[ 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: 1706429978886.jpg ( 135.17 KB , 800x970 , 800px-Katherine_Maher_(cro….jpg )


I just heard about the resume of the newly named CEO of NPR, and it has to be seen to be believed. I've never seen someone with a resume that glowed this bright.

>2002-2003: The American University in Cairo, Arabic Language Institute, Arabic Language Intensive Program (ALIN)

<2004: Intensive Arabic Program at the Institut français (Ifpo) in Damascus, Syria, a university funded by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs
>2004-2005: Council on Foreign Relations
<2005: Eurasia Group, whose leadership include Gerald Butts of the WWF and Cliff Kupchan, who worked in the State Department during the Clinton administration as deputy coordinator of US assistance to Eurasia
>2005-2007: HSBC, International Manager in London, Germany, and Canada
<2007-2010: Founding member of UNICEF "Innovation and Communication Officer" in communication, advocacy, and youth organizing
>2010-2011: "Information and communications technology (ICT)" Program Officer at National Democratic Institute (NDI) in Washington, DC
<2012: Security Fellow at Truman National Security Project
>2011-2013: "ICT" specialist at The World Bank in Washington, DC
<2012-2013: THINK school of leadership, a school for "developing creative leaders to solve global challenges", funded as a partnership of the Dutch government, Vodafone, McKinsey & Company, KLM Airlines, and other private entities. Its leadership includes Esther Wojcicki of Creative Commons. Esther Wojcicki is the mother of Susan Wojcicki, former husband of Google founder Sergey Brin and owner of DNA company 23andme, whose stated mission is to harness personal genetic information to advance research.
>2013-2014: Advocacy Director at Access Now, an organization discussed below
<2014-2022: Wikimedia Foundation
>2020: Council on Foreign Relations
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
11 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Only using infographics to justify their contempt for women and brown people.

Otherwose, they whine about Wikipedia being " 'lefty' by nature".
(You know how rightists confuse leftism woth liberalism)


Wikipedia feels like something ripe for replacement by a federated alternative. There are already independent, specialized Wikis which can often be better than Wikipedias articles on the subject.


The question of who owns and controls the servers doesn't really address why Wikipedia is so bad. Wikipedia's biggest problems all stem from its fundamentally broken governance structure and contribution rules, which strongly favor corporate media stances over facts and evidence and give factions with the resources to employ large numbers of occupational users (state actors, corporate PR departments, etc.) the ability to control articles and topic areas by overwhelming non-occupational contributors.


look its literally npr, USA state media. yes its propaganda and its run by propagandists. thanks for pointing out the obvious.


What I had in mind was something more akin to a non-centrally owned Fandom. Get rid of Wikipedia as a singular repository of knowledge and embrace a decebtralized, well-networked, diverse, and even redundant wikisphere.

File: 1641545780518.jpg ( 498.25 KB , 1280x720 , 985499.large.jpg )


I'm really enjoying all of the videogame journalists pissing and shidding themselves over the gold rush game publishers are in over NFTs.

Practically every major publisher is promising to integrate NFTs into games and some like Sega, are already selling them now.

One legitimate criticism of NFTs are their environmental impact. But every media talking head that brings this up never spoke out against the Iraq War that irradiated entire cities with depleted uranium munitions, or the Pentagon, who is the number single emitter of greenhouse gases.

So I'm with the crypto bros on this one say this is sour grapes on people that missed out on the ground floor of this get-rich-quick scheme.

I also see this as anger from the burger settler class who are now really getting priced out of the middle class lifestyle in earnest to the point where their steady diet of new videogames may soon be out of their reach. As someone who grew up poor and was always priced out of these type of consumerist leisure goods I relish their anguish.

Another example of this is when Settlers (read white people) shidded themselves over Disney's new $2000 a night Stars Wars themed hotel. As they rightfully saw this as a new trend in Disneyland Theme Parks where they will soon only cater to the 1%. I never got to go to Disneyland when I was young and was told by these same Settlers that I shouldn't be upset because I can live without it. Ironically, it's them who will now live without it while I can actually still afford to go.

And game journalists are particularly hypocritical because we've seen none scarce digital goods sold for 20+ years now, first with iTunes, and then with Amazon with books, and later Steam with games. No one every questioned the environmental impact of these systems.

Overall I think NFTs will be a net good for the proletariat, it will provide a second hand market of digital goods that proles have already spent billions on, and put a lot of equity in their pocket.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
84 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>Anyway, RPGs are timewaster games for shut-ins and losers. Hiroshi Yamauchi was right to call them so when berating people who didn't like the lack of RPGs on N64. They're really games for children / tweens, not grown-ass people.
"grown-ass people" are fucking SLAVES, retard.

Imagine not being a fucking shut-in if you get the opportunity.

I want other people to be at the distance of an internet connection - that's the only way they can be tolerable.


Iromy is, adults waste their free rime on TV.

Yet they still berate kids for playing vieo games.

Also, kids are slaves too.


>munee kums frum sumware
das rite butt runnin a website's mightee cheap 4 most normhoes at small skalz.


Opsec 100


don't do identity-politics baiting

File: 1678548620202.jpg ( 97.86 KB , 1200x900 , Space chariot.jpg )


Noam Chomsky has a principle that he will only criticize his government (the US government in his case). His reason is guarding against co-optation, he doesn't want the chorus of reactionary intellectuals that manufacture consent for the powers that be, to be able to use anything that he writes or says for their sinister purposes. I think the Chomsky principle is largely correct but it's too strict, i think that you can criticize other governments as long as they aren't on the official LE-BIG-BAD list. So based on that you can criticize countries like Saudi Arabia or Israel, but for example Russia, China, and the DPRK can't be criticized, because they are the ""axis of evil"" in the mainstream narrative. I'm following this weaker Chomsky principle because i don't want to say anything that might be appropriated for an argument that supports a new cold-war or worse. Keep that in mind when you read this.

Main topic
I'm trying to get a materialist view of liberties. Usually people consider liberties to be timeless conditionaless absolutes. In some places of the world owning a gun is considered a liberty. In order to have that liberty you do need a government that doesn't try to disarm it's population, but far more importantly you need to have invented sophisticated metallurgy and gunpowder. So in conclusion liberties are conditional to development, in this case technical development. Tho not all conditions for liberties must be of a technical nature.

Many people are criticizing China for lacking certain personal liberties, and a big chunk of that is made up horror stories that never happened, but not all of it is wrong. For example China lacks technology privacy.

A considerable section of the Chinese population is not plugged into the techno-social information infrastructure. Since China has only beaten absolute poverty but not yet uneven development. That means if china were to move ahead and improve the tech-rights for Chinese citizens at this point in time they would benefit only the wealthier sections of society that can afford all the information services. That section of society could potentially seek to pull up the ladder behind them selves and prevent the rest of society from gaining access to beneficial information services.

So I will speculate that once China has leveled the uneven development, it will become politically viable for China to advance tech-rights. Politically viable in this context mePost too long. Click here to view the full text.
40 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>Well there is a point in not using that propaganda terminology. If only to communicate that you aren't towing the ideological line that seeks to demonize China in order to make war. Also language is an ideological battlefield why would you seed any ground to the warmongers ?
So basically virtue signaling?


What ?
no, it's not a virtue, there's nothing virtuous about this, it's an ideological position.




File: 1706667673158.png ( 235.64 KB , 600x650 , 6_09.png )

Your life was never yours to enjoy.


File: 1706674695619.png ( 7.38 KB , 300x200 , annoyed.png )

fatalism is useless.
if your life isn't yours, claw it back from who ever took it.

File: 1693578419130.jpg ( 43.51 KB , 680x472 , infrared-haz-is-unironical….jpg )


No wander leftypol spazzes out at the mention of him


>On the face of it, it seems completely contradictory to call leftism right-wing. The midwits responding to this will definitely try and remind you of that.

>But at some point in the course of Western history, people forgot about the actual historical tradition of left-wing politics entirely, confusing it for a newer ideology: Leftism.

>The key distinction lies in the 'ism' part of Leftism. In contrast to left-wing politics, leftism is itself an ideology rather than a political position. Jacobinism, Sandinismo, Mao Zedong Thought, etc. for example, can be called ideologies, which are left-wing in political content.

>Leftism, by contrast, is only left-wing in form. In content, it is actually right-wing. And this can be proven easily.

>Instead of referring to any actual concrete left-wing politics, leftism should be understood as a comprehension of the historical left taken in a purely abstract way - a meta-narrative of left-wing politics, if you will.

>This is what makes it outside the actual left-wing: In order to turn left-wing politics into a total IDEAL, you need a necessary conceptual distance from it which is only possible if you are, in fact, a right-winger.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
11 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


>Blacks and Fags not STFU about racism and homophobia are why conservatives vote Trump.
There I saved you 30 mins


File: 1693948245303.jpg ( Spoiler Image, 74.8 KB , 571x496 , 1693869309031796.jpg )

>They (the left) were taking all of the right's slander, mis-characterization, and demonization of the international left at face value and started identifying with it openly.
Holy shit no, the left did not turn into the histrionic strawman the right painted them as. This is something some old neoliberal fossil on Prager U would say


>Liberals have entered the chat


File: 1693997404222.jpg ( 625.63 KB , 1080x1336 , Screenshot_2023-09-06-17-4….jpg )

Ya, it was all PragerU who spun this idea out of nothing.


irony is alot of ethnic and sexual minorities are Trump sympathisers.

File: 1706372300703.jpg ( 598.3 KB , 1966x3000 , comrade lenin cleanses the….jpg )


The supposedly left-wing desire to obsess over the "racist, settler-colonialist Zionism" of the Israeli state is a way to obscure how the conflict is connected to capitalism, specifically, how it emerges from the failures of capitalist politics. What the so-called left has managed to achieve through their exhortation to focus on the plight of the Palestinian people is to transform empathy for suffering into a thought-terminating cliche, wielding it as a a blunt instrument of censorship, and at the expense of the very people who they claim to have empathy for. In true Orwellian fashion, they have managed to reconcile their empathy for Palestinian suffering with unwavering support for Hamas, free from any cognitive dissonance.

The extreme rhetoric and spectacular protests of the contemporary left is little more than a means of pressuring mainstream capitalist politicians, and even the desire to "defund Israel” (a policy that far-right Zionists also support) is likely just a way to scrub away the issue of Israel/Palestine in U.S. politics. Ultimately, their goal is not to support the liberation of the Palestinian people, but to be “on the right side of history", to wield moral authority over others by appearing to side with the most vulnerable belligerents. They perversely enjoy the fact that Palestinians will continue to be slaughtered, proudly parading the numbers of dead so that their "progressive" mode of politics can remain relevant.

But the greatest crime that the contemporary left commits is to tell people that they can be petty-bourgeois radicals, nationalists and fundamentalists, yet also be progressive - that socialism is unnecessary for the cause of progress and justice. The post-colonial world is the history of peoples living together but being shoehorned into nation-states. This is the outcome of the vision of the League of Nations and of the United Nations; it is a world of nation-states, and therefore a world of widespread national repression. There is no way that the nation-states which emerged from decolonization can be accepted as progressive or liberatory in the socialist sense, and the reason why the Soviet Union refused to join the League of Nations in the first place was to reject this very vision of a world of nation-states.

How we should interpret the Israel-Hamas war is not as a noble struggle for liberation against the forces of oppression, but as a capitalist political negotiation through violence. The goaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.
4 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


I agree with most of what you're saying. I intentionally avoided giving an analysis of Israeli state since it goes without saying that it is probably the most reactionary state to exist today. But I will include an analysis in a bigger document I'm writing. I'll probably post it here later if you want.


File: 1706438707321.png ( 23.91 KB , 979x90 , ClipboardImage.png )

Thread was deleted on leftypol, so I guess I'll be posting the critique of Israeli brainrot here then.


The what who where?



u gonna post this analysis/critique or what ?


>Socialists ought to reject

What the fuck do we actually do anon? The best we can do for palestine is block highways to raise awareness, block boats from leaving our ports going to Israel, and being annoying IRL and on social media. That's the most I can do in our political climate here. You do understand that really helping them is equivalent to revolution at home right? Because, you know, of all the imperialism.

There are countries in Europe with a higher rate of unionization that have probably taken more effective direct measures to help Palestine, I think there are massive protests in Germany right now over this issue.

So I don't really understand your criticism, you use a lot of words to shit on leftists, but first of all your criticism isn't constructive. You offer no suggestions for better courses of action. Second of all you seem to think that caring about the Palestinian cause is somehow tangential to our proletarian class cause at home. Yet you argue in favor of internationalism. Like wut.

File: 1705514824492.jpg ( 209.04 KB , 512x384 , zuck_umami_small.jpg )


Do they go

>I have to carefully construct what say to get the proles to do what I want and tolerate what I am doing

Or do they go

>I am so fucking god-like, I will use ruling-class language with my people and they will do my bidding.

Basically what I'm asking is do they have ideology of their own that they are unconsciously committed to, or are they blatantly just lying when they talk about things like creating jobs?
45 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



I was thinking recently, why the fuck would your average person participate willingly in wage slavery, the very idea should be so disgusting that no one would do it. Could the answer be that people are okay with working until they are like 70 years old because they believe in heaven? So they don't give a shit about their actual life in this world?

Even if it's not the idea of heaven, Christians are truly masochists and think life needs to suck in order to be pious. Fuck em, I'm sick of other people complacently going to work and perpetuating this system because I fucking hate it here.


>posits an actual way out of the system

Maybe I need to readmoar but Communism doesn't have any satisfying answers about how to get ourselves out of Capitalism. It just says that capitalism will bring about the conditions for it's own destruction. There are very few ideas about how to run a communist society and even fewer practical experiments where workers were not alienated from their labor.

Don't get me wrong I'm a socialist, I think Marxism is the way to think about things, I'm just saying there is no plan to get from point A to point B [in a modern, imperialist country]. And there should be.


Christinas arent really masochists. Theyre sadomasochists.

They have main character syndrome. They glorify suffering because they think life is like comic books and action movies.

Alot of these Christiams whom talk about how their lives were empty before following Christ and offer paternalsitc metaphors about their faith to young people?

Theyre all fake.
These Protestant patrons are only in church because they got nothing better to do in life.

Theyre midlofe crisis patrons.

Christianity is midlife crisis club.


Socialism seems more practical than communism tbh.


> It just says that capitalism will bring about the conditions for it's own destruction.

Anon you deff need to read more bcuz that is not what any communist text has ever said at all. You might have poor reading comprehension, but, none the less, communism as a social and economic movment is about working class people building and gaining popular power through whatever methedology, unions, state power, etc etc and enforcing that state/democratic power to impose their power over the bourgeois while developing society to a level of production and planning beyond the need for privatization of commodities and property in the first place.

Also, you're kind of moving the goal post because "A way to communism" is not what the argument was about. Communist ideology is the only system that actual posits changing the economic and social order of the system itself and not just blaming it on the jews or aliens or whatever.


I couldn't think of anything specific to say, and I just wanted to share this fantastic recent exchange between Richard Wolff and Michael Hudson on the subject of China's imploding housing bubble and recent global political economy. Enjoy, anons.

65 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1706155310725.jpg ( 80.49 KB , 764x430 , have-you-played-habbo-hote….jpg )

If you work for money then it can be called a job. This is also why people convert their cash into virtual money to live virtual lives, like habbo. My concept is holistic and scientific. If not, then what is "money" to you?


File: 1706297388824.jpg ( 96.24 KB , 534x534 , sub-buzz-28789-1537217336-….jpg )

>It's not a natural limit, like the Earth said "no more precious metal, guess nature says you can't do money any more!"
Obviously there is a limit to how much actual gold exists inside the earth. What makes it a good currency is that a politician cannot decide we need another 20 year war in the middle east and magic the gold out of thin air. Actual work and energy needs to be expended to increase the money supply.

>And always have. The reason for selecting precious metals in the first place was because ordinary people couldn't acquire them.

Even 60 years ago government coins contained real silver. Sorry I don't have time for the rest of your post if it's just more of this.

At least defend your original argument instead of jumping to a new topic.


>tldr you can trace some individual sats back to shady transactions.
And you can trace basically all dollars back to illegal activity so what's your point.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


>And you can trace basically all dollars back to illegal activity so what's your point.
This is not about traceability, at least not directly. Some BTCs have become tainted and can no longuer be exchanged , that doesn't happen with other currencies

>Nobody is forcing you to buy an iPhone.

<It's a monopoly if you are forced to buy it, technically you are not forced to buy anything, and therefore monopolies can't exist.
That's a retarded definition.
Marxists define a monopoly by the ability to set prices above market exchange value and collect monopoly-rent. (more explanation at the bottom of the post)
That's clearly the case for apple.

>You guys really are just entitled

<Apple is entitled to it's monopolies, you're not entitle to a free market
I know this is facetious, but you asked for it.
Anyway what Apple gets away with, is what all the other smartphone producers will try to copy, so everybody who isn't a I-zealot still is affected.

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


You're not getting it. Money as a concept is not intrinsically worth anything. It exists because states issued coinage, not because people decided for no apparent reason gold or silver ingots were now valuable. Most people have no reason to view anything as intrinsically valuable, or that there is intrinsically a society at all to trade with, let alone a society that would honor the value of anything its members claim. The money could be anything. It was never intrinsically valuable by any law of nature. Money was valuable because there were particular people who decided it would be, whether because it was dictated by them or because there were people who colluded to introduce a new concept of value or how people are to interact with each other. The only laws of nature are that there are human beings who like living - it says nothing about a preferred standard for economic exchange. All of this is just a way to make people do things they really don't want to do, and so money is worthless without armed men to enforce debts. Money and debt regimes have failed in the past, because the things that are really coveted are human labor and technology, and the uses of those things are not freely exchangeable by any natural and self-evident law.


The point isn't that people don't have bits of gold or silver, but that the mines to provide them could be controlled with far less effort than it would take to lock down all of the farms, all of the trade roads, and monopolize them. The drive to monopolize anything is not something rulers "have" to do, but choose to do.

File: 1702500601812.png ( 17.56 KB , 472x406 , smallsign.png )


The liberals have a universal discourse around protecting the minorities.

However pretty much everybody agrees to ruthlessly suppress serial killers, violent psychopaths, human trafficking rings, and so on.
But all of these are minorities. When the majority of the population suppresses the ruling class minority that's just called democracy.

You don't need to know sophisticated marxist theory to grasp how conceptually broken this is. Why did the liberals turn minorities into a political universal ?
21 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


When you speak of "minority rights" you are implicitly upholding a German conceit of culture war and friend-enemy distinctions that divide a society from within, and that to be a minority intrinsically means being "enemy". All of the laws in the US regarding minorities are not intended to mark minorities as "other" - every minority is under American law, and all of the laws pertaining to the status of minorities exist in principle for historical purposes, the big one being slavery. Outside of the US, this line of argument doesn't have any meaning, because it was specifically an attack on the concept of equal protection and the imposition of a German idea of what a nation "ought" to be. We're not as stupid as the theory requires us to be.

There is no concept of a "favored minority" or a minority with "special rights". The concept of a protected class exists because there was a reason for them to be protected. That's where "intersectionality" was a pernicious legal doctrine, because it confused the historical reasoning for protected classes… though in principle, any judge that would have looked at an unfair firing of, using the example, of a black woman, would not need to rely on a special class called "black woman", and the intersectional idea suggested that there were particular biases against black people and women which worked in concert, rather than an "oppression axis" where you scored points to rate how oppressed a group was. That narrative was purely a conservative and Germanic conceit of race-science and some eugenics garbage… which the liberals liked, so they codified it as policy. Such a policy would be flagrantly illegal and contrary to both the law and any purpose that we would consider good, and great pains are taken to act like the abusive policy either doesn't exist, or isn't what it actually is. And the point of the policy wasn't to protect anyone, but to make a mockery of any protection and convert it into a property claim of the institutions - that is, the very entities that are unfairly firing employees and hiring their buddies for nepotistic bullshit reasons, which is why you have affirmative action laws in the first place. If hiring were fair and equal then the concept of unfair firing and hiring wouldn't get far. Really though, the problem is that institutions are not designed on the premise of fairness. TPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


But to make it clearer, if you go to the minorities in America, the things they hate about America aren't that their culture isn't given approval or respect, but that stupid white people - and this is a vocal group of white people and some tag-alongs who want to be Uncle Ruckus - won't leave them alone to let them have the basic things that would make live worth living here. Said stupid white people will and have turn against white "race traitors" who refuse to enable their faggotry. It's Nazification, it's eugenics, it's Germanic, and reasonable people think it's fucking stupid. The same essentialism can be applied to any group, even an arbitrary group like "blue eyed people" that has no real political history. And of course, it specializes professions and essentializes them.

What all of that means in the longer term is the creation of a caste system, and this is what the partisans really want. Once they get rid of that pesky concept of "laws" they will move ahead with creating the caste system these fags have always wanted.


I shouldn't besmirch Uncle Ruckus, because he actually works for a living and, ultimately, is a decent-hearted and caring person who does all sorts of favors for the Freemans. Most of the assholes who do this are just shameless fags with no such redeeming quality whatsoever.


And in case you object to my naming of "fags", I do not support any "anti-fag" laws or this idiotic eugenist drive to purge all of the homosexuals. The sexual politics angle is always used for eugenics and nothing else, and this is true of homosexualism, feminism, and the pornification of society. You can talk to some gay guys who haven't gone crazy and they're wondering what society people think we live in, because they feel they're worse targets now than they've been at any time, and they're being forcibly "outed" and put through the wringer.


>muh brain develolment
>muh zoomzoom are dummies

Go back to "adulting"

File: 1705090742593.jpg ( 9.2 KB , 232x250 , Stalin-pointy-finger.jpg )


US Justice Department confirms: Stalin did nothing wrong, because Stalin made very difficult, national security decisions, operating under extraordinary time pressure.


<Practically the first words out of Sauer’s mouth were to warn the judges that if Trump could be held criminally liable for his actions in the White House, so could previous presidents. “To authorize the prosecution of a president for his official acts would open up a pandora’s box which this nation may never recover,” he said.

<“Could George W. Bush be prosecuted for allegedly giving false information to Congress to induce the nation to go to war in Iraq under false pretenses? Could President Obama for allegedly authorizing drone strikes targeting US citizens?”

One faction in bourgeois politics tries to go after another, and then realizes: fuck our guys did the same.


No shit? Nobody wants to prosecute Trump, and if they want to get rid of Trump, they wouldn't use this infantile rules lawyering. Trump is their plan and always has been. Why would a liberal oppose him? They would love to run against Trump forever.


Trump is an outlier pawn. Hes not anti-establishment. Hes just making a bigger tink than the typcial candidate.

His whole indignation campaign is just to generate profot to recover from his failed businesses.

File: 1667451319356.gif ( 1.65 MB , 498x301 , 1655028378033.gif )


>revolution will never happen in the first wo- YAKC!


>Polls show 70% of American people support unionization
13 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


In what way was terrorism not good for radicalizing people in the 60s and 70s? It was a huge part of the insurrections and civil wars that characterized the period.


I think that you're missing the point here. Are these people supporting new unions, or AFL-CIO unions? AFL-CIO unions are actively cucking to the actions of Congress and the big bourgeoisie, so unless you have a plan to salt them and bring change or(much more likely) create new systems altogether for class struggle, I don't think this is the flex you think it is. Ask anyone you know what the IBEW or the UFT is like, and they will tell you the same story; little representation in negotiations, constant loss of bargaining power due to increasing workforce(ergo inexperienced workers that cannot provide the same quality), revisionist and outright bourgeois representatives. It's Luxemburg's Reform or Revolution to a textbook level. I suppose there's nothing we can do on our own to find out what the data actually means by that though.


Also workers in general are to stupid to understand how unions work. I'm dead serious. At my old job that was union everyone would constantly bitch about the union but never participate in meetings or do anything to support it.


>People love a lot of things that make their lives worse. Speaking of chaos and destruction, isn't that state precisely where our fantasies lie? Who wouldn't prefer a Mad Max-style apocalypse to going to work tomorrow? Who wouldn't rather live in a horrible, awful fantasy world like Fallout? I don't think that you appreciate the powder keg that we are sitting on. People hate this fucking world.

People are infected with main character syndrome. They only look at rhe glitz and glamor of Hollywood productions. In real life, alot of people would be overdosing on drugs or suiciding to cope.

People hate their own reality because they crave action/adventure fiction brainrot they read in comic books amd movies.


why else is the American South anti-union?

Where I live, its mostly union retiress from the northeast corridor but they vote against union policies here.

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