/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>469084
The rulers do not want any form of socialism that would be a meaningful implementation. They make it clear they do not want the people to have anything, and have found a critical mass of people who will fight to the bitter end to ensure those selected to die will die. That is the governing principle they have chosen to regulate society and economic activity. They announce this loud and clear. That's the source of your problem - that a concerted interest absolutely refuses to allow those cast out to possess a single thing. We could very easily give to those who have not the means to live and participate in society, but it was decided that the alien underclass was to be destroyed. There is no going back - it has gone on for too long, and is far from complete. If you want to change that, it is a political struggle - and it would not be some revolution where people LARP as Jacobins or Soviets and recapitulate past memories, which weren't even what their narratives suggest they were. The Jacobin tyranny did not conform to this clean narrative of Whig History canned revolution, and not even the narratives that were at the forefront of the revolution suggested that line of historical progress. What would be required is something very different, that has never happened in human history and managed to win. It would entail a way of thinking that is alien to all hitherto known politics, or at least politics as it has been conducted in this vast imperial enterprise that has a very long history.

>>469088
>The rulers do not want any form of socialism that would be a meaningful implementation.
When slave-societies like the Roman empire were converted into feudal societies, the slave-masters did not want it, but the feudal lords did not leave them a choice. When the feudal societies were converted into capitalist societies the feudal lords did not want it, but the bourgeoisie did not leave them a choice. When socialism gets implemented it'll be like that as well. If humanity would ask the entrenched rulers for permission to advance it's social and economic organization we would never have gone beyond clan societies.

>people who will fight to the bitter end to ensure those selected to die will die.
I guess it's true that such a tendency always exists in class societies but it's a loosing strategy, because it's too inefficient to murder or degrade loads of people. And it's not like it's possible to change the composition of the population via mass-murder or selective breading-rights. You could say that humanity is genetically so redundant that it's utterly futile to attempt artificial negative selection.

>What would be required is something very different, that has never happened in human history and managed to win. It would entail a way of thinking that is alien to all hitherto known politics
That sounds interesting, but change doesn't begin with a new idea, it begins with new material conditions that give rise to new ideas.

>>469089
<Tfw a dim-witted teenager tries to have a serious, deep, and logical conversation with a schizophrenic
>change doesn't begin with a new idea, it begins with new material conditions that give rise to new ideas
So change begins with…. a change
The education system in burgerland is a joke

>>469090
This went over your head, the point was about grounding the origin of ideas in the material world. If you tell people to search for new ideas, you also have to direct them towards examination of material reality, other-wise too many people will try introspection. Nothing new can be found from looking inwards, and that has been the case for millennia.

>>469091
Fair enough. I couldn't actually bring myself to read the rant you were replying to

>>469054
>I'm kinda wonder about the privacy aspect.
You should, given that multiple WEF officials have stated that it's explicitly about controlling people.

you can't even buy crypto without ID today

so the whole idea is pointless since its no better or secure than credit card

there's monero and other alternatives but you immidietly labeled criminal even if you mention it. so nobody uses it anyway

most likely it isn't perfect either

while interesting current gen of these currenties and applications are 'hoaxy' so its pure speculation or something

i have read a very good article in some anarchist joournal about these currencies how they were created out of some schizo ideas of the 90s

bitcoin obv. wasn't even remotely first currency and it was just engeenered or whatever

actually very good article on history and concepts that makes it pretty clear lmao

Oh lol Dickblast is part of the club. Interesting angle he played.

>>469055
The WEF's "you'll own nothing" is like the total oppposite of socialism.

There is basically 3 types of property: personal, public and corporate property
In fully realized socialism there would be only personal property (like your stuff) and public property (like roads).

The WEF wants that corporate property replaces all personal and public property, and everything becomes a subscription to a rental service, and the only way to own your stuff is via "manual liberation".

I suspect that what Cockshott has in mind doesn't really involve anybody from the WEF tho, he sees Central Bank Digital Currency as a way for nation states to regain power over finances. Currently the Bahamas, Nigeria, Russia, Thailand, Malaysia, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and 7 Eastern Caribbean Union countries, have a central bank digital currency. China is working on one but it's not yet rolled out. So I guess we should look at what effect it has in those countries.

I see a potential problem because CBDCs might be ab/used for blocking the finances on the basis of political disagreements, that would cause it to fail, because nobody trusts banking that could just be turned off. In order to prevent financial which-hunting they would require very rigorous privacy features.

>>469045
You’re just a charlatan who think they found a new political position because you picked something to be a contrarian about

>>469047
Personally I'd define neofuedalism in more simple terms
>An economic system in which an increasing and fundamental proportion of economic surplus is directed toward expanding the means of social control, in which the reproduction of social relations increasingly occurs directly, politically, and for its own sake, and in which profitization through rent, subscription, fees, and similar arrangements take precedent throughout much of the economy.
Don't listen to the mouthbreathing unoriginal dogmoids who have never accomplished anything politically significant in their lives. They are just latching onto something to give themselves with a sense of certainty and significance

Happy mayday frien.
Solidarity.

I felt that

>Pedestrians trying to cut through trains have been disfigured, dismembered and killed
Why don't they build a few of these pedestrian bridges, the wooden ones are relatively cheap.

>>469009
There isn't a capable contractor in the area who donated to the right person's election campaign

>>469010
Wow what a clunky convoluted system. People used to complain about bureaucracy making it hard to do stuff, but this seems way more complicated.

>Greenpeace Activists Scale Belgian LNG Terminal to Demand … to demand an end to European imports of LNG from the United States.

hmm interesting, green activists that are not co-opted, it seems.

>>468827
Some US states are also trying to bring back child-labor
<Lawmakers in Iowa and Minnesota have introduced legislation in the last month proposing exceptions to child labor regulations in their respective states
https://www.businessinsider.com/fair-labor-standards-act-hiring-child-laws-worker-shortage-iowa-minnesota-2023-2?r=US&IR=T

Capitalism is degenerating

>>468829

A labor shortage? But why don't they just raise the wages?

>>468832
>A labor shortage?
Yeah as long as there are unemployed people, it's impossible to have a labor shortage, since capitalism never does full employment, capitalism can never claim to have a labor shortage.
> But why don't they just raise the wages?
exactly, we should call it a wage shortage

https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=qNWQMW3KlXs

<"We're engage in creating slavery, We're trafficking slaves to this country ?"
>"Absolutely !"

This is referencing some 85000 children by the way.

Literally who?

Literally what?

>>468930
i think this guy was posted on the old 8chan leftypol alot, especially this webm

>>468934
No he wasn't.

Climate boogaloo isn't real, but energy policy is never dictated by the people or their wants. It is the exact opposite - energy monopolies were the birth of post-slavery capitalism, and were contingent on ensuring that the masses were as far removed from the benefits of electricity and technology as possible. Every decision of the state after 1870 was designed to eliminate the masses' comprehension of science and technology, so that people were ruled by the machine, completely alienated from it. It started with the type of education allowed for them in public or private schools, which emphasized slavish devotion to pedagogy and philosophies of rule, or emphasized avarice and a love of backstabbing and called it "business sense". It goes without saying that eugenics was at the center of this entire project.

If you did want to reduce the dreaded carbon emissions - which was always a bullshit excuse to invade peoples' lives and not anything real - you would begin by not making planned obsolescence the norm, and institute some fucking quality control over the entire chain of industry. It would be trivial to reduce energy requirements for many things, but this is not done because it was always an excuse to attack living standards. The rulers did not want to hear anything about technology being more efficient or better, and when it became too difficult to suppress new technology or changes in peoples' habits, the climate boogaloo was invented to justify a further invasion and begin fully stripping away people from technology. Not just the reduction of fuel use, but the elimination of private transport, the war against the countryside, and the shittifcation of everything were deliberate and the entire point. Ultimately it has nothing to do with any substantive use of energy, but seeding the idea that too many people is the problem, and using the control of energy technology as the vehicle to impose this from on high. That is one lever the oligarchs hold over the people, since energy is a natural monopoly. He who controls the oil controls the planet, and that is something they don't give up. Same with uranium or fusion power plants, or the infrastructure to even maintain electricity which is necessarily expensive. The only way this could be stopped is if people exert what leverage they possess and there is a force commandeering this infrastructure that will fight eugenics. That's why you can't bank on this idea of a peoples' revolution from nothing - thePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>468911
>Climate change is real hurry durrr

Kill yourself Eugene.
You will never be an intellectual.

people that believe climate hooga booga: "i fricking love science!" "achtually men have periods"
people that don't believe climate hooga booga: "i love jesus and lenin" *build mach 15 long range cruise missiles*

>>468911
>planned obsolescence
>attack living standards
Those points are true, there is a fuckton of green hypocrisy and green-austerity-wealth-inequality-extremism in the ruling ideology.

Consider that climate change can be true and at the same time the ruling class also tries to bend every narrative towards their agenda.

It's actually pretty easy to cast the ruling class as climate sinners, their live styles are extremely wasteful, and they are casting stones in a glass house.

>>468918
This

>>468895
>what makes Ukraine as 'an example of what a country should avoid' different from 2003 Iraq?
Iraq was the enemy of the US empire, and it got destroyed. The story where the big powerful empire crushes a puny foe, shocked nobody.

Ukraine was a different story, because Ukraine was the ally of the big powerful empire, and as such the expectation was that the power of the empire would grant Ukraine a swift and triumphant victory without suffering much damage. Ukraine now lying in shambles despite being on team empire, that is the big shocker.

Of course the outcome was predicted across the political spectrum of realists, but that's another story.

>>468896
>Ukraine was a different story, because Ukraine was the ally of the big powerful empire, and as such the expectation was that the power of the empire would grant Ukraine a swift and triumphant victory without suffering much damage

Did anyone actually believe that? Barring a direct intervention (which wasn't going to happen - Russia is a nuclear power & Ukraine isn't in NATO), most in America expected Ukraine would have lost by now.

>>468895
Wait a minute, i might have misread that, you might have been talking about deterrence. As in the US destroying Iraq should have deterred more countries from opposing the US.

I have to admit i don't know how to quantify how many countries complied with the US empire because of fear from getting the Iraq treatment. I don't know if objectively the Ukraine-shock-effect is more powerful than the Iraq-avoidance-effect, but superficially it kinda does appear like it is.

Fear is only a short term motivator and people who are effective at reaching positions of power usually have a much lower fear response. So you'd expect that the people who end up the leaders of countries are less likely to act out of fear.

Also it's possible to draw the conclusion that because Ukraine got destroyed despite complying with the empire, that is worse because it being Submission + Defeat, while those that were defeated in defiance to empire did not loose their dignity.

I think that broken expectations also do play a role.

>>468898
>Did anyone actually believe that? Barring a direct intervention (which wasn't going to happen - Russia is a nuclear power & Ukraine isn't in NATO), most in America expected Ukraine would have lost by now.
It's hard to know what people really think, but it does appear that the Neo-liberals really believe their own superiority myths. If i had to guess what the neocons think: They can't make mistakes, they can only be failed by others.

The people in the west who expected Russia to curb-stomp Ukraine in 3 weeks, thought that Ukraine would take the first peace-deal the Russians would offer. I think the Russians might have had similar illusions. The other thing was that Russia didn't use heavy weapons in the first half of the war, they didn't destroy anything that would impact the civilian population. For a very long time they operated with damage minimization as a priority. Virtually everybody in the west expected Russia to go in like the Americans "shock and aw" massive fire-power unleashed. Nobody expected Russian legalism to be so influential, they declared it a "special military operation" and that really did put many constrains on what the Russian military coulPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>468899
>The people in the west who expected Russia to curb-stomp Ukraine in 3 weeks, thought that Ukraine would take the first peace-deal the Russians would offer.

I thought the former but didn't think the latter…
Yeah, Russia might have been under that impression, though.

>>468901
Most people who were paying attention to the Donbass civil war, had that impression. The expectation was that Ukraine would rather grant the Donetsk and Lugansk People's republic some concession over fighting the Russians.

tldr

>>468865
no clue what OP tries to say

There's a creativity sweet spot to drugs. You've veered too far, I'm afraid.
Now you're just incomprehensible.