[ 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

File: 1695544916047.jpg ( 164.71 KB , 1200x879 , McDonalds-1.jpg )


<If you eat this shit, you are subhuman and shouldn't be able to vote.

Honestly, people who eat pic related can't even make a rational decision regarding their own health. Why should they be trusted to make decisions for all of society?

Inb4: limp wristed emotional argument


nootrients are nootrients.
but I agree, there are more efficient and cost effective ways to get food.


It's cheap and a lot of people who don't have much money don't have that much time or energy (or, necessarily, space) to cook all the time. Also, it appeals a lot to children.

It's not like eating a shitty hamburger is a reasonable measure of how much shit someone will fall for, either - you can absolutely fool the shit out of plenty of people who pride themselves in being ""smart"" consumers.


CICO is all that matters


yes, and macro and micronutrients


Absolutely retarded if you believe that minerals and vitamins, quality fats, etc, don't matter.


Children aren't capable of making rational choices, which is why we don't let them vote or get a tattoo…. just change their gender.

Chipotle is also cheap and isn't food paste formed into the shape of french fries and burger patties


File: 1695557234483.png ( 37.5 KB , 721x741 , jun an ko.png )



File: 1695561124521.jpg ( 41.46 KB , 600x600 , IMG_20230915_224556_135.jpg )

I love McDonald's. Yuuuuuuuum


yeah but chipotle makes my asshole hurt


Make sure to wash your hands before you finger yourself, especially after eating Chipotle


she's so beautiful…


Something i find odd is that the food from those types of fast-food-chains does not taste good, I wonder if they found new yet unregulated addictive substances or something to get people hooked on this.

In some places corporate food-like-substances are the only available source of sustenance, especially for people that capitalism isn't allocating enough resources that would enable them to avoid the pitfalls of capitalism. Personal responsibility is not something that can be assumed anymore. We live in a capitalist system that means that the capitalists are the ones allocating the surplus, and by default the responsibility falls on who ever controls the surplus, that's the capitalist class in capitalism, and in socialism that would be the workers. Capitalism is extremely totalizing and individual people can only be ascribed personal responsibility in rare cases and you have to prove it's not systemic.

From a statistical perspective people that get impoverished by class societies, also tend to suffer worse health as a result of the impoverishment. If you politically disenfranchise unhealthy people, you are also politically disenfranchising the people that capitalism made poor. When people try to play these underhanded games of denying political rights to certain groups like wealth-deprived people , via a proxy concern-troll-mechanism, i can't help but think that Stalin was too kind.

You also made a logical error, there is no correlation between having healthy eating habits and being a good politician that makes decisions that lead to a prosperous society. There are many healthy neo-liberal politicians that make disastrously bad political decisions.

If you earnestly care about people eating better food, you have to fix the supply side, everything else is idealist and demonstrably does not work. There are people attempting to do harm reduction by appealing to self responsibility combined with good advice, that's commendable, but it is not a solution. While I've taken a harsh position against OP in this post, OP does get some credit for dunking on a corporate sludge cannon.

Remember we could be living in a world where all the research and development on food science and technology created food-choices that are all generally healthy.


File: 1695569473363.png ( 495.91 KB , 1280x720 , 1692977368707-0.png )

This is kind of idealistic. you can't expect the ruling class to act in the interest of the working class under capitalism. As you said the point is to generate surplus capital in the form of profits and that is all that any capitalist is concerned with. Externalities like people starving, or, people not having adequate nutrition is not the concern of the capitalist.


It seems that you are attempting to manufacture rationalizations. If the capitalist system isn't providing the capitalist ruling class with the correct incentives/interest-structures, they're responsible for incorrectly configuring their system.

Ultimately if you control the surplus of society you have the responsibility for society, no exceptions.


Word salad: You are failing to understand, anon. There is the only incentive under capitalism. Profit is the only incentive that exists under capitalism for a capitalist. That is the whole point of exchanging commodities to produce more return than you put in. This is literally basic marx. Like first 3 chapters of capital shit.


I do understand the capitalist mode of production. But the internal logic of the mode of production is not the bedrock of reality.


Wordsalad cope
>Muh amorphous capitalism made me fat
No one with common sense buys this shit nor the rest of your fake/ghey abstractions


>Be capitalist
>Probably promote woke corporate newspeak
>Open store in the hood
>Constantly get robbed/burglarized
>Close store

<How dare you!

>Inb4: but why do they have to make a profit

<Idk anon. Why don't you just work for free


No one said it was the bedrock of reality, ut, it is the bed rock of the economy and how decisions are made under it. the profit motive is the quidproquo of the whole economic system and thus everything else will be subservient to it.


What is your point here exactly?
People don't just rob people in the hood for no reason it's because they are poor as fuck. Also even the hoods have mcdonalds I know cause I grew up in a notorious one.


I'm suspecting that this strange outburst is perhaps you projecting your self(hate ?) onto others.


Now try to look at the society as a hole from a more consequentialist perspective.
If you produce lots of good food and feed that to people, you'll have lots of healthy people.
If you produce terrible food and feed that to people, you'll have lots of unhealthy people.

You seem to be implying that there is a combination of words one could say to people that would make them ditch McFastfood, and instead eat self cooked meals composed of plenty veggies, a little bit of lean meat/fish, some complex carbohydrates, a bit of healthy fats, while being low salt, low sugar, high ratio of nutrient/calories and so on. If you know the "magic" words please spread them as wide and far as you can.

I think that the only way to make people eat a healthy diet, is changing food-production to mostly healthy food production, If all the choices are healthy, people will eat healthy. I would love for you to prove me wrong, because figuring out how to build a food production system that makes this happen will be super hard.


And they are poor af because they have a shit culture which valorizes petty crime and demonizes the sort of habits and actions that generally lead to success. Part of this is media-fed (i.e., shows like Family Matters portraying smart Black students in a stereotypical and negative light). Anyone from the hood with half a brain tries to escape the hood. Barring an ability to afford living in a better neighborhood, they avoid people who drag them down.

Also, given you're belief that poverty inevitably causes people to commit crime, it's strange that lots of poor people don't rob others. Or that some people do stupid shit when they're young, get in a bit of trouble, and then turn their life/character around whilst still facing personal difficultly and receiving a low wage.

They worldview you have is so patronizing, it's unreal.

No, that's not at all what I'm implying. Your projecting your own autism on me. I'm literally saying that people who eat McDonald's make poor decisions and shouldn't be trusted to vote.

Otherwise – yes, I'm all for banning specific harmful food additives with little/no nutritional value. (But not necessarily for trying to centralize and set quotas for lettuce production lol)

All and all, you kinda sound like a dork who tries to personalize an entire economy into the decision a single person makes (rather than the complex interaction of individual actors largely looking out for their own interests - with many doing so in a foolish and short sighted way).

I'll be the first to admit that poverty causes people to make poor decisions (eating shit food, commiting crime, etc). The solution to this isn't to trust them to make more decisions better. It's to give them a roadmap and opportunity to reach a place where they can make better decisions.


I guess that's a plausible scenario. But you have to admit, it's also an admission of failure, that says capitalists couldn't hack it. Maybe they could hand over the control over surplus and let somebody else try.


Vague abstractions vs actual plausible policy


>No, that's not at all what I'm implying.
>I'm literally saying that people who eat McDonald's make poor decisions and shouldn't be trusted to vote.
Abolishing democracy is an extremely drastic measure, and i fail to see how that would make people stop eating bad food.

Are you implying that the dictatorship of the dietary-virtuous, will fix the diet of the masses ? How ?


What policy ?
closing stores, is just admitting defeat


>Children aren't capable of making rational choices, which is why we don't let them vote or get a tattoo…. just change their gender.

I guess this is supposed to be a joke, but you know they usually don't approve any kind of gender treatment until adolescence, yeah? Exceptions in which treatment is allowed at a younger age are very rare and are more controversial, they don't represent the typical case.
If dysphoria is a medical condition which presents in response to puberty, then it makes sense to treat it as soon as possible. If it's a magical mindwarp caused by spooky demons summoned by merely saying their names, then I guess the possibility medical treatment goes out the window, though. People ordinarily get their drivers' license around 16, and that's a million times more dangerous than any of this stuff.

Also, I'm not arguing for marketing McDonald's to children (the clown and Happy Meals are not targeted towards teenagers, btw), so I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply. Did you just need to get a dig about transhumanists in there?
People start eating shitty burger at like 3 and they get hooked on shitty burger. That's what "it appeals a lot to children" means, it's not a defense of shitty burger. People often return to things they're used to, and the McDonald's brand makes a lot of appeals to very young children. It makes no sense to read this as some kind of moral or intellectual failing on the part of people who get used to eating stuff from McDonald's.

>Chipotle is also cheap and isn't food paste formed into the shape of french fries and burger patties

So you'd think higher of those people if they consumed the thing you approve of?
What about areas where there's no nearby Chipotle? What if they don't want Mexican food? I'm asking as a person who likes neither of these; what kind of retard would, just for your approval, drive a half hour to Chipotle if they're ok with eating slightly shittier food from a nearby McDonald's? That seems wasteful.


This is some actual racist pol shit what are you doing here? You realize this analysis makes zero sense because "culture" doesn't exist out of nothing it comes from the economic conditions of existing history. Black people "have poor culture" mainly because they are poor and tey are poor because capitalism has existed side by side racist forms of economics with in it . Such as red lining and other legal means to subjugate black people and disenfranchise them. Black people in the US literally ha ve 1 dollars to eveyr 100 dollars a white person has.

This is actual old timey racist shit.

>You're given belief that poverty is inevitable

This is a strawman as I never said this. What is inevitable is poverty under capitalism and poverty causes crime in e general sense. This is just idealistic bs.


If you control the surplus of society you take on the responsibility for society. Surplus is what allows you to affect changes, solve problems etc. People that do not control surplus can't be made responsible for solving problems because they don't have the resources to affect change. This remains true for any society that has socialized labor (ie not primitive society where all labor is direct labor) regardless of the mode of production.


Fuck, you are dense and a retarded liberal
For most of history, even in democracies, a minority of people were eligible to vote.
I'm implying exactly what I'm saying. People who make poor decisions on a personal level will likely make poor decisions when it comes to voting.
Doesn't understand what policy means in this context
Troon leftypol tourist who lives for safety
Capitalism has existed for maybe 400 years. During that time, people went from living in hovels without electricity to having appliances and cell phones which they use to claim that poverty has reached unheard of levels. For all intents and purposes, absolute abundance has largely increased.
What you seem to be referring to is wealth disparity, which is indeed something that necessarily occurs under capitalism without proper checks.
Otherwise, you are right that culture and economic conditions interrelate in a feedback loop. Poverty (or, rather, disparity) increases criminal culture, and criminal culture increases disparity.
Why do you keep using the word 'you.' No single person controls all surplus, save maybe autocratic states in which a single leader is able to direct the economy according to their wishes, i.e., perhaps the DPRK (but even they have a thriving grey market economy). Shallow breathing sort of thinking.


>For most of history,
You mean pre-history, all class societies are primitive forms of civilization, history proper hasn't begun yet. Most of pre-history is filled with mistakes, that ought not be repeated.

>even in democracies, a minority of people were eligible to vote.

Democracy means rule by the demos. You can have votes in your club all you want, but unless the demos has political power it's not a democracy. When the board of directors of a mega-corporation votes on something that's not a democracy either.


Smoke another


I don't think you understand what I am telling you. The progress of history is not up to any one person or group, or, class of people.
"Men make their own history but they do not make it as they please, they make it under a set of pre determined circumstances" - Karl Marx.

Even if you believe that the capitalist class has some "duty" or "obligation" to support the people who do not own the surplus product of society that does not mean that; not only that they don't have to, but, that they have no material incentive too as to do so gets in the way of the maximization of their profits. It is a material, inherent, contradiction between two classes that exist with in the system of capitalism itself. This is wildly idealistic.


No I mean poverty. You can sugar coat it anyway that you want and it might be true specificxally for you who is a privleged white man living in a suburban house in his parents basement, but, the majority of the world (including the poor in the united states) live in abject poverty. It's easy to judge when you have never lived in the hood or seen the worst parts of capitalism.


This place is filled with the dumbest people pretending they are smart.

I literally live in a developing non western country.

You are projecting when you talk about a limited experience. Clown shit


Voting is dumb
McDicks is based tho, I had 3 McDoubles today


Did you get a free booster vaccine with it?


>Trust me bro I am on an imageboard

I also live in a 3rd world country.
You're missing the whole point tho.




Eating cheap food is now the same as the government dosing us with experimental nanotech?


File: 1695704613972.mp4 ( 2.46 MB , 480x592 , M9lc4MLAn9tdsn3j.mp4 )

The fact that her vote counts just as much as yours is one of the major reasons why America is in such dire straights.

Socialist countries such as China don't have this problem.


The reason isn't because of voting lmao.
The reasn is because china actually has a socialist govnerment that works in the interest of their working class and the united states works in the interest of the bourgeoisie and all they care about for american workers is a docile work force.


That's what I said. In China, a socialist country, the lumpen bourgeoisie is rightly disenfranchised and carted off to labor camps. In Amerikwa, they are shoehorned into popular media and given deference.


I thought you ment that them being the way they are is an issue. Though I don't think you should throw people in jail for being retards.
One of the many tings china does wrong.


It's not jail. It's a reeducation camp


Basically the same thing. Throwing anyone in jail for their political disposition is not only morally reprehensible, but, it is also tactically bad.


It's not throwing them in jail for their political disposition. It's reeducating them into a mininally proper, prosocial behavioral disposition - so that they are a net positive to society and not a net negative.

This is why China is growing in influence while the west is deteriorating at a breakneck pace.

I'll trust the Communists who successfully wield power, not the incompetent communists without power who screech online about their idealist fantasies and moral pretensions


Forcin people to do anything has show to have the exact opposite results. Wether you are actually correct on your opinion it just is more likely to have people double down which is why it's a low autism score move. Not to mention people with solid political foundations don't need to act in such a way.

>China's influence is growing

It's always hilarious when china dick riders come in here talking about china and brics as if this isn't just a massive cope. You realize no matter how much china is growing, financially speaking, even in the worst economic period, the united states is still light years ahead of china.

This is just cope.

>I'll bildly trust people who are communist basically in name only over actually bothering to think for myself

Whatever helps you sleep at night drone.


Nice digits.

But I'm not 'blindly following' anyone.

Given a choice between listening to someone with 0 experience in governance who merely talks online, and someone with experience, only a fool would choose the former.

But I'm sure in your head you would do a great job lol


>Troon leftypol tourist who lives for safety

You're a crackpot retard who can't even talk about McDonald's without trying to get a cheap shot in at transhumanists.


>Given a choice between listening to someone with 0 experience in governance who merely talks online, and someone with experience, only a fool would choose the former.

Pol Pot ran a country, too. It's possible for people with power to do things which are not beneficial. Castro, more of a socialist than any post-Deng Chinese leader, eventually regretted his decision to send gays to labor camps.

It's strange that when contemporary China, a country with massive privatized industry which participates eagerly in global capitalism, locks people away, there are people who will claim that doing this is somehow for the benefit of a socialist state which was done away with 40-or-so years ago, and isn't for the benefit of China's current welfare capitalist state. What does this outlook rest on? Pure ideology - the idea that China is following an underlying ideology in spite of its actual actions rather than in accordance with those actions.


>about china and brics
>no matter how much china is growing, financially speaking, even in the worst economic period, the united states is still light years ahead of china.

China has an industrial sector that is 3x larger than the US's, in material terms. In financial terms China has a larger economy than the US measured by purchasing power parity. The US only leads in per-capita metrics. In absolute terms China has surpassed the US. Which isn't surprising , China is industrialized and it's got a much larger population.

The US used to have a substantial lead in technology over China, but that has shrunk alot, and in some sectors China has taken the lead, for example communications technology, quantum computers and high-speed trains.

Brics will become an extremely large and influential economic constellation. It seems unlikely that the US will be able to subordinate Brics to US interests.

After the cold war ended the US was unrivaled in most areas. That is no longer the case.


Using your own metric: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/opinion/china-us-economy.html

China has a GDP of 18.4 Trillion while the united states sits at 25.6 trillion, even still.
GDP is not the end all be all to financial development and power. You're deluding yourself if you think that china out paces the unitedstates in terms of financialization. I work in the united states in the industrial sector, I have actually worked several jobs in the united states industrial sector and the one common theme in the united states compared to china is that in the United States we have a hyper focus on high quality goods. China on the other hand mass produces cheap, obsolescent garbage to shovled out to the american consumer, which, there we are again, the mass base of consumption for china is the united states itself. This is just china brained delusional ideology from desperate marxists looking for some kind of dogma to cling to.


Is a inadequate economic metric
Check out Micheal Hudson's critique:
<If you look at the gross national product accounts of the United States, they depict America is getting richer and richer when people have to pay higher rents. And richer and richer if you own a home and your housing price is inflated. In the national income and product accounts, they say that if a homeowner were to rent out his house to himself, what would he charge for the rent? Well, as rents go up, as if housing prices go up, GDP goes up.

<One way to accelerate GDP is to fall behind in your credit card accounts. If you fall behind in your credit card payments, then your interest rates go up from 19% to a penalty rate of 29%. The GDP accounts say that that is providing “financial services,” and GDP goes up.

<A little while ago on this very program, you had my colleague, Steve Keen, who feels the same way about economics, academic economics, the way that I do. And he was just in New York – we had a meeting two weeks ago, here in Forest Hills where I live. And he was telling me about how he had come down from Harvard where he had given a paper on global warming. And his adversary was William Nordhaus, who had said, ‘Well, there’s nothing to worry about global warming. If global warming would go up two degrees, mass budding and everything, it would really only cut GDP by 0.2%.’

<And I told Steve, I thought his response, it should have been that actually global warming is going to help accelerate GDP. It will add to GDP. Because for one thing, there’s going to be much more flooding. And you’re going to have to rebuild houses again and again and again that are destroyed by extreme weather. The hurricanes, a lot of rebuilding there. A lot of flooding, a lot of reconstruction.

<Disease actually has been helping GDP quite a bit because you have to now pay 18% of America’s GDP for the Obamacare, for medical care – much higher than the proportion of any other country. All of these things are considered GDP.

<Robbery helps the GDP go up and burglary because people have to replace what’s taken. So, the GDP is a travesty of any measure of welfare or size. And it’s a travesty of comparing a post-industrial economy like the United States – where the objective is not to produce anything at all, but the import it all – and economies that actually produce goods and services.


PPP (purchasing power parity) is a less distorted metric. Look up those figures instead of GDP.

>US … hyper focus on high quality goods

>China mass produces nothing but shovel-ware
This is no longer accurate, China has been clawing it's way up "the value-chain", and high end quality goods of Chinese origin definitely exist. I don't think the particular economic division you have referenced will persist.


>Micheal Hudson
retarded trot nazoid

dismissed BITCH


>retarded trot nazoid

No he's not. Wtf are you talking about?


☑ insult the guy
☐ counter his arguments with reason

you ticked the wrong box


1) This is pol tier China bashing
>Lol look at those dumb chinks and their shoddy infastructure blah blah blah

2) it's thoroughly unmarxist in that it sees the world as a static things and not in a state of development and change, unable to pick up on the shifting winds on history

In all honesty though, I hope you're right. A world with China as the leading influence wouldn't be better than a world with the US as a leading influence


>being a delusional desperate Marxist

Another pathetic example of modern Communism.


That's literally what I said, if you would bother to read the thread I said "Even by his metrics" Meaning GDP which is not an accurate measure of economic stability; even by GDP the united states is trillions of dollars ahead of china.


Can you at least try reading the first 3 chapters of capital and then posting here? Please dude, it's embarrassing.

Unique IPs: 21

[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 ]