in America will be convinced elections are relevant. 2020 already made it clear that shit is done. The rulers threw it in your face that none of that was real, and brag that they're killing us off. You're all idiots for even acknowledging these narratives.

Trump country is desperate to keep the center of attention on Retard-Man.
You are already seeing that so many people have died. Americans are going to look around during the primaries and see that there just aren't any more people. How the hell can the results of an election be legitimate after that? Even acknowledging the reality would make clear that many millions in the country are dead or left. They're going to have to get the graveyards voting in force to elect the "winner". It's preposterous, and they laugh about doing this to you.

Leftychan is magacommunism insurrection gang

Supermaga

>>472821
This man seems smart, I will critically support him (with prayer hands)

>>472723
Every Mainstream media boogie-man gets likened to literal Hitler. Although this time they also compared the Russian president to Stalin, which caused me momentary confusions about why they were all of a sudden praising the boogieman.

There are rumors that soon-ish Russia will end the static line grind-warfare and go for an advance. With NATO weapons piles drained and the Ukrainian military depleted, the Ukrainians would likely loose lots of territory again , and then the news will likely change the topic.

But to answer your question about why the Ukraine-war was so heavily propagandized in the news. Maybe it's several factors. The imperial bourgeoisie cared about this alot because this was their attempt at knocking down a rival power. It's also an incredibly unpopular war because most people think it's just a money pit, and they turned up the propaganda-dial to 11, to manufacture consent. It's also an external conflict and those always serve as distraction from internal problems.

>>472723

It's war in Europe, and hundreds of thousands of people have died. It's the biggest military conflict in Europe in decades, casualties are around 1000x those of the 2008 Russo-Georgian war. The end goal of this for Russia is the annexation of Ukraine, a country which has not been part of Russia for over 30 years. It's significant.

Also, the annexation of Crimea was a big deal back in the day, and that was much, much smaller than this, but you probably were like 2 so I don't blame you for not remembering. Not all armed conflicts last equally long, are of equal size, or occur in Europe. If this happened in France or Germany, it would get way more coverage - ftr, there have been plenty of weeks where the only place I hear about Ukraine is some anon whining on here about how the media talks too much about the massive European war. The news talks about it less often compared to other topics than you guys do.

>>472725
The news hasn't been talking about this as frequently for like a year - which, by the way, everybody thought Russia would win in like a month a year ago. Went great! They'll probably still win, who knows?

>The imperial bourgeoisie cared about this alot because this was their attempt at knocking down a rival power

Oh, yeah, they baited Russia into starting a ground war based around Lebensraum by, uh, not letting Ukraine into NATO.
Russia didn't have to invade. They didn't have to annex Crimea in 2014, and they didn't have to try to annex the rest of Ukraine in 2022. It was an incredibly stupid move. What do you think would happen if South Korea tried to annex North Korea? Do you think NK would just give in if China didn't send them bombs? Probably not!
Invade a sovereign country with a huge military and a sense of national identity, and what do you think will happen? A birthday party? The US should back out, but that alone isn't going to end the war.

>>472737
>which, by the way, everybody thought Russia would win in like a month a year ago.
We have to put this into context.

At first people thought that this war would last no longer than a few weeks, because the assumption was that the Zelensky government was autonomous enough to broker a peace deal with the Russians. Can you really blame people for assuming that Ukraine wouldn't just let it self be sacrificed by the US ?

Also the Russian military did cripple most of Ukraine's original military in a few months, without NATO continuously rebuilding Ukraine's army this would have been a very short war indeed. Emptying out NATO weapons stocks to prolong an inevitable Ukrainian defeat that's not rational behavior either and wasn't predictable. It seemed so unthinkable that so many western governments would do military collaborationism with hardcore Nazis in Ukraine. Perhaps that was a bit naive.

>they baited Russia into
The Ukrainian fascists were gearing up to do ethnic displacement in east Ukraine. That was more than just bait. Given how many familial and other ties exist between Russia and East Ukraine, that kind of political pressure on it's own was probably enough to cause a war. The fact that Ukraine wouldn't rule out NATO integration that made war a certainty. The Russians think NATO=US-hard-power-projection.

>Crimea
The Crimean's do have a right to self determination, they held a legitimate referendum that upheld democratic norms. They became their own country and then they immediately joined the Russian federation. I would have preferred that Crimea and the other countries like the Luhansk and Donetsk people's republics had become fully independent countries. That might have been possible if western governments had offered them international recognition and done stuff like opening embassy's in their territories. By rejecting their requests for international recognition they basically pushed these fledgling nations into the embrace of the Russian federation. One of the many strategic and diplomatic failures.

>Invade a sovereign country
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>472783
>The fact that Ukraine wouldn't rule out NATO integration that made war a certainty.
Also worth mentioning that Zelensky made allusions to Ukraine pursuing nuclear weapons at the Munich security conference just before the invasion. A nuclear armed NATO collaborator right next door with a large border near important Russian cities? That shit was never gonna fly.

>>472737
Go back to Reddit you gay faggot

First of all, capitalism isn't a "system", but a situation. No one was an "ideological capitalist" until the rise of the fascists. The reactionary elitists and idiot screamers embraced ideology, but their ideology suggested not "maximum capitalism" but oligarchy and slavery. That is the result of the German ideology, Nazism, the Austrian School, and so on. There were political elitists who did see the future as liberal and progressive, who believed themselves to be a new aristocracy, which makes diagnosing what this was difficult given the amount of lying involved.

The trajectory of capitalism as a situation is literally what Capital was intended for, and it was expected that this understanding would be expanded on by future writers. The questions Marx asks are not particular to him, so there are liberals and socialists and proto-fascists / elitists asking the same question. The Fascists themselves are directly responding to Marx, and to the situation they saw. It became the consensus of those who opposed the democratic movement that fascism was the only future society that would protect a political elite, and so that is by the admission of those who rule what they really want. They want to Nazify the world, and keep telling us the Germanic system is the only possible system, since the Germans dominated world fascism and cleared out every other type. In the main, fascism is the political system of eugenics.

This isn't the position of the "left", but the position history has shown us, and by the start of the 21st century, eugenics was all that remained. Ideology is for the slaves. Eugenics in the end supplants capitalism as the dominant situation. Rather than the capitalist's lordship being through command of money or financial institutions, eugenic society is dominated by command and control of people in a form of slavery more abject than any yet known. If you were to suggest a teleological view of history, human civilization appears to the present ruling ideas as nothing more than a progression of slavery to ever-worse forms. Chattel slavery gives way to serfdom, which gives way to the scientific slavery of the 18th and 19th centuries and imperialism, which gives way to corporate rule and the early efforts of the eugenists, which gives way to the national security states that could command all life from cradle to grave, which gives way to the eugenism which is currently seizing the world. There was never once, in the ruling ideas, a suggPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>472740

Can you elaborate on the last paragraph?
This is a really interesting post.

>>472742
There hasn't been any new current in "left" political thought that is genuine in a long time. It is so bad that the positions of the far right are sold as "leftist". It's why the "new left" is ecologist and lies so profusely to the masses. They've gone over to fascism, and were the most eager to roll into what is happening after 2020. The actual left has been disintegrated, lacks any worthwhile leaders, and mumbles weakly about their future in some small forum or cloistered location. Anyone who was of the older left got out of the US or accepted that it's a lost cause - so many became expats wherever they could flee. There is nothing left in this country and they knew it would be a wasteland. A lot of them want it to be this way, and got into the European ideological sickness. They hate Americans more than anything in the world, and increasingly they just hate the people. That was always something latent in leftism, honest or the "new left" posture. Long ago the left abandoned the people and chose the institutions - the same institutions most of us see correctly as the source of the problem. When left, right, and center align with the institutions and against our actual existence, there is nowhere to go - and their goal is to make a world that is completely unliveable. When done, the Hegelian view of history can operate in "lab conditions" - all inadmissible ideas have finally been swept away, leaving only "historical progress" to lead to the inevitable outcome. That outcome, predicted long in advance, was despotism.

>>472766
Basically, if anything is going to be different, it would start from entirely new foundations. The left/right distinction referred to a historical divide in the republics rather than a universal position, and the fascists monopolized the "third way" to eliminate all potential worlds that could have been different.

>>472767
In communism, there would be left and right tendencies inherited from the same struggle, but those concepts meant different things in the socialist society, as socialism was premised on very different settlements. In the main, the left communists desired the same social reform that left liberalism implied, and the right communists were the advocates of the retreat to the institutions and abandonment of the people. The history of the early USSR and the Stalin period is fascinating if you dig into it, but the revisionist history is that Stalin was le dictator who waved his mighty hand to move the world, which is absurd and something the actual "Stalinists" vehemently denied, with facts backing them up.

>>472669
Besides a Kremlin-hit, there are other possible explanations.

They could have put burned corpses on the plane, and parachuted out just before it crashed, to fake their deaths and disappear. This isn't the first time Prigozhin was said to have died in a plane crash afterall.

It could have been a US assassination because they think Wagner might fight in Africa.

Prigozhin could have had other enemies too.

>>471597
personally gotta say i like to imagine they all suffocated to death especially since the news makes a habit of stating blatant lies and at best half truths as undisputed fact with usually each story tied with a pretty bow all backed up by buncha quacks and shysters

>>470217
It's marketing for the remake of Critical Depth. Get Hype.

>>471601
Wow This brought back memories

>>471597
SAUCE??!?!

>>471931
Xi Jinping has moved China's economy to the left so far. That's a pretty good sign.
We kinda have to see how well they deal with the US shenanigans like their attempts at starting a war in Taiwan.

I think the US attempts at toppling the chinese state won't go beyond 2030, and after that the Chinese socialist project has a reasonable chance at succeeding.

Also after the US empire is concluded the age of empire will come to an end. Not China nor any other power will play hegemon. The material conditions no longer allow for anybody to bootstrap a new empire.

>>471932
>Those properties are UNPROFITABLE, and they are on the balance of the state municipalities.
Real estate hedge-funds aren't after profits they want rent.
The more real estate goes from large hedge-funds to the public-sector or individual people, the lower that parasitic drain. This is a W.

>>472604
here's the embed

>>472490
>Muh pop culture Netflix reference
Psyoped opinion discarded

The right gets bent out over shit like this because they are to stupid to understand systemic issues.

>>472544
they are to stupid

>>472544
You think they'd be less "bent out of shape" if they understood it ?
I doubt it. I read a bunch of Marxist theory and roughly understand how monopoly capital formation and financialisation works, but i still find it infuriating. The anger won't go away until the broken shit gets fixed. There is only some alleviation from understanding it.

But maybe you're not entirely wrong, at least part of the right thinks that capitalism is exclusively small and medium sized enterprises competing in a utopian market where no capitalist ever manages to corner the market, and nobody can extract monopoly rent or super-profits. And when actually existing capitalism is corporate hell standing on your neck, it generates anger from broken expectations.

Maybe we should invent a new economic ideology that argues for automatic caps on the maximum size of companies and limits on capital accumulation. The chances of this type of utopian capitalism working in praxis are not great. But at least that could work as a entry point to structural thinking.

>>472546
>Maybe we should invent a new economic ideology that argues for automatic caps on the maximum size of companies and limits on capital accumulation.

If you're willing to compromise, just do Georgism.

>>472506
>the important part that there were regional differences
idiotism

the differences in time are far more significant than regional differences

>>472507
not an argument (also take meds)

>>472502
>My imaginary version of feudalism had some upsides
Actually existing feudalism worked like this:
90% of the population had to do subsistence farming, which meant they lived short, brutal and austere lives. The nobility, the aristocrats, the barons,… and the theocracy, stole most of the food they farmed. People got subjected to physical torture, psychological terror and arbitrary punishment. Also feudalism regularly had severe famines where significant numbers of the population starved to death. People were kept artificially ignorant because even basic literacy training was suppressed. Religion was mandatory, and if you didn't believe their fantasy, they tried to stone or burn you to death.

The only thing about feudalism that didn't completely suck was that during agricultural off-season, people had a lot more free time.

>>472509
and now you just do heroin instead of all of this

>>472510
Yes you are correct, people are still being subjected to degrading conditions.
However the drug mafia can be defeated too.