/leftypol_archive/ - Leftypol archive

Again?

And how come a government/president doesn't have control over its military?

>>26220
>Again?
Might just be a flash in the pan. Telesur says it's already "neutralized"

https://twitter.com/BTnewsroom/status/1806088019549557005
Pro-coup troops chased out by protestors.

>>26222
Yeah the hole thing was basically a reminder to the MAS coalition that they have a common enemy.

Interesting TrueAnon episode on the coup attempt.

>>25541
Proofs?

>>25539
>thinking he will be safe in Australia
They didn't drop the charges he admitted guilt in exchange for getting out of jail. They could haul him right back in as soon as the election is over.

>>25540
>he should probably just apply for citizenship in Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc.
Well not North Korea he will starve in a communist country. I bet staying in Australia is probably part of the deal though.

>>25543
The famine in the DPRK ended a long time ago, and their economic outlook is positive now that they've re-established diplomatic relations with Russia.

Kevin Gosztola made an interesting point on a journalist panel today: He and likely other peers have been spending all their time the last several days listening to each other, the sources they actually trust to cover Assange honestly and fairly. Conversely, they have spent very little time assessing the corporate mass media's reaction to it. I sure hope someone has been cataloging all the recent libel and slander slung at Assange, these propaganda outlets and propagandists need to be held to account for the immensely destructive things they've done to the journalist profession.

Link to stream:

https://consortiumnews.com/2024/06/29/watch-revisiting-the-assange-case/

>>25545
>the corporate mass media
>the immensely destructive things they've done to the journalist profession.

There used to be journalistic activities within that structure, but is that still the case ? Before we yell at these people for failing at journalism, we have to ask our self whether we're not complaining about how spoons are terrible shovels.

Maybe we should consider whether they are more like PR companies now.

>>25511
True! But spending a bunch on basic infrastructure maintenance and expansion is, like, expensive!

>>25512
Waterlines and sewers is the type of infrastructure that works nearly flawlessly in non-failed states. The US is supremely rich, it's a faulty priority problem, not one of expense.

>>25513
True!

>>25510
its made for phones so the paragraphs are small

Atlanta water seems to be back on after 5 days. We'll see.

>>27851
This author makes a lot of dogmatic assertions without arguments to justify them and I couldn't take her seriously after she brought up "misogyny".

Trump announces Massad Boulos as adviser on Arab and Middle Eastern affairs

US President-elect Donald Trump says Lebanese American businessman Massad Boulos will serve as a senior adviser.

During Trump’s election campaign, Boulos repeatedly met with Arab American and Muslim leaders.

Boulos is also the father-in-law of Trump’s daughter Tiffany.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/12/1/live-aid-workers-among-45-killed-by-israel-in-gaza-as-hamas-in-truce-talks

https://twitter.com/CornelWest/status/1879645785328844932
Statement from Cornel West on the ceasefire

>>27854
Does anyone still pay attention to this clown?

>>27855
… It's a good statement. I watched it.

>>26407
>that's the economic system socialists try to build
No it's not. Under socialism the product of my labor doesn't belong to me it belongs to Bob because Bob "needs" it more than me. It's a good deal if you're Bob which is why socialism only attracts losers who want to leech from others.

>but it's not like that now
It's not like that now because of taxes. If you are self employed then all the product of your labor belongs to you except what the state steals.

>you mean like the bail-outs for wallstreet
Yes. Free stuff at the top to keep the rich rich and free stuff at the bottom to keep the plebs voting and the middle class has to pay for it all. It's not your ideal version of socialism but it is a type of socialism.

>Those were capitalists not socialists
Nope. The government is the one giving the bailouts and when the government does stuff that's socialism. In a free market when banks go broke they go broke and if the CEOs owes money to the people then we throw they/them out of a helicopter.

>Can't have a working theory of economics without that
You are deliberately evading the question
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>26409
>See picrel.
I distinctly remember Blair abolishing hereditary peers, stuffing the house of lords with his own people and gratuitously banning fox hunting just to wind up the Tories but sure everyone you don't like is a secret Tory.

>Corporate deregulation
You're saying there are fewer regulations now than 40 years ago? Calling a big old bullshit on that one. The point of regulations is for corporations to use the government to screw over competitors so of course they are only going to pile up.

>outsourcing
<refuse to work
<cry when jobs move overseas
Also this has nothing to do with government policy.

>union busting
Unions are the ones who destroyed your economy in the first place but ok.
Unions only exist because the government protects them anyway.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>26410
Work in a primitive society, like ancient hunter gatherers, work is directly social, all the work is for survival. In a more complex society that has better tools, not all of the work goes into survival, that is what becomes surplus. In capitalism this surplus is mostly captured by capitalists as profits. The state also gets some of the surplus via taxes or state-run enterprises. A big chunk of the surplus that the states gets flows to capitalists, like with wall-street bailouts and arms spending. Only a small part is going into public well-fare. And keep in mind that most well-fare recipients only need it because capitalism denies employment to a section of society, because they want to have a reserve army of labor on stand-by. So try not to be a worm that kicks down.

You're right that socialism isn't 100% efficient either, it'll have overhead as well, but you'll get a much bigger part of your surplus back than in capitalism. Btw socialism isn't synonymous with when the government does stuff

The relations in capitalism aren't really voluntary because You can't choose another economic system.

Given how much damage the financial crash caused, you're idea with aviation based disciplinary measures, is understandable. However I would like an economic system where the accounting and transactions system is stable and doesn't operate like a casino.

Nazis used gas as a weapon of mass destruction in the extermination camps. They didn't use it on the battle field against advanced military because it was obsolete. That is not a display of morality it's just basic grasp of military tactics. The use of chemical weapons in later wars was just stupid, it doesn't prove effectiveness.

The Soviets failed to ensure food security and that led to starvation, the narrative that it was done on purpose, was propaganda by the Nazis that was later re-used in the cold-war. It's wrong please stop repeating this.

Some of Mao's polices were indeed retarded and backfired catastrophically, however China did industrialize under Mao. Live expectancy doubled. And yes most of China's early woes can be attributed to the decade of colonial subjugation, the Communists inherited a huge mess. China's introduction of market elements into it's economy are indeed responsible for a chunk of China's economic rise. However you aPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>26412
>outsourcing
<refuse to pay decent wages
<cry when the low wage periphery uses the outsourced industrial power to dismantles your empire

>The only reason a government would burn votes like this is because they are broke
They're broke because they blew it on pointless militaristic schemes.

>>25439
Iran is a large country, and the heli went down in a mountainous region, so that is not particularly surprising. What is surprising however is that they apparently didn't pack a satellite phone. Or at least a beacon.

>>25440
Nah the Israeli likely don't have that capability.
The last time one of their Generals was assassinated, it was the US, and the Iranians retaliated by wrecking a few US military bases. They certainly aren't shy. In the extremely unlikely event that Israel tried to take out political leaders in Iran, it would be open hunting season on Iran-unfriendly Israeli political leadership. Unless we see Israeli figureheads dropping like flies, we can assume they weren't involved in this. Atm. it looks like malfunctioning equipment.

>>25441
Politics would be a lot more fun if they were.

>>25437
Minor correction, East Azerbaijan is part of Iran. It's near Azerbaijan, but it's not actually Azerbaijanian territory.

>>25438
I think it looks very suspicious myself. You know, 2-out-of-3 of the helicopters seem to have done fine, it's just the one with the president and foreign minister which went down.

Azerbaijan has also had close relations with Israel from what I understand, and this trip was supposed to be a sign of warming relations between Azerbaijan and Iran. It's not impossible that there was an act of sabotage performed by someone within the Azerbaijanian government.

Confirmed dead.

>>25444
>It's not impossible that there was an act of sabotage performed by someone within the Azerbaijanian government.
What you are saying makes sense but, lets hope it's not true, because the guy is dead, and we want countries to have warming relations.

>>25502
In theory, sure. My belief is that, in practice, neoliberalism is effectively a sneaky way of reintroducing fascism. It's only "small government" in rhetoric, because it inevitably reaches the same contradiction that ancap does: large-scale corporate capitalism, rentierism, etc. rely entirely on a state to define & protect certain property rights & monopolies against those who are harmed by these things. Neoliberalism is when the state does the work to define and protect the rights of capitalists, but removes checks from corporate power and sells off infrastructure which was publicly funded, and then, in practice, socializes the damage with a kind of periodic mock-Keynesian crisis capitalism. This inevitably was paired with massive union busting, because there isn't any other way to actually achieve this - the state is absolutely necessary in all this, and it plainly used its power to enrich and favor one group while suppressing another.

While this didn't generate fascist conditions (in first world countries) immediately, it's inevitably crept towards that. Privatizing the organs of state, while they still essentially operate as organs of state, essentially just functions to remove them from democratic accountability. It was only about 20-something years after the rise of neoliberalism in America that the same country was passing the PATRIOT Act, and now we're at a point where even many of the modern, socially liberal rights which existed back then have actually been scaled back.

I think, and maybe I'm mistaken, that a lot of the neoliberal "thinkers" probably don't believe the shit they say to make it sound palatable. Even early proponents of capitalism understood that corporate power would act like states' power if unchecked.

>>25502
QUICK SHUT IT DOWN STEER BACK TO APPROVED HARBARA NARRATIVES!

>>25501
Fascism implied a level of cooperation and lack of division that the coming setup no longer needs nor wants. Basically, everyone who wanted fascism would be told that the only way to the "light" is to embrace what appears to be fascist ideology, and it will be switched out with this new thing - and has been. The Rightoid has already been primed to accept anything, any self-abasement. Trump and the Eurotrash Right are proof of how retarded they are.

The fascist idea was purely about running into the ground any country's institutions and replacing them with screaming faggotry. What they're bringing in is the result of fascism not really being answered in the past 100 years, except by people fighting for their lives and refusing to die any more. The fascist ideas were rehabilitated after they became so unpopular that overt fascism in most of the world would have led to the rulers and their front groups being lynched. The true believers got to work as soon as the war ended, but it wasn't until the 1960s that it started to "work" - almost entirely on people who were too young to remember the war and what it really was. A law against serious discussion about the war events produced enough chilling effect in the academy, all of whom were exempt from the death cull that the world wars brought - just as they planned for the world. They laugh at you for lying to yourself about what fascism was. Laugh at you. Laugh at anyone who believes in this fag pablum sold to them, because they've been too afraid to even name their enemies, too eager to lick boot. Fags, pure fags.

>>25503
Why do you believe there is such a thing as "small government"? The very idea of capitalism will tell you the state and commanding heights will regulate economic life for the first time, in a way that was not known in the past nor workable. The idea that the government would be small is tripe sold to the dumber of the proprietors with a wink that they'll keep getting payola as their rivals are killed first for not being Nazi enough. There's some more fags for you, the "small governmPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

If you look at the actually non-retarded neolibearals, they are not under any illusion that their government is small. They stripped down bureaucratic largesse and replaced it with private, imperial largesse, because one liability of the liberal order was its reliance on very large bureaucracies to maintain private property in a world where the conditions of socialism were met and became too obvious. So much wealth and effort was spent destroying anything that worked, because they simply did not want the people to live, and would pay exorbitant energy to uphold elitism - an elite that long ago ceased to have any justification, that has grown more incompetent at actually doing anything. They only need to poison the people faster than they succumb to their own crapulence, and that is the "safe" and "smart" strategy for elites. Aristocracies go far out of their way to not produce anything as a rule, because this puts them in a situation where they will have to keep producing and find a way to destroy any product so it doesn't reach the hands of commoners. Any product or value aristocracy wants is little more than the value of human suffering itself. Its chief commodities are opium, pornography, and all forms of rot that accelerate the death rate. That IS value now. That is what will replace capitalism, what will replace the remnants of the liberal order, and already has to a large extent. There is no "off button" for this. We're locked into it for at least 40 years, probably 50.

>>25504
>A law against serious discussion about the war events produced enough chilling effect in the academy
Interesting, elaborate?

>>25502
>neoliberalism is absolutely not to be conflated with fascism.
There are similarities tho, like both fascists and neoliberals steal from the public via privatization. They both serve the most reactionary chauvinistic imperial finance bourgoisie.

>fascism on the other hand is bringing a state in to resuscitate a domestic economy by forcefully suppressing revolutionary fervor and workers' movements.
Marget thatcher ordered death squats to break up miners strikes so…

Fascism distinguishes it self by committing national suicide on behalf of capital. That certainly is what Nazi Germany did in ww2.

>Neoliberalism at its core is about getting the government out of the way of capitalists so that idealized market forces can allow the formation of monopolies
Some neo-liberals are genuine free marketeers, but many neo-libs are not principled, they just side with monopolies, they toot the free market when it benefits monopolies, but they will seek government intervention to uphold monopolies when the market forces don't go their way.

China is now getting involved, they brokered a reconciliation between fatah an hamas. Something along the lines of uniting all the Palestinians as a prelude to establishing Palestinian-statehood.

They managed to get the Iranians and the Saudis to bury the war-hatchet. Given how deep that conflict went, they must have used especially potent diplomacy to make that happen. With that in mind I'm wondering whether this is a sign that shit will get done now, or whether this is just more declarative non-happenings.

https://farside.link/invidious/watch?v=X2rTINHPT9g

New thread: >>483169

If someone says "Eugene, you're an American hypocrite" - I don't profit from any further enclosure of Indian land, and what was done was done. America has a lot of questions to ask itself if it is to be a "thing" in the future. But, those questions won't be asked. Eugenics won. This is the world eugenics creates. So, I think only about that, and I will work with anyone who will kill eugenist filth.

Amazing read Eugene, after you finish your work here, I would like you to reconsider seeking a Phd or Masters at Cambridge.

Also publish on demand is a thing, I would very much like to read your work in hard copy.

If you need help typesetting, which tbh fam I reckon you could do yourself; We can help.

>>26296
I know how to format it to look "professional" or something close to it. Just a matter of obtaining materials to make the hard copy.
I have most of Book 3 finished but want to edit it for clarity, to make it clearer what I'm referring to. It looks like "rant at highest volume", which it will be since Books 4 and 5 tone down the "doom is nigh". It comes off as doomer because I'm writing about concepts which are basically trans-historical - that is, what it means to speak of the concept of the political and economic, which are rather grody if they are distilled to their essential characteristics, how we speak of them. I really need to make the point that you won't find answers to the political within the political itself, especially formulations of it written by aristocracy - written traditionally by religion and for the purposes religion serves. Religion itself gives some of the answers of where to look, since no religion is a "total system" in that sense, and I'm opposed to "total systems" as an explanation of anything useful for us. The only total system that is relevant for me is the world itself, and even there, the world is not a "system" in that sense.

I have a supplemental I was writing but it needs to be edited, since I want to avoid "rant mode" and clarify what I wrote in the first book about the concept of systems, and how this concept could be worked with in the future. My main goal there is to demonstrate how a systems thought could be reconstructed from simple components, rather than reliant on pedagogy to assert a fixed system in minds that aren't able to defend themselves against it. My more long-term hope would be to write something accessible to a young reader, so they can do something to guard against the poison of education and we might have far less of this toxicity. I believe this will happen without me doing anything out of necessity, but the fear is very strong now and there is something very real to fear. If there is nothing but "the system" that we're getting - if what they did to us in the 1990s is allowed to continue but worse when the brats around me are the elders - it will be terrible to live through that. That whole thing was set up so that the favored would have their private and special education and everyone else will get nothing but "retard! retard!" shouted at them from cradle to grave. Since it's Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Moved to >>>/leftypol_archive/22975.

>>23042
I'll try to answer each briefly.

>what do you think of the black national question?
Attempt to shoehorn a Germanic understanding where it doesn't belong. Go to black Americans and most consider the black nationalists to be silly hoteps who will make their situation worse. The prevalent strain of black nationalism isn't the Panthers or what these ideologues think. It's the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan, which lifts a lot of Freemason stuff but it's for black people and says that they are the real Israelites.
There isn't a burning desire for "black identity", let alone a "black nation-state" which would be enclosed and segregated. The communists promoting that were doing a lot of damage and promoting their own brand of racism. About the only desire for that from the black people was that they were pushed against so much that they believed they had no choice but to resist. The overriding aim was to simply be able to live, after being left with nothing after emancipation. If that simple thing were granted, there wouldn't be a "Negro Question". That was always an insinuation of eugenics. If you look at America of the past, ideological racism was not what the narrative theory of history insisted it "should" be. You'd probably find that this would have gone away within a couple of generations if the economic basis of the country were at all sane. When that started to happen, it was necessary to "teach the controversy" and restore segregation on explicitly eugenicist grounds. By now, black Americans have no solidarity with each other, and you can go ask them yourself or judge what you would do in their situation, instead of defaulting to pigheaded assumptions.

>What about the national question in general in regards to USA/Canada?
This ties into the above. America/ the US isn't a nation-state in the Germanic sense (which itself was an intentional parody of nationalism as a democratizing force in the late 18th century). It started as 13 colonies in British America, and they understood themselves as British during the Revolutionary War. None of that was about a "national identity". It happened because "well, we've already been at war for a year", and there were expectations that the Empire would not be centered around a racial idea in England. There were people in tPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

If someone says "Eugene, you're an American hypocrite" - I don't profit from any further enclosure of Indian land, and what was done was done. America has a lot of questions to ask itself if it is to be a "thing" in the future. But, those questions won't be asked. Eugenics won. This is the world eugenics creates. So, I think only about that, and I will work with anyone who will kill eugenist filth.

Amazing read Eugene, after you finish your work here, I would like you to reconsider seeking a Phd or Masters at Cambridge.

Also publish on demand is a thing, I would very much like to read your work in hard copy.

If you need help typesetting, which tbh fam I reckon you could do yourself; We can help.

>>23046
I know how to format it to look "professional" or something close to it. Just a matter of obtaining materials to make the hard copy.
I have most of Book 3 finished but want to edit it for clarity, to make it clearer what I'm referring to. It looks like "rant at highest volume", which it will be since Books 4 and 5 tone down the "doom is nigh". It comes off as doomer because I'm writing about concepts which are basically trans-historical - that is, what it means to speak of the concept of the political and economic, which are rather grody if they are distilled to their essential characteristics, how we speak of them. I really need to make the point that you won't find answers to the political within the political itself, especially formulations of it written by aristocracy - written traditionally by religion and for the purposes religion serves. Religion itself gives some of the answers of where to look, since no religion is a "total system" in that sense, and I'm opposed to "total systems" as an explanation of anything useful for us. The only total system that is relevant for me is the world itself, and even there, the world is not a "system" in that sense.

I have a supplemental I was writing but it needs to be edited, since I want to avoid "rant mode" and clarify what I wrote in the first book about the concept of systems, and how this concept could be worked with in the future. My main goal there is to demonstrate how a systems thought could be reconstructed from simple components, rather than reliant on pedagogy to assert a fixed system in minds that aren't able to defend themselves against it. My more long-term hope would be to write something accessible to a young reader, so they can do something to guard against the poison of education and we might have far less of this toxicity. I believe this will happen without me doing anything out of necessity, but the fear is very strong now and there is something very real to fear. If there is nothing but "the system" that we're getting - if what they did to us in the 1990s is allowed to continue but worse when the brats around me are the elders - it will be terrible to live through that. That whole thing was set up so that the favored would have their private and special education and everyone else will get nothing but "retard! retard!" shouted at them from cradle to grave. Since it's Post too long. Click here to view the full text.