[ 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   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


File: 1692999170484.jpg ( 166.17 KB , 1500x1500 , LP06FAL_001_10_S03.jpg )

 No.472721

Hello leftists. I'm a dilettante when it comes to political theory, so I'd really like your help.

What is the projected end stage of capitalism? It feels like, long-term, Capitalism is just a highly efficient way of extracting all resources on planet earth and distributing them into the hands of an increasingly small elite, but unlike other economic systems, there is no equilibrium under Capitalism. All Capitalist countries work in tandem by pursuing infinite growth, but what happens when we run out of growth avenues? This seems way too complex to speculate about alone, so I ask you for help and reading if possible!
>>

 No.472727

File: 1693003234872.jpg ( 85.56 KB , 1000x668 , mining for mineral in the ….jpg )

>>472721
Imperialism seems to be the last stage of capitalism.

But i wouldn't actually consider capitalism highly efficient at extracting resources. Many of the resource extraction operations under capitalism do not use advanced techniques. Sometimes capitalists only deploy shovels and buckets. pic-rel
>>

 No.472729

>>472727
"efficiency" under capitalism does mean allocation of resources it means generation of profits and how well a particular enterprise does it.
>>

 No.472738

Lmao go watch literally any Mecha anime from the 80s. Basically that.
>>

 No.472740

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

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

This isn't the position of the "left", but the position history has shown us, and by the start of the 21st century, eugenics was all that remained. Ideology is for the slaves. Eugenics in the end supplants capitalism as the dominant situation. Rather than the capitalist's lordship being through command of money or financial institutions, eugenic society is dominated by command and control of people in a form of slavery more abject than any yet known. If you were to suggest a teleological view of history, human civilization appears to the present ruling ideas as nothing more than a progression of slavery to ever-worse forms. Chattel slavery gives way to serfdom, which gives way to the scientific slavery of the 18th and 19th centuries and imperialism, which gives way to corporate rule and the early efforts of the eugenists, which gives way to the national security states that could command all life from cradle to grave, which gives way to the eugenism which is currently seizing the world. There was never once, in the ruling ideas, a suggestion that a different world was possible. The faint hope that it could be different was just that, an empty hope that was never seriously considered. This was done not out of any material incentive or for any ulterior motive, but because slavery and the command of people became the sole purpose of the human project, and anything else we would want was destroyed. Right, left, and center would all align towards that goal in the end, and the concept that it was going to be any different was no longer something that could be said without political elites bursting out into laughter and silencing the fool who thought he could ever be anything else. That is the world of the present day. To those outside, humanity appears as one giant running joke and a list of atrocities committed against his race. Humanity is not the future to most of us. Humanity is seen, correctly, as the enemy - and without humanity, we are in the ruling ideas lost. Humanity itself changed from its earlier spiritual conception to a purely biological and racial conception, and in doing so, the thing we are told humanity is, is the exact opposite of what humanism now stands for, which is nothing but eugenics.

There are no ideas permitted that suggest "historical progress" will result in anything different. The only thing that is evident is that the world of the future will be nothing but misery and humiliation, even for the rulers who turn on each other like jackals. That's all that humanity can be now, and the rulers revel in that, because they really do not think.

The orthodox leftist view is to suck up to this beast and be liars and enablers. Officially, some form of socialism is proclaimed to be the future, but this "socialism" is always dubious, and the left is contemptuous of anyone without political sense. They really should stop lying to the people. We're not as retarded as they think we are or they need us to be.
>>

 No.472742

>>472740

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

 No.472766

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

 No.472767

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

 No.472768

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

Unique IPs: 6

[Return][Catalog][Top][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 ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome