[ 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."
Tor Only

Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord

| Catalog | Home

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.


Ben Norton is doing a Series on the Deep State.

The first episode is about the JFK assassination.


File: 1677531685766.png ( 164.05 KB , 400x400 , bennortonayy.png )

I hope he sticks to journalism instead of his usual "anti-imperialist" piss take analyses. Since this one is about history, I'm guessing it's unfortunately the latter.

File: 1667202870995.png ( 602.17 KB , 768x445 , screen-shot-2015-09-21-at-….png )


John Fetterman is cool because he's the cognitive deficiency candidate. Mr. Oz has smarts, but he only knows how to use them for evil. He made his bones terrorizing the brains of innocent old insane dementia people, scamming them with fraudulent weight loss products. Fetterman may be dumb but he knows how to stack bricks and smear mortar on the bricks for 16 hours a day in the hot Pennsylvanian sun. That is a deed Mr. Oz has never known once in his privileged life.
5 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


If fetterman wins it will be sublime justice


File: 1677474606167.jpg ( 98.9 KB , 1009x1024 , 1677474107415553m.jpg )

Kek, left(tm)fags literally voted a braindead guy into office (for the 2nd time in 2 years)


File: 1677475926979.jpg ( 210.24 KB , 1048x768 , boredom.jpg )

>it's another pol-conflates-liberals-with-leftists episode


If the shoe fits
>Muh, we want the same thing but real leftist believe we have to have a revolution and destroy society to get it
Ya, so different


File: 1677479183197.jpg ( 210.24 KB , 1048x768 , 1677475926979.jpg )

>it's another everything-i-disagree-with-is-conflated-with-pol episode

File: 1677422193711.jpg ( 530.41 KB , 594x729 , 20230213_141741.jpg )


All U.S. extremist mass killings in 2022 linked to far right, report says
When will the public wake up to this existential threat?


File: 1677422811099.jpg ( 136.53 KB , 640x400 , stop and think.jpg )

>Anti-Defamation League
lol, got a real source?


The anti defamation league isn't the source though lol


They performed the study.




There's plenty of Jews that I like, such as the fine journalists at the Grayzone. ADL on the other hand is basically a lobby for Israeli Zionists and has a long track record of lies and smears. They are not a very credible group when it comes to assessing others' politics.

File: 1619621596196.png ( 114.59 KB , 1435x1600 , gfhj.png )

 No.198097[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

A general thread for all South Asian related discussion.
474 posts and 122 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1629084262654.png ( 124.35 KB , 400x224 , ClipboardImage.png )

>can't even get a vaccine in private without muh gobermint documents
>banned tiktok and other apps from the market for bitch ass reasons

fucker can't decide to be a libertarian or a government stickler
i hate it here

independence my ass, stalin was right. the bourgeois only changed hands from british to indian



What the fuck is wrong with our region

This literally sounds like an insane strawman you would imagine some radlib making but it's fucking real.

Is it all just because of sexual repression and patriarchy?
Nobody is safe from getting assaulted men, women, children, animals

I don't think our countries will be ever safe unless we go through some kind of cultural revolution.


Thoughts on Narendra Dabholkar?


File: 1633090534340.mp4 ( 39.37 MB , 1080x720 , h5x1llhj7rq71.mp4 )

This one pro-reservation meme made so many redditors seethe

Not to be unexpected since most of them are worthless, reactionary rich kids on a meme sub but still.

Other than the corruption aspect where people fake documents to pretend to be lower class, I don't get the hate regarding reservation.



File: 1675697731499.png ( 56.42 KB , 1454x980 , falling rate of profit wit….png )

 No.465059[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

Before Karl Marx wrote the political economy of capital, he was studying energy conservation laws. The tendency for the falling rate of profit is partially an expression of that.

Capitalist ideologues that are pretending that capitalism can go on for ever are basically peddling the same scam ass free energy perpetual motion devices.

In Marxist theory, the falling rate of profit is caused by the capitalist system changing the material conditions until it can no longer reproduce its existence.

Capitalism is not a perfect machine that will continue working until the profit-rate reaches zero. It will likely stall out some time before that. In this context perfect capitalism has perfect market-competition between capitalists, and all the capitalists are reinvesting 100% of their profits into new/upgraded means of production. No surplus goes into prestige projects, ruling class luxury, wars and means of political domination. All those expenses will make the system stall out earlier than the theoretical ideal of capitalism.

Marx also said that the mode of production changes once the old mode of production can no longer advance the productive forces.
That is also something that arises from statistical mechanics of thermo dynamics. In simple words low entropy increasing systems are statistically less likely to exist than systems that increase more entropy. The productive forces are really good at increasing entropy and the more advanced the better they become at increasing entropy. War is also very good at increasing entropy, so if you value peace, you value investing in developing the productive forces. It is not possible to choose a low entry path, like for example going back to agrarian society, because it will anger the gods of entropy.

Should we say it's a cooling rate of profit ?
129 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


There is very little mass in the fusion plasma so it can hardly store any thermal energy, hence it can't impart much heat-energy to the reactor wall by touch. If the fusion plasma touches the reactor wall it just vaporizes the topmost layer of atoms from the reactor wall surface, and that doesn't matter, because that's an insignificant amount of wear and tear compared to everything else.
It won't melt the reactor, because the instant the fusion plasma goes out of vacuum and touches anything it will cool down below the temperature it can sustain fusion and it will instantly cease to produce heat.

Basically if the plasma touches anything the fusion gets extinguished and then it's just an incredibly thin gas.

On the off chance that you are interested in learning why you were wrong, you could read about the difference between thermal energy Q and temperature T.


File: 1677173673364.png ( 124.14 KB , 3200x2400 , funding for fusion.png )

>still no working fusion reactor
didn't get enough funding.


This is mostly due to people freaking out about nuclear energy with no understanding of it. Things are changing.


this is simply because there are cheaper, easier and financially safer ways to produce energy in the short-term
its just le "market forces" at work


Well, there's that too, but, also what I said. It's multifaceted like all things. The anti nuke movent did play a large role in fear mongering about nuclear energy.

File: 1676143713203.jpg ( 83.82 KB , 334x500 , poster-karl-marx-1717305.jpg )

 No.465309[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

Ok, I've never really heard anyone here explain what the left is (except the one dude with the asinine and convoluted definition about 'how the left doesn't exist because people don't perceive the left or it doesn't do the same thing as 100 years ago).

I've obviously used this place as a bit of a platform to rant against muhleft or the left (tm), and I genuinely appreciate the latitude the mods have given me to do that - since I feel like critique of the left has always been a tradition within the broader termed left. (Bolshevik split with the Mensheviks, the anti-revisionists broke from the USSR, in the west the 60s new left broke from the old, etc).

In some ways, the fake and ghey left is an example of a section of the broader left trying to distinguish themselves from the rest, albeit on a misguided cultural footing within the lap of finance capital.

But, this still an open question: what is the left.

I always find myself returning to the Marx quote - the free development of each is the free development of all.

This presents a sort of paradox, since development (on the individual and collective level) itself is never free. It always has an expense. Moreover, often development occurs faster through episodes of adversity, challenge, and even necessity.

At the same time you have a situation in which something is to lacking of freedom, has very little optionality or autonomy, it becomes stunted or dies, or it develops accordingly as cattle.

So you have these two (four really) qualities you wanted to maximize: collective and individual liberty and development. Of course, you cant completely 'max out' one without sacrificing stats in the others, but you can arrange a society in which all are raised a great bit.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
223 posts and 59 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1676867073740.jpg ( 645.15 KB , 1790x2048 , 1676548006906770.jpg )

Well if you want to post nothing but pepes and le heckin soyjackarinos go to 4chan



File: 1676868076977.jpg ( 237.44 KB , 600x600 , serfsup.jpg )

You really have a thing for that LARPer.
>Very ideological, don't you think?
No, it's narcissistic cosplay, which is what he did regularly in public.
>Nah, must be because he is just a madman and thinks he is a literal Hercules or something.
That would definitely appear to be the more likely scenario given how he liked to play at being a gladiator.
>nothing to do with politics..
Nothing about the reign of Commodus suggests that he had any political acumen whatsoever. We are talking about the guy who crashed the Antonine Dynasty.
>It must be that free citizens became coloni of some landlord out of the good life, because there was just so much "free fertile land" laying around.
Are we talking about Roman plebs or are we talking about veterans of the legions?
>and there was no such phenomena as raider takeovers of the polis lands by landlords and the arbitrary moving of the landmarks that required a special attention of the emperor with a rescript..
I seem to recall Augustus (or was it Tiberius?) dealing with that little scheme in his day, but he did so by convincing the senate to condemn the offenders so that it would be regared as an act of justice rather than an arbitrary assassination of his own political opponents. That is the way that someone who is good at politics handles such a situation.
>By that time the municipal slaveowners didn't need more slaves, they were struggling with their own.
How long had it been since there had been an actual slave revolt at that point? Two-hundred years? The slavers weren't struggling that badly.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


Go back, trawny




File: 1677103700729.jpg ( 591.11 KB , 1920x2417 , Emperor Commodus as a glad….jpg )

Ok, I really need to expand on how I view the Roman history in general so you can understand where I am coming from.

First, the basic foundational element of the roman and ancient way of life is civitas - a polis commune. A commune with common polis lands, assembly, magistracies, division of labor by "orders" and all the bells and whistles that come with it. This commune by its very nature produces slavery because to enable expanded reproduction of the polis beyond the family unit and a mutual neighbor help you need non-citizens.
The foundation of the civitas, a citizen who can take part in the public life of the polis (including deciding agrarian policy) - a self-sufficient free farmer.
The polis ideology was such that wealthier citizens were morally required to "take care" of their poorer brethren. From this you have what in general could be called "bread and circuses" and later in the Empire basically basic income for the poorest citizens of Rome.
The poorest citizens of Rome in the course of its history have won some concessions including a say in the decisions of agrarian policy. They got land all around Italy and then the Meditterain.

Long story short, for the last century of the Republic for the large part the Roman state was conducting a program of the populares in its agrarian policy. The Emperors of the first century for the most part continued this program by confiscating the lands of large landowners and redistributing them to the citizens.
Then came the Antonines who were the henchmen of the senate, who branded the previous emperors as "tyrants", who ended the practice of land redistributions, and so you see a rapid growth of large landownership, with the first landowner and the feudal being the Emperor himself (the villas of the emperor were among the first to widely use colonate on their lands), which was a death warrant to the Roman civitas and the roman army and so to the Roman Empire itself as a political entity (which is what happened further down the line).

So in the light of all this, I see Commodus and the later soldier emperors as a reaction (and a belated one at that) to this existential threat to the Roman civitas.

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 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 ]
| Catalog | Home