[ 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."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix

IRC Chat

Pleroma

Mumble

Telegram

Discord



File: 1629985245501.jpg (118.47 KB, 1125x1394, 345r4rt34f34.jpg)

 No.449782[View All]

A vote has passed in the congress to establish a right wing debate general to argue against right wing talking points and keep them from leaking out onto the rest of the board. From this point on all right wing discussion points should be confined to this thread and this thread will be used for debunking them and generally punching rightoids in the dick. All right wing nonsense posted outside of this thread will be subject to a deletion hence forth if deemed necessary.
223 posts and 91 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
>>

 No.458710

>>457979
Isn't the linking of personality and private property in a way an admission of Marx's principle of "conditions forming ideas" being correct?
>>

 No.458746

File: 1665518893492.jpg (247.98 KB, 1600x900, 1665413767572996.jpg)

>>458484
I kind of take issue with this understanding of the theory though and even among the most well read minds on the subject there is intense debate about the sbuject matter of the labor theory of value. As I understand it the LTV is about the utility of commodities and exchange relationships between capitalists in market economics.
Labor creates everything of utility, or, value as marx would put it. The capitalist then usurps this product of the workers labor and returns him a wage which is made to represent labor time of what the worker works and the work the capitalist would otherwise have done had he not simply "owned" goods magically which gave him the ability to magically not work.
That's where the surplus and exploitation happens not just on the surplus profit itself. You're working 3x harder than you wpuld in a situation that would otherwise not be had it been for the economy we have today.
Secondly, not economic teory not even supply and demand can really be codified as "objective" science. As even you yourself admit many case studies show that labor and profit are heavily correlated.
Value = utility. Marx clearly states this on chapter 1 of capital. You don't have to agree but it stands up among most retorts. At least from what I have seen.
The exploitation happens because you are working for yourself and the borg to sustain a living rather than just yourself. This relationship manifest in the mass production of commodities for the borg to be exchanged at a later date for profit.
>>

 No.458776

Low tax rates encourage the rich to pay them more than high ones, no? Any further needs should be negotiated through union contracts rather than government demands. Most socialists I have met trust the unions more than Democraps anyway, so why would you vote for them unless you're there for the social policy(in which case I would say vote LP).
>>

 No.458817

>>458776
Vote LP? we don't have an LP in the USA. I vote dem cause of social issues and I guess even their economic polices are better than faggy republicans.
>>

 No.458818

>>458817
Psy oped Vaushite
>>

 No.458819

>>458818
Can you morons think of anything other than "generic NPC response #15654?" I literally just got the exact same response about a totally un related issue on 4chan. You are useless.
>>

 No.458820

>>458819

You voted democrat because youre ghey. We get it
>>

 No.458878

File: 1665679668903.jpg (144.28 KB, 800x1600, kanyememe (1) (1) (1) (1) ….jpg)

Consequences will never be the same
>>

 No.458969

>>458817
You do understand I mean Libertarian Party? I'm quite certain you have one.
>>

 No.459256

My main critique after re-reading WLC and VPP is this; the way that Marx values necessary labor is by the price of the necessaries one consumes to perform it; however, surely a price would not only contain the necessary labor for its production, but the surplus labor that the capitalist must take to be a capitalist. Does this mean that at some level that surplus labor also constitutes the "true" value of a product?
Is this something that I need to re-read Chapter 10 of VPP, for?
>>

 No.459257

>>459256
I thought Marx equates value to the utility of an object.payijg your workers enough to eat is just over head cost.
>>

 No.459385

>>459257
Whether an object has value(e.g a use-value) is based on whether it has some utility, and exchange-value is dependent on the rules of supply and demand, but Marx affirms the value of a commodity is based on the average(he says 'socially necessary') labor needed to produce it.

In the case of labor itself, however, the value of it is based on the value of the necessary goods needed to reproduce labor(e.g food, water, shelter, etc.), and this is where my critique lies. I suppose the rule would apply to shelter as well, but I don't think that it would need a separate answer altogether.
>>

 No.459395

>>459385
>>459385
Average labor time is a phenomenon that arises under the system of capitalism. The only trye objective value commodities have are their utilities.
>>

 No.459544

Why is leftypol anti-porn?
I thought nofap was right wing incel brain damage, but I finally find this place and now another anti-porn rule
Are all political ideologies anti-porn?
I now feel much less lefty because this place is anti-porn.
>sadface.jpg
>>

 No.459545

>>459544
Anti porn rule? Where what are you talking about?
>>

 No.459559

>>459545
>2. Pornography should not be posted on /leftypol/ or /meta/
It's the same as fucking 4pol
This board is basically the same as literal Nazis
>>

 No.459560

>>459559
Fascism is when can't compulsively masturbate
>>

 No.459569

>>459559
Retard post it on /b/. What a spoiled brat
>>

 No.459581

Where do I go if I hate leftists and rightists? (Where I define "leftist" as "Marxist and/or revolutionarily socialistic" and "rightist" as "socially conservative, fascistic, and/or Social Darwinistic".)

No, I'm not a "centrist" or "moderate". I just fucking despise those two particular categories I laid out. Why isn't there an imageboard for normal people who aren't "millions must die"-facing in their room?
>>

 No.459582

>>459581
You're a lib and it's called crystal.cafe
>>

 No.459866

>>459582
spot on
>>

 No.459885

>>459581
reddit.com
>>459582
they are leftist just not marxist
>>

 No.459900

>>459885
If they are "leftist," then "leftist" is a term without a definition.
>>

 No.459938

File: 1667203471199.jpg (31.47 KB, 479x544, 312870889_5821109407911730….jpg)

>>449782
Can I ask the right wingers a question in here?

Do you even know what it's like to be a big strong, virile Chad?

Right wingers seem to in general be like angry sadistic lockershoved bullies who fantasize about women they don't know fervently. They do things such as eat humans or torture cats. That is not "Chad" behavior.

Just wondering if any Right Wingers in here know what it's like to be a real feminine, sensitive man who respects women and animals, even bugs.
>>

 No.460137

File: 1667557770079.jpg (168 KB, 959x1280, IMG_20221030_010450_197.jpg)

>>459938
So true!
>>

 No.460146

>>460137
Why are they all blonde?
>>

 No.460292

I don't really see the point of debate. Nothing really needs to be said. Marxism is dead. You know it, and many of us know it. Communism today is just a meme. A post-1960's Gladio boogeyman that the system uses to scare NatSocs into dragging us back into some conveniant position for their anti-socialist suppression. It's a boogeyman the systme blames for its own market liberal capitalist faults. The litnay of conservative grifters cry out "it's those damn marxists running the system" as wall street gets another bailout. Marxism is not a threat. It's an ideological sandbox for people still stuck in the post-war moral mental labyrinth. Just look at this board. It's dead. Look at reddit communist boards. Dead. No movements, no popular support. The last spark was Corbynism and it was crushed with ease by the system, and it's crushing was a result of Marxists refusing to understand race or the racial hierarchy of the system we live in. Youur solidarity is so broken, you split your dead marxist boards into two different boards over minor differences. Honestly, I'd have no problem with putting on a red beret and yelling workers of the world unite in a glorious revolt against capitalism, but it's not going to happen. You just don't understand this system, who runs it, why they run it the way they do and how you are manipulated by it. For this reason alone, you will always fail. You will always be manipulated into failure. You will be infiltrated, dominated and lured into the same pitfalls of the last seven decades. You refuse to learn from the past. You refuse to admit the reality of race. Admittedly, alot of NatSocs don't get this either. They think they do, but they don't, but you certainly don't. Corbynism was defeated by Zionism. Memo's were written about this, by Marxists, and did they learn from this? No. Marxists have consistently lost for seven decades against Liberalism and its zionist hierarchy. Marxism has capitulated at every step. While Nazi Germany had to be destroyed by three world empires, made up of an alliance of communists and capitalists - it's revolution was butchered to a man, fighting to the bitter end. Meanwhile, the late great Soviet Union was sold at a yard sale, sold off piece by piece, without fanfare, and without a shot being fired. That is the legacy of Marxism; Capitulation and failure. A worldview created for the express purpose of undermining European Socialism at its time, elevating a state that executed anti-semites, and then demolished when that same state was overtaken by slavic nationalism and emerged as an anti-zionist threat.

Honestly, what is there to argue? What can you offer me and my people? You're a dead worldview that can't even maintain unions. You can't maintain enough solidarity to have one board. What could your dead worldview and dead boards offer me and my people? More ridiculous theory, as capitalism crushes my people. More whimsical fantasies of some global republic, even as ethnic divisions gain more violent momentum? More ridiculous notions of racial blindness, as my people are accused of blood libel and openly vilified by the system? What do you offer me and my people that National Socialism does not? Our martyrs and dissidents are numerous. Our influence grows despite our rampant persecution. Good men and women are crushed by this system for speaking out for my people. I have no doubt some of you naively celebrate this, out of some vindictive vicaruous desire for power that you don't have and never will.

I'll say this. I respect you Marxists. More than anyone else. The libertarians are slaves or slavers. The Liberals are status-seeking cowards. The conservatives are broken house slaves. You wield a revolutionary spirit. I like that in you people. You understand this system is illegitimate, immoral and evil. You want it gone, but you will never achieve that. You couldn't when we held power, you didn't when we were annhilated, and you have only lost more despite not having us as a competitor.
You are a dead worldview, a meme, a myriad of books no one will ever read. A dead board, mocked by your own dead politic.

You cannot offer us anything.
>>

 No.460296

>>460292
>Nothing really needs to be said. Marxism is dead.
And yet you felt the need to say it.
I guess Marxism isn't dead after-all.

You can't really refute Marx's arguments about economics or material reality in general, and hence you seek to socially discredit his ideas instead. It's very obvious.
>>

 No.460315

>>460292
Marxism has influenced more people on earth arguably than the bible.
>>

 No.460396

>>460315
And just like Christians, most marxists don't read the damned book.
>>

 No.461130

>>460296
>You can't really refute Marx's arguments about economics
what if I told you national socialists believe in socialist economics.
>>

 No.461131

>>461130
B b b based
>>

 No.461233

>>461130
I would ask you what you think socialist economics are.
>>

 No.463359

Hey hey people, christian fanatic here.
First time posting here.
On the topic of superstructures: Marx said
>The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political, and intellectual life.
And:
>The changes in the economic foundation lead, sooner or later, to the transformation of the whole, immense, superstructure. In studying such transformations, it is always necessary to distinguish between the material transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal, political, religious, artistic, or philosophic—in short, ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it out.
As explained by CatAnon on leftypol.org, this means basically that commies don't know what will happen with the superstructure once communism will be enacted, but only how "the base" will operate in such an environment (i.e. communist environment).
From my understanding, it's actually just Marx not being able to explain what is the value of these kind of jobs. For example, how would you value the work of a artist? I mean, these jobs are inherently capitalistic (i.e. they are prone to an application of classic economics' laws first and foremost) in nature: the "best" one will sell more, and become subsequentially rich.
My question is: if the media is a superstructure, the lack of criteriae that determines whether or not a specific structure of this market is part of the communist society will prevent the determination by the people part of said society of its characteristics, leading to a paradox: in a communist society there may be people (read as: "glowies") working in the media who will claim that the society is not communist, and by doing so preventing the proletarians to acknowledge the fact that they indeed achieved such a feat (i.e. creating a communist society) at last. In other words, the glowies, through the means provided by the media, can create a post-truth that can prevent the creation of a communist society altogether, prior, during and even after its constitution.
Likewise, a glowie can create a fallacious society and declare it "communist", proving that its crumbling is due to the Marxist theory to be flawed.
So my question is: if the mind cannot see (also read as: "comprehend", "actualize", but also "define") the existance of communism in the real world, how will it be achieved in the first place?
>>449970
>believe
Idolatry is a sin, anon.
>>

 No.463361

>>463359
This is literally insane pshycobable
What do you mean by how would art be "valued in communism?" Art would be valued exactly as it is now. E.G Subjectively. And of course no one knows what will happen with certainty but you can make educated guesses and deductions by extrapolating from what happens now.

For example, because of capitalism the current mode of production is mainly driven by the accumulation of profits, so, this creates a system of alienation where people become further and further from one another because any time you are not producing profits or generating profits in some way is time spent not making money for the capitalist overlords.
We can see this in social media like tictok, facebook, fbi.gov, instagram, etc etc etc where your every moved is bought and sold to investors to sell you targeted ads.

What you are saying makes no sense and is frankly kind of silly. Like media as we know it wouldn't even exist under communism. Media as it exists today is used as a means to enforce the capitalist hegemony. Building socialism is something that is done by the masses so there's little reason to believe that anyone retard would have any attention paid to him. It just doesn't make sense.
>>

 No.463364

>>463361
>This is literally insane pshycobable
My deepest apologies, anon. English is not my first language, you see, so I tend to express myself in a quite uncanny way.
>What do you mean by how would art be "valued in communism?"
Clearly, I am talking here about the economic aspects of value, because I am talking about an economic theory (i.e. the marxist economic theory). In other words, I rhetorically asked how would you pay an artist in a communist society? By the number of books he sells? He will become extremely rich. What about an actor, then? On the number of movies he is part of? Can he contract his salary? What if he is famous? In that case, he would have such a bargaining power, that he will make the film director go broke! Also, how will movies be made? Will the proles have a whip-round for the film?
Last example: what if I don't wanna work. I will say I work as an artist, specifically a trap artist, and publish one album each month. Will I be entitled to receive a pay for it? What if I suck?
>this creates a system of alienation where people become further and further from one another because any time you are not producing profits or generating profits in some way is time spent not making money for the capitalist overlords.
Why would isolation be an effect of capitalism? From my perspective, capitalism tries to reroute social interations through means that will produce profit, not reduce their numbers. As we can see, social networks have increased to such an extent social interactions, that the apocalyptic future described by John B. Calhoun doesn't seem so distant after all.
>What you are saying makes no sense and is frankly kind of silly.
And yet you agree with me by saying:
>Media as it exists today is used as a means to enforce the capitalist hegemony.
I have to point out that we (you and me) actually disagree on one thing. I argued in my previous post that media can be used to enforce any political ideology hegemony, not only the capitalist one. For media stands for mass media, which is a mode of mass communication. But communication of what, you might ask? I argue it started out as a mean to transfer informations to a (throughout history) progressively large audience (first it was the bourgeoisie, then the proletariat, then both of them considered together, etc. ). This characteristic is still to this day key to define what mass media means. Such characteristic, in my opinion, will translate in a communist society, while other key features present in the mass media of the capitalist societies (like propaganda) will be eliminated in the "communist-type" mass media.
>Building socialism is something that is done by the masses
I partially disagree: socialism will be built by the masses under the direction of certain people who will coordinate the work. How would you otherwise build a factory? Will you rely on a hivemind? I hope not.
You need not only the directors in this deed, but a strong IS (cfr. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_system, for an introductory page on the topic) that will adjuvate the directors in their operation. The IS, if considered in a broader setting of society as a whole, corresponds to mass media.
>there's little reason to believe that anyone retard would have any attention paid to him.
Let me specify: you are saying that retards will not be paid attention to? I have to go a little bit of topic now, but how do you explain Gorbachev then? With all the due respect, he and Yeltsin were a little bit unstable, yet they arrived to such positions that made them considerably powerful. I agree they are not part of the media, but, especially with Yeltsin, people voted for him because he was a very public figure.
Honestly, I consider them both glowie's assets, which reached a point where they could condition proles into thinking that private property's what they (the proles) needed.
Why wouldn't in the media sector happen what happened in the political sector of USSR?
>>

 No.463373

>>463364
>how would you pay
>communist society
I believe that I have discovered the source of your confusion.
>>

 No.463383

>>463373
Trully a great mistake on my part, anon. Apologies! I have unconsciously thought that 2 Thessalonians 3:10 would apply to communism as well, not only to the socialist phase.
Nevertheless, I do still consider it necessary in a communist society some kind of control to exist. For what will happen if every manchild will claim to be a worker, by streaming Nuzlocke runs on Twitch everyday?
>>

 No.463385

>>463383
Everyone deserves the basic necessities. Water, foo, shelter, clothing, etc etc.

It's har dto flesh out what your qualm exactly even is. Epecially since you, rather annoyingly, keep using green text to cherry pick peoples arguments apart leading to things that could be answered simply by reading the whole conversation.

I didn't say that isolation effects capitalism in a negative way. It effects people in a negative way. Capitalism needs this alienation as, again, as I said, when people are not producing profits for capital that is time spent not makign money for capital owners. I also gave examples so how you are arguing against this reality is beyond me, but, it is not unlike ancpas and other autsrians to deny reality.


Your ahistorical acceptance of great man theory makes it impossible for you to understand what we are talking about because you do not see the world as a historical accumulation of forces which lead men to act in certain ways. But you see it as people just rising to the occasion free of the influence of historical and material forces. All in vaccuum.

People don't pay attention to nazis now and they wnt pay attention to retards under a socialistic mode of production.
>>

 No.463767

>All right wing nonsense posted outside of this thread will be subject to a deletion hence forth if deemed necessary.
Isn't it about time this thread was unstickied and replaced with something more congruent with the moderation beliefs of this webzone? It's quite apparent we have actual Nazis lurking around the topic of Ukraine in other threads now.
>>

 No.463768

>>463767
>It's quite apparent we have actual Nazis lurking around the topic of Ukraine in other threads now.
Natoids are not necessary nazoids. Libs are natoids too.

Majority of ziggers on the other hand are nazoids too, only draped in red. Which deserves even harsher punishment, because in the final analysis the primary enemy of communist movement is social fascism.

If we ban nazis we should ban ziggers and right socdems in general too.

also to all the social fascists who read this, before you sperg out, by nazoids I mean socdem national chauvinists, ie - you
the difference is that nazoids become full blown nazis only when faced with the radical proletarian movement, what they tended to call "bolshevism"

Mussolini is the prime example of a nazoid in his early syndicalist days
>>

 No.463772

>>463767
>>463768
How about we don't ban leftists for not agreeing with you on certain principles? I assume that we are all on a chan, because we don't want to be on a reddit. These "nazi" accusations are nothing more than the mad flailings of faggots who can't argue a point. inb4 oh, you must really be a nazi yourself then.
>>

 No.463773

>>463772
I don't want mods to ban anyone except spammers (repeated same messages), CP (not cartoons), and guro (not cartoons).

I'm just pointing out the sheer absurdity of ziggers crying to ban nazoids.
Like, bitch, you will be the first to go lol.
>>

 No.463778

>>463772
>These "nazi" accusations are nothing more than the mad flailings of faggots who can't argue a point.
Mmm, it's a bit more than that at this point. What do you call someone repeating ancient Nazi propaganda about the "Holodomor", constantly talks about how people from some adjacent nationality are subhuman and takes glee in their deaths? If it walks and talks like a Nazi, it's probably an actual Nazi. Now I don't have any problem debating bad Nazi arguments, but isn't the whole point of this thread to contain them within here? If that is the point, why are they allowed to spew their nonsense outside of it? If that is not the point of this thread anymore, then it's about time this thread was retired.
>>

 No.463823

>>463778
>What do you call someone repeating ancient Nazi propaganda about the "Holodomor"
Liberals do the same thing. The Victims of Communism people are all liberals.
>constantly talks about how people from some adjacent nationality are subhuman and takes glee in their deaths
I've definitely heard liberals do that.
>If it walks and talks like a Nazi, it's probably an actual Nazi.
Or it could be a lolbert. That's the thing–until they start talking about ethnostates, jewish conspiracies, and the aryan master race it is impossible to differentiate nazis from liberals.
>>

 No.464053

i dont really get you guys. Nazis worship death aesthetic, is the op pic meant to demoralize them or moralize you? skulls = look cool
>>

 No.464064

>>464053
>is the op pic meant to demoralize them
considering that it's a skull of a nazi - yes

it's cool and edgy to carry insignia with a skull - until it dawns on you that it was your skull all along lol
>>

 No.464367

File: 1674178773934.jpg (98.56 KB, 1024x976, Moving.jpg)

I'm honestly ignorant about these phenomenon, so if someone wants to explain or guide me towards resources to better understand them, I'd be glad to take a look.
>>

 No.464372

>>464367
Gentrification is when wealthy people come to town and jack up the cost of living for everyone else due to real estate speculation. Most white people aren't wealthy. White flight is when working-class whites with enough financial assets to relocate leave an area that is being deindustrialized by capitalists who have abandoned the area to seek cheaper labor elsewhere.
>>

 No.464780

How does the shortcomings in Engel's analysis of indigenous civilizations(including outdated ideas on how "savage" these populations were, along with other outdated ideas on measuring their intelligence) affect how we should view his further findings today?

Unique IPs: 29

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]