The threads are getting out control. Keep ‘em clean.

As a reminder please utilize the WHO IS SHE and Begging threads to the best of your abilities

I see you trying /booty/‘s method
Caucasoid
Reddit fuck

>>168289 (OP)
Do an Anne Heche, prick.

fr let’s get these freaks a space

Making a separate thread for these milk/pregnancy lovers would be nice

>>168318
You're an idiot. Mods are asleep at the wheel. Nothing will ever be enforced so what's the point?

>>168289 (OP)
Hi guys, I'm a tripfag with terrible opinions. You might have seen me around. I often say the N word, hard R. I just want to say that everyone here who isn't a slobbering retard, is awesome and I hope you're all doing your best in life.

>>168319
Yep, I'm an idiot, there already is a preg thread lmao. Didn't notice

>>168333
Oh. It's you.

>>168333
Not a thread though is it?

>>168345
Thread? Forum? Whatever you want to call it - a place for those guys

>>168344
It's me? Lol

>>168347
The guy with a hate boner for pregnancy.

>>168348
Ah - you should re-read my comments in that post or get your head examined. When I say I didn't care for the fetish, that means I don't care for it. It's not in my interests. I'm not sure how else to spell it out for you lmao

>>168351
Not the guy spewing bile in the Cassie thread? Sure.

>>168353
This is me id: ea714d
Are you that paranoid you think it's a conspiracy that everyone there is the same guy? Lmao

>>168356
How can it be a conspiracy when it's just you?

threads are getting out control because of the fucking niggers and cucks visiting the forum

This should be where people argue about tal berry, every thread about her is a shit show

It’s annoying how much arguing goes on in the threads

I doubt this is gonna work. People post that shit on the other threads because it's easy to get a response plus because this board barely gets any content these days every1 on here is sexually frustrated as fuck which makes them either easy to troll or gives them nothing better to do than fuck with randoms.

Can we finally ban that guy in the adriana fence threads?

He... Talks like! This. Red or blue??

>>168433
>>168454
It’s pinned but the other pinned threads hardly work either

How many actual different people visit this board per week? Sometimes I feel like it’s the same 12-15 people lol

Man wouldn't it be great if all these racist pieces of shit got chemically castrated

>>168472
I too have fantasies of wiping people out that think differently as well.

>>168433
I remember this sub-forum was super active during the start of the COVID pandemic in late 2020. People actually delivered the goods compares to now.

>>168323
I wonder what this person's name is?

>>168478
I have a couple of this chicks videos huge titties but a shit ton of tats almost to the point that it's an absolute turnoff

>>168360
Or the racists dumbfucks who never fail to get a thread taken down

cutie

>>168454
What's the deal with that anyway? Bitch stopped doing nudes years ago and yet that dude is on here all day long posting the same old photos over and over

>>168480
>>168472
Post your arm

Not to be rude to the jannies but creating a separate pinned thread for racism seems nonsensical, but I'm not complaining about the website having it hosted in the same country as me makes it speedy AF.

>>168514
Who knows what motivates anyone here. It's a shit show. Free content is welcomed with scorn and models that fit right in are torn down. Doesn't make any sense.

WTF happened to this board?
Did 4ch close /s/, or /pol/, or something?

>>168549
I've found this place to be far more harsh than /s.

>>168480
So what her name is?

>>168613
Nevermind i found it

>>168586
But it wasn't before. Something changed and now this board gets more and more toxic.

>>168477
There were more ppl posting thot shit too since there was no way to get attention in person. Either way the good days are def long gone both in terms of content production and sharing.

>>168701
Half the threads are just dudes getting baited for their money by non nude insta content and then the other half are just not good looking women imo (old, flabby, whatever). It doesn't surprise me that mfers get sexually frustrated and act like dumbasses.

I am angry, angry about boobs

How many real people y’all think actually view this site per week

>>168934
i wish it were enough to bring back /trans/

>>165125 (Cross-thread)
just look, LOOK at this aggressively average specimen. even 5/10s think theyre supermodels now. every girl off the street wants to be a pornstar. wants to be paid to give you a bad jpeg of her toneless, saggy body. wants to make you pay extra if she pretends to like you, for the feeling youre not a piece of shit, for the feeling the world hasnt been turned topsy turvy and that guys can still get a date even when they aren't 10/10 chads with several million instagram 'subscribers' . that monogamy still exists, that love ever did. that you're not fucked. that you can get fucked. get fucked. all of it can get fucked. these entitled average cunts especially, who think being rude and loud and dismissive is a virtue. Who think their random limb flailing on camera constitutes dance or that their retarded fucking lipsyncing of vapid pop songs constitutes real expression. Who think that they're a fucking new noble class. Who think their gray dismal pussy lips, already drooping at 20, have inherent worth, that you should bow down to them and throw money their way. Commercialized like everything, the arbitrage of human contact captured by a hundred thousand pimp algorithms who whore out the entire human race. Oh but we're the ones with a problem right? We're the desperate incels who deserve contempt just because we were born with the original sin of being average joes. Fuck you. Fuck this stupid ugly cunt, fuck her ugly cunt. Her meat is gonna rot like the rest of them. She's not special. Let her fucking sink into her own delusions of grandeur for the 3 years it takes for her to become obsolete and replaced by a million others. Always fresh meat for the fodder eh friends? The world's fucked, she's plain, we're all gonna die, deal with it.
I've lost the ability to cum.

>>168944
Wanna come up for air?

>>168942
doesn't /ee get enough of that content? Just a question.

>>168944
I like your stuff, it has a vital energy. Reminds me of IncelMisogynist from Xhamster, who is, IMHO, the GOAT incel-poster.

>>168722
I hear ya but none of us are the board police. Best to hide the thread/user and move on. Converting people ain't a thing. Admitedly when something obviously doesn't belong here it should be pointed out but the mods seem to deal with that too.

>>168528
guaranteed 3/4 nigger

>>168944
>>168957
Reminds me of that Black Mirror episode "Fifteen Million Merits"

>>169072
guaranteed 4/4 nigger dumb hick crakkker

>>168944
STFU faggot. Imagine being this much of an incel in an era with the highest female population in history and with the most easy going women in history. Goodness gracious.

>>168957
lol look at this loser. Imagine reading what people who call themselves "incels" blather on about. I realized the whole "incel" shit was retarded when actual cripples/handicap and homeless people get laid and reproduce with regularity. "Incels" are actually just really picky or more mentally ill than the average person.

>>169077
>>169078
>>169080
Stop talking to yourself. This is a forum, not your damn Twitter feed.

jesus, this forum became just like LA, full of fags, niggers and beggars

Posting never-nudes in this forum is a waste of everyone's fucking time, both yours (the coomers) and ours (the consoomers). Quit wasting your fucking time because they'll never show anything decent.

Momose posters. gravure is fucking boring
PureRuby posters, shes just zesty italian flavor amouranth
nerdygirljulia pos- never mind that fucking lake dried up months ago

tl;dr: L + ratio+ forever tittyless

>>169140
Their time to waste.

>>169078
>the highest female population in history
the female population is 50%. what are you smoking?

>>169080
I was using the term 'incel' comically, but by the way it triggered you I can tell I touched a nerve.If you get laid so often why are you being aggressive and uptight on a forum where people whack off over misshapen overweight women? Let's call a spade a spade here, you're no casanova yourself.

>>169080
it's also been proven that 95% of the female population try to attain the top 3% of the male population.
here's your (You)

>>169187
So almost 4 billion right
But idiot doesn’t realize also highest numbers of men too

>>169078
You're right incels are retarded about most everything except the workplace. Tapped some bitch in the shoulder now I have to do sensitivity training. Smh

>>169187
Think dude meant most number of easily available women in history.

>>169106
Shut up honky.

>>169264
how are they easily available when they only go for 10/10s? and even then they still act like massive cunts with one word answers and you have to pull teeth to get anywhere with them. even when theyre fat and ugly.

There should be a containment board for non-white content.

>>169287
/prison?

>>169287
Best content here is nonwhite and they have better bodies. Go back to fagchan(4chan). Faggot.

You all are lame pussy diseased bitches that are virgins with no shaft.

>>168934
I wouldn't be surprised if there's like 20 posters and a few hundred lurkers.

>>169365
you insult like a 3 year old

>>169374
Agree. The quality of insult leveled here is piss poor.

e87fde drops a hard R and posts a blurry picture of Subrina. Must be from Alabama. His mommy must have made him mad that morning.

>>169374
Ight I’ll do you one better. You can suck your son’s dick when he turns 3. Pedo lil bitch and your fagget friend over there agreeing with you like you butt hump each other every night. I’m in this bitch so start some faggets

>>169393
Do me a favor bud and go ahead and take that fella’s dick out your mouth ok? Greaattttttt

>>169106
You forgot to add your faggot ass to the chart. This dumb fuck lol you thought you was fucking cool then the rest? You on the same site bitch wake the fuck up loser

>>169315
Show us your arm

Do niggers ever think it’s weird that Hiroshima is a nicer city than Detroit, or are their shrunken brains inhibiting that sort of introspection? Literal nuclear annihilation is easier to recover from than niggers.

>>169510
That's a lot of words there. I might ask the same. Does the hate drive you through to the end without possibility of reflection before you hit reply?

>>169510
Tell me you don’t get pussy without actually telling me type shit……nah but Japan really???? Lmfaooo who tf wants to live in a disease infested city where you have no rights. Sure virgin. Go back to Naruto please

>>169519
>>169522
Retarded niggers incapable of answering even basic questions. Can’t say I’m surprised, after all, just look at any of the nigger-infested shitholes around the country!

>>169525
Don’t you eat dogs and cats? Lol and bats???? Lmfaoooo don’t you kill y’all daughters??? Throw them away in a trash can. Wait hold on didnt Covid come from your disgusting asses??? Keep on bro lol this funny asf.

>>169525
I can't say I care to answer for races other than my own even though collective concious doesn't actually exist. I think you refer to tribe when you say nigger. Again I don't tend to enter into classism either.

>>169526
It disgusts me that my taxes pay to perpetuate your inhuman species. Thank God you niggers can’t stop killing each other or we might have a real problem.

>>169527
Yeah blah blah blah go eat a dog and create another disease. Lol you specs think your white or some like you wasn’t rounded up and put in camps back then 😂 never heard of Asian privilege dumb fuck. Go do the math on why Kabukicho is failing then or Kamagasaki. Dumb spec smh

>>169529
There is literally no specs on this site. Why tf you here? Thought so lmfao dumb specs stop creating diseases please

>>169529 don’t y’all be fucking your cousins a shit

I cant tell where the shitposting stops and the schizoposting begins
Even /booty/ has a better schizo containment thread

>>169529
First, there is no god you dumb faggot. Second black people are set to be the biggest population globally in less than 50 years. Cry more about it jizz stain

>>169562
You are arguing with someone who doesn't know how taxes work, has never opened a history book beyond high school, and is clearly baiting.

That anon has no idea of what he's writing about, does not believe a word he types, and does not care about what he types. But most important, he does not care what you write to him so long as he gets attention and someone to fight with so he can feel good about himself.
He will racebait and shitpost and write whatever he needs to in order to get that feeling, and he won't stop until he gets bored or until he can't get that good feeling.

So please stop feeding him.

>>169562
How is that when over 75 percent of the United States population is white and only 13 percent are black. So your saying in the next 50 years the African American population is going to jump 62 percent? Bullshit. Second off people can believe whatever they want to I can go out and pray to a dog terd and who are you to say that I can't. Your the jizz stain dude.

>>169582
He said globally dumbass

>>169592
Globally would make sense if what he said had any amount of truth behind it. The overall population in the world has been declining sense the 60s and that includes all ethnicities. So you and him can fuck off

>>169371
I wouldn’t be surprised. And at the same time itd hurt because I’m reminded even more how retarded it is to be pornhunting .. and on an image board

>>169553
The schizo over at booty makes himself very obvious
Haven’t yet learned who the schizo is here, because he hasn’t replied to himself yet, I don’t think

>>169562
Not here to defend or belittle any races, I’m white and I don’t hate

But You’re a faggot

Good point on Africa’s development though

>>169595
Wait nvm found the schizo. Who told you the global population was declining since the 1960s? Please tell me you’re shitposting

>>168942
Gross.

>>169618
It's complicated. In 2019 40 percent of the global population lived in countries that had declining birth rate

>>169642
It's complicated usually means it's bullshit. Total global population is only increasing.

did the bumping problems get fixed?

>>169645
Population growth isn't just measured by comparing the population numbers today to the population numbers of yesterday. The birth and death rates within a population are also taken into account when measuring whether a population is in growth or decline, along with whether the population has grown because of immigration.

If a population has a growing rate of deaths within it and isn't hitting the amount of births needed to compensate for those deaths, then it doesn't matter if the overall total is higher than what it was yesterday. It will be marked as a decline.

Niggers tongue my anus

>>169676
This is seriously your explanation for you literally saying the population has been declining since the 1960s. You are so misguided. Stop being an idiot

>>169676
Equivication = bullshit. Total global numbers on a gradient of maybe a decade(?) or take you sewage elsewhere. I am speaking global and if i remember right you meant that too.

>>169700
No, that was my explanation for the metrics on how a population is measured.

The reason for why the population in the United States has been on the decline is because of the rise in suicide rates, the rise in mass shootings despite homicides being on the decline in many states, and the decline of birthrates overall. Mostly among White people, but the effects can be seen with the other groups as well. The mass immigration boom covered that up, especially with White Hispanics being counted as White to bolster the numbers, but with three Presidents (W. Bush, Obama, Biden) with big deportation numbers behind them, that avenue has stalled. I would count Trump, but his deportation is a weird combination of a huge backlog, immigrants disappearing into concentration camps or being disappeared by ICE, and people being so repulsed by him or riding his dick so hard that nobody really knows what went on.

And all of this was before COVID happened.

With COVID, we're in hard decline despite having a bigger gross population than previous generations. I imagine that's why Roe V. Wade got overturned the way it did and why it's not going to change any time soon. And why Biden isn't going to let off the gas when it comes to deportations. They're going to pump up the birth rates one way or the other, but they refuse to actually change the conditions that brought along the decline in the first place.

But neither you nor>>169703 care about that shit. You just want to be spoon-fed a conclusion so you don't have to think.

>>169698
Dude fuck off with that bullshit tongue your own anus

>>169718
Yes we’ve found the schizo

>>169718
Do you believe any of that dumb shit? 🤣. Deportation was always a thing, it just got ramped up under the orange man because it was effecting the electoral college and house seats. Illegals can't vote but they do effect the census which in turn changes to amount of seats districts get in the House. Stopping the flow of illegals who would unfavorably change the make up of congress is just self preservation. Every single president in the last 4 decades has run on slowing iigration except the mummy in office now.
And to blame the declining birthrate on shit like suicide and mass shootings is just flat out retardation 🤣. Do you have any idea how low those numbers actually are? Most "mass shootings" are gang/drug violence in cities like Chicago, LA, Detroit, Minneapolis, etc. The metric is 3 or more people shot. That's it. The never gets added for political pull but no one mentions that it's in those areas because they don't actually care that it's almost entirely black people getting killed. They use the numbers to promote gun control, when those cities have the strictest gun control anyways because the point of gun control from the start was to prevent blacks from being armed.
What was waaaay more detrimental to population growth was societal changes like the push for women to join the work force instead of being stay at home wives which disrupted the previous family structure and Roe V Wade. Since Roe JUST African Americans have aborted 65 million pregnancies. They account for more than 50% of total abortions since the initial ruling. That's a decimation of that population that was strategically pushed specifically to lower the birthrate of blacks and poor whites. The changes to society that the US has gone through over the last few decades is why the birthrate has dropped, especially since 2020, it drastically dropped when everyone thought it would spike because of what an absolute shithole society has turned into. Fucking suicide and mass shootings 🤣

>>169787
I mean can you be more obvious about being a white nationalist. This whole paragraph is filled with made up bullshit. Theirs not even 65 million African Americans in the US you shit head. If you look at the number of abortions its not even one percent of the US population and it takes two incomes nowadays for a family to survive or atleast survive without having help and name one illegal immigrant that got elected to congress. Dude your the fuck tard of fuck tards. Congrats

>>169787
I looked at the statistics of abortions and if you add the last 40 years it's no where near 65 million. Your free to return to your bubble

>>169792
“Name one illegal that got elected to Congress” .. dude you are so fucking slow. That not what he meant in any way … it’s like seeing children argue

I thought it was a waste of time but this tread was a great idea.

>>169797
Om so what did he mean genius? Better yet how about you explain his entire message so we can all understand nimrod

>>169595
You can fuck off too your racist asshole

>>169859
Intentional statistical skewing, political gain through IDless votes

Real shame thothub went down

All these niggers need to rob someone and get shot by the police fr fr not a cap on lmao

I don't get why racism is cool. I used to read Stormfront and National Alliance for kicks, just to see retards being retards. It's radicalism for right wing hippies.

>>170243
There are attention whores that think that racism is cool, but I think that most of them do it because it gives them direction and something to do/someone to hate or because its what they were taught and don't want to think outside of the box.

I mean, the second the board comes back, and the first comment in here was racebaiting. That anon is looking for attention and to feel a certain kind of way.

>>170235
You would never say this to a black persons face pussy

>>170267
Because I don't have to see your CENSORED

>>170243

See the post by this anon.>>170271

The anon he's talking to and calling a monkey is probably White. But the race of the anon doesn't matter so long as he or anyone is triggered by the comment. Then the racist anon can say his edgy, racebaiting shit and feel a certain kind of way.

He gets off on the idea that he can get a response that fits his needs.

>>170271
you sound like the next Payton Gendron and I’m sure you embrace it too you fucking ugly useless fat piece of shit. I’m sure you have the most miserable life on this thread with the ugliest fattest bitch and family too. Of course you have to vent on an anonymous thread your racist thoughts you fat fucking scumbag.

You know then the monkeys are hurling shit at each other at the zoo.....

>>170498
Yes, BBW-Chan is a zoo.

And no matter the color, we're all idiots for being here.

>>170243
it's not cool, it's common sense

>>170818
Common sense is knowing that everything eventually dies. Everything else is personal biases and a desperate scramble to find a good enough lie to keep you going or creating a means of cultivating and maintaining power over others.

Racism isn't some universal fundamental truth, it's just another round of stupid people making up stupid shit. Because they either want floaty, mercurial answers that make them feel good or just want power over others and limited ability for chances of reprisal.

And if you're in the comment section of an imageboard for fat bitches talking about "common sense", you have no power and are looking for a good, ever adapting lie to keep you going. So be it, but at least don't lie to yourself about it.

TL:DR
You'll never have real power over others or yourself, but you want it any way you can or just to feel good while waiting for the end.

>>170900
Most based comment of all time

I gotta say, I'm liking these new rules.

>>170900
> it's just another round of stupid people making up stupid shit
Nice projection. That’s what this thread is for right? To make ppl feel good including yourself.
Why bother with the semantics?
Lots of ppl are still inexperienced on the web young and old smh

>>171511
Except there is no semantics involved. It's a matter of opinion, and either you agree or disagree. If you disagree, then provide a counter. But waiving off the comment with nothing other than "semantics" like you know what the word means is just dumb and lazy.

You literally went with the "I know you are, but what am I" defense, dressed up in ideas and words you don't really understand to say something that means nothing.

Good for you.

>>168289 (OP)
Stfu you nigger shitskin poo or whatever tf you are. I will post whatever I want. Freedom of speech you fucking nigger.

>>171111 (Cross-thread)
>>172539
you know how people on their deathbed will blurt out all sorts of shit, suddenly re-energized to address certain issues, ask for forgiveness, tell secrets, etc.?

That's basically what this is. Not you specifically, but white people in general. White people are very fast losing grip over their political and social privileges that defined the whole prestige of whiteness, and now white people are increasingly becoming a minority in the country their ancestors had colonized. Being a global minority is already bad enough, but maintaining control as a minority natively is going to be impossible. Even if the current system of capital continues to exist, it will only serve the interests of the dominant racial/ethnic classes in order to avoid any motivation for rebellion (that's why middle class workers tend to be anti-worker, for example). We very well may see a future where the roles will literally reverse, where white women are constantly degraded, white men always brutalized by the state, and white families crippled by financial institutions controlled by black and brown hands.

Personally, i'd rather capitalism be done with for a better life for everybody. But eh, ngl, I wouldn't mind living in the same exact system with the roles reversed.

>>168289 (OP)
I swear this is the most fucked up thread on the site. I include all the CP and gore in that.

>>172653
I do agree with the sentiment that White people and Whiteness is on it's deathbed, but I don't think it's a good thing that the same class/racial dynamics would end up reversing itself as White people race to the bottom of the totem pole. Half the reason we're in this mess in the first place is because there is a totem pole with a top spot, and Whiteness/White Supremacy Capitalism desperately needs bodies to keep the machine going but also needs to maintain a White Supremacist hierarchy to justify the shrinking amount of White men at the top.

Eventually, we'd end up back in the same place we are now, just with a shrinking pool of non-White faces fighting to create a fascist empire where only they are in control.

I think we need a more democratic system where power is decentralized and has safeguards on it so that nobody can take the top spot or take the center space or just become the primary focus. But that would require both the dismantling of the system and everyone become a defined group rather than a "race" defined by the needs of the people in power. Which would include White people as well. Hell, the success of it would require White people to finally become defined on terms that don't rely on White Supremacist Capitalism to bolster the group.

>>170543
Yeah it's a zoo, and yeah, we're all idiots, but y'know what? It's still a thousand leagues above titsintops. That fucking shithole of circlejerking faggots truly sucks massive horsecock and doesn't even attempt to hide it.
At least it's productive here, at least we can post anyone 18+ any time because wtf kind of simp shit is a dnp list, at least there's no arbitrary stupid shit rules where you can't call someone a piece of shit for their piece of shit behavior and ideals because it's "an insult", at least here isn't a court of beyond useless fucking jokers who call themselves mods, which is an oxymoron, who are only worth 1/4 of a turd collectively but think they're the greatest shit to walk the earth because they rule over a kingdom of idiocy
Fuck those basement-dwelling virgin fat fucks, fuck titsintops and fuck their stupid rules, but fuck you specially if you're a mod there you useless piece of human waste

>>172683
Feel better now?

>>172663
It's me again, the guy you replied to. I fully agree with you, we're all better off building a post-capitalist world.

But the reason I say I'd rather the roles reverse is mostly because I don't see capitalism ending anytime soon. Don't get me wrong, its unstable nature means it will inevitably die either by revolution or by collapse (hell, the internal contradictions of capitalist mode of production has gotten so bad that our economy is icnreasingly driven by speculation and ficticious capital, we are further and further drifting away from real production, which is the beginning of an end).

HOWEVER, in either case I think we're only going to degenerate into fascism (if a revolution happens and fails) or barbarism (if capitalism collapses), and so with how badly the general population has been plagued with idealism, superstition, etc., I don't see us *yet* capable of having the ideological tools needed to rebuild society without regressing back to capitalism. Maybe like 150+ years later we'll actually have a thriving, post-capitalist world, Us, our kids and their future kids will be dead by then most likely, soo.

>>172689
I do, yeah, thks

>>172714
Same anon you're replying to.

Assuming we are in End-Stage Capitalism, I don't think there's going to be a collapse in the way that people think it will be where there will be anarchy and violence and lawlessness. It will just be power grab after power grab as resources further consolidate into the hands of a few. But a part of me thinks that, one way or the other, the superpowers and a few governments are going to strong-arm those corporations into compliance in order to stabilize things. Like China and Russia did, for example. The one thing people should be able to count on is the government being goons, smart or stupid. And if there ever was a time for the government to be a goon and start strong-arming corporations, its now.

Eventually, the United States is going to follow suit, it just needs the right excuse and the right government in place to do the goon work.
work to reign in the corporations like they should be.

I don't think we'll ever be rid of Capitalism, but I do think that we are far closer to democratizing work and the means of production than we are to laze-faire Capitalism. And I do think that, if presented, people will go for a hybrid system with Democratic Socialism handling the critical infrastructures that were left to the hands of private ownership. I think we're already there, if all of the strikes and demonstrations are any indication. In the past, they would have been snuffed out by police/federal intervention, and now they're getting more and more mainstream press and the usual police/federal goon tactics isn't enough to stop it without mass bloodshed. And the people calling for it don't have the numbers they used to despite the internet saying they do.

It can get worse, but I don't think it's going to.

>>172653
>>172663
>>172714
>coomunist doomers
You lads happen to stop by 4 chan at all, your rhetoric would garner more views there. This shithole ain’t worth it trust me

>>172742
It's not about the views, anon. It's about venting and/or discussing shit that would derail other threads.

Besides, 4chan is like a 50 year old man who still thinks they're in high school. This shithole may not be worth it, but that shithole is just old edgelords who refuse to grow past being edgelords. And the idiots who sincerely think 4chan is a good place to recruit White Supremacists from.

>>172740
I love reading the musings of complete retards. What have you ever produced, or given to society? Jack shit

>>172754
Labor, anon.
I've given my labor to a business who pays taxes which help to fund the state government which helps to fund services that a government does in order to function and provide for itself and the citizenry.

>>172754
My problem with this comment is that it means nothing. It's just a quick and lazy way to say "stop saying things I don't like" without actually dealing with what was being said or written or expressed. And how can this really be responded to? Get angry at it, and they feel like they win...something? Ignore it and they still find a way to validate essentially saying nothing of value. The only way to really get at it is to get at the person who wrote it and why, except I know why you went into this thread to say that stupid shit.

I mean, the foundation of what you wrote was "only special people get to say something." And it's stupid because people aren't special. They're just people. No better or worse, and most of them struggling to survive. Some better than others. It doesn't mean they should have a better platform, it doesn't mean they should have a worse one. But because they're citizens in a society, they should be encouraged to participate in society and express themselves. And the people should be able to vote and say yes or no to their ideas.

Because we live in a democracy. And saying
>What have you ever produced or given to society
As though that should bar you from participation is just anti-democratic.

>>172766
The bare minimum required by law then.

It's wonderful to be lectured to by people that do not contribute more voluntarily that I should contribute more at gunpoint.

>>172766
We live in republic. The funds which the government appropriates from me are poorly spent, but you jackoffs want the government to run everything.

>>172757
>>172798
I'm a Communist, not a statist. The ruling class (the class that is the ruling material force of society) and the state (the centralized, bureaucratic, and militant organization that acts as the dominant apparatus of society) are both in a symbiotic relationship -- because their aims and their restraints are determined by the labor and property relations of society. The ruling class exercises those relations, the state facilitates and enforces it.

What you want is a small class dictating the affairs and relations of society, which is by definition authoritarian because of the consolidation of power. What I want is the working masses to have that power. I trust the interests of my welder neighbor far more than I trust the interests of anyone from the distinct class of bureaucrats or the distinct class of investors. You, on the other hand, mistrust the working class because you probably were taught to regurgitate the ideas that say wealth is a reflection of character, so the wealthiest should rule society because they have the best characters of all society -- and other things like that.

>>172803
Humans are incompatible with communism.

>>172806
On what basis? Because to even think that is also to think that human nature is fixed.

If you look at anthropological evidence, humans have actually lived communist societies for about 90% of the history of homo sapiens. I.e., hunter gathering societies (because they're stateless and classless). Hell, previously we thought that advanced medicine started 7,000 years ago (around where agriculture kicked off), but just yesterday they discovered successful limb amputation surgery goes back at least 31,000 years ago (during hunting gathering system). You know what that means? If the surgery was successful, then it probably wasn't their first surgery. For them to do it means they understood limb anatomy, they knew about infections, they knew how to prevent blood loss because they understood vascular systems, etc., and most of all they knew why it was necessary. So now what we previously thought of as "primitive communism" may actually not be primitive at all.

>>172808
On the basis that we are animals with access to finite resources.

>>172808
Anyone pushing for communisn is a piece of trash. To say that human history was 90% communism is the most retarded thing I've ever read on this board, which is saying a lot. Just because people were tribal, doesn't mean they didn't have classes. There's always leadership, there were hunters, warriors, elders, the women took care of the children, etc. There has never been a point in history where the vast majority of groups of people did not arrange themselves into classes and hierarchical structures. And "stateless" is another retarded comment to make. Territory. Thats it. Humans have ALWAYS fought over territory. Just because smaller tribes weren't big enough to have a "government" didn't mean they didn't have their territories. States are just territories. Communism was bullshit when Plato wrote about it and it was even bigger bullshit when that human waste Marx wrote about it. He was a whiny little rich kid who thought he knew what was best for everyone else, also a fervent racist. Just like everyone who pushes all that garbage now. His government should've done the world a favor and hung him in the streets for the world to see and put a stop to that shit at the start. The only thing communism has ever done is kill hundreds of millions of people by starvation and government force and fuck up everything it touches. The only good thing the FBI has ever done is throw black bags over communists heads and drag them off never to be seen again.

>>172817
Funny, to say the least.

Even if you dislike it, I would recommend you to read "The origin of the family, state and private property", written by Friedrich Engels.
It's not the ultimate opinion on the subject but, nevertheless, it's a good read on this matter, and a good first contact with Historical Materialism.

At the very least, you will get some better basis for your arguments.

>>172822
>Engels
Might as well read a book on agriculture by Lysenko.

>>172822
Well, at least try to read it.
You is already wasting your time here, jacking off and challenging others opinion, so...
...why not?

>>172798
The term you want is "Democratic Republic." We live in a Democratic Republic.

If we lived in a full Republic, then the government would have complete control over housing, food, and transportation rather than having to pay subsidies and negotiate with corporations and the individual markets they occupy. There is no private ownership in a Republic.

But yes, I would rather have the government have complete control over vital infrastructures rather than trust private corporations to do the job. With private corporations, the individual people can't vote them out, can't price them out, have little to no access to the same resources legally, and are at the whims of the private entities. And if the people running the corporations are grossly incompetent, completely unregulated, and so dedicated to profit margins that they cut too many corners and create avoidable safety hazards, then the people are especially fucked.

No, I don't want the government to run everything. But I do want them to run the vital resources necessary to live in this country. Because I want the people to have power over those vital necessities, whether directly or indirectly, than to give up power to a handful of private owners with little to no oversight to keep them in check.

>>172817
>>172817
You are literally incorrect. I didn't say they were communist because they were tribal. I said they were communist because they didn't have states or economic classes.

This is what you people don't understand. You keep seeing Communism as purely philosophical, but it is an economic term.

Also, to think territory = state just says how desperate you are to make some kind of point. A territory might have a way of life and a faction that defends the group, but that itself isn't a "state" because again -- based on the historical development of money and class, class societies needed some sort of central force to enforce its systems, i.e., the state. The development of states have always continued evolving -- but what they all have in common is the fact that they're (1) centralized, (2) bureaucratic, (3) armed, (4) they function to protect and enforce the interests of the dominant classes of society.

If the only way you can make an argument is by coming up with bad definitions that are imprecise compared to the definition you're arguing against, then why do you bother arguing against Communists at all? It's obvious you haven't read any Communist text diligently yourself, you just by faith regurgitate what the dominant media, press, and education systems told you. That's a lot like how many Christians become Atheists, you know, by actually reading the bible and actually reading about science. At the very least, you'll be able to come up with better arguments once you understand what it is you're arguing against.

>>172850
>>172856
The evidence that this never works is in the numbers dead as a result of any attempt to implement it. This time it'll work trust me comrades. This time.

>>172864
Except I want a hybrid between Socialism and Capitalism. I have no illusions that Capitalism will go away or that Communism is be-all-end-all of governance. But I do believe that certain industries should not be in the hands of the private sector, dictated by corporate interests and the markets and a profit margin (healthcare, housing, food, and transportation)

And I do believe that the people should be educated and given more of a say in how the government works rather than fully relying on politicians and insulated government officials which can be bought by donors and corporations/industries.

There may never come a day where we'll all live in open communes, but a laissez faire situation always leads to violent revolt and the installation of different versions of the same terrible systems.

But you don't care because its easier to use a NPC route than actually think of what you're saying.

>>172869
You really can't meme can you?

>>172879
Anon, we're near 10 years past the point where any of this is a meme.

>>172880
You are very astute. I don't care. I want to be left alone and neither of you on either end of the authoratative spectrum can get that through your thick heads. Your silly hybrid is a compromise I want nothing of. Revolutions stem from interference that none of you can help. You don't have an original thought in your head and you all think you know best.

>>172881
Nobody forced you to type that out. Nobody sought you out. Nobody is trying to make you do anything, and that you feel like you need to respond to people who aren't seeking you out to do anything is more about you wanting to feel something.

Nobody needs you to be a part of a compromise you have no interest in. Nobody needs you to be a part of something you don't care about. And whether you are actually apathetic or just attention seeking, you shutting up and staying out of it is far better than you walking in just to voice that you don't care and nothing will work.

And if you really do have the answers and choose to stay out of it, you are truly worthless.

>>172919
No, you people need to be told to fuck off at every opportunity. It's a duty. History is littered with the victims of the learned with their superior understanding convincing me that the more sure you are that you have the answer, the more dangerous you are. No one has the answer and that's the whole point.

>>172923
Didn't say that that I had the answers. But it's better to try to come up with something, even if it fails or goes unnoticed, than fight to do nothing or find security in doing nothing.

>>172923
This! They sound like a bunch of fuck heads sitting around the quad at Harvard.

>>168289 (OP)
I'm back you fucking niggers, you thought you could ban me. Kekk

Can you let us know how long a thread can go without anyone posting in it before it no longer bumps? Frustrating that good threads are being lost when it's only been 6 days since someone posted in them. That's really not that long relatively speaking for this board

>>173522
The white race is still dying bruh. White women and white men even are increasingly producing nonwhite babies. Ethnic classes of immigrants are increasingly populating America. And most of all, America is destablizing both at a financial level and cultural level (e.g., work ethic culture). Many moderates and liberals are increasingly developing class politics, and so they are beginning to abandon parliamentary politics that rely on supporting the state -- to instead support the abolition of state and the abolition of capital. We're going to see yet another Communist uprising. This time, instead of a class of uneducated and unarmed peasants revolting against a largely agricultural economy -- we have a massively proletarianized class of educated workers that are armed withina highly industrialized economy. The material conditions of socialist revolution then were different, so we should expect a very different revolution in the modern day.

Fuck white supremacy and fuck capitalism. Both will die, and when they do our successors will look back at this entire economic and social system as primitive and inferior. Your kind specifically, degenerate, uneducated, broke ass white supremacists will particularly be ridiculed for the subhuman scum you lot are.

>>168944
saved for copypasta use

>>173966
>White women and white men even are increasingly producing nonwhite babies.
Some big brain takes here.

>>173522
top cracker ass, great seeing you!

>>173966
You are correct, racists are scumbags. You're also incorrect, socialism/communism doesn't work, has never worked and will never work. I always find it comical that the people that fight so hard for the idea of socialism are never smart enough to know that the "capital" from capitalism is required for anything to get started in any kind of buisness sense. How do you start a company? Capital. How do you buy equipment to make a company or industry run? Capital. Workers can't work if there's no buisness or industry to work in. They want to control businesses and supply chains when they do not have the capital or resources to start, maintain said resources. All socialism is lazy pussies who want to leech off the endeavors of other people because they can't get the life they want going for themselves. They mask it in this "equality and fairness" when all it is is fucking weak willed, cowards with no drive to make life work on their own so they want to take from other people. Socialists and communists are a disease on humanity and should be thrown from cliffs en masse to rid the world of their weakness. If socialists/communists took over it would be the same as every other time. Societal collapse and authoritian government take over. Socialism is for fucking retards who'd rather cry about fairness than work 🤣

>>174113
Yup. Just the other side of the retarded collectivist coin. Where the racist sees everything in terms of ethnicity he sees it all in terms of class.

>>174113
Your entire comment is "Socialism doesn't work because Capitalism needs money to work." Which ignores how both Capitalism works and how Socialism works and relies on boogeymen to make a stupid, emotional point.

Then again, this is an American talking point for Americans, and the online American Left and Right have made the conversation so stupid and devoid of meaning that the word Capitalism and Socialism and Communism are quickly turning to "thing I like" or "thing I don't like" with no nuance or history behind it.

I want a democratization of the workplace because it will allow for better distribution of work and resources and hopefully get people to invest more into their jobs and see better rewards. That the worst aspect of unregulated Capitalism (the consolidation of power and wealth into the hands of the few while the rest get the labor and a pittance) just leads to people willingly producing garbage while driving quality of life standards into the toilet. And that said democratization, along with stronger regulations and a functional taxation system will help alienate the worst parts and create a functional and prosperous society.

But as long as the discourse is being driven by the online Left and Right, any chance of actual change and improvement in people's lives will never happen. And the same idiots running things into the ground trying to squeeze pennies from dimes will keep doing so, no matter what color their skin is.

>>174132
Oh. It's you again.

>>174132

Well, the important thing is that you're cleverer than both the left and the right. And in the end, isn't that the true meaning of Christmas?

>>174185
I might sound like a faggot here but I wish there was a like button for comments like this.

>>173966
Why fuck white supremacy if the white race is dying? Doesn't that mean it doesn't exist?

>>174210
It's so stupid. It's a 50/0 trade off. If the offspring isn't white it's not black either.

>>174132
I do enjoy that your comment begins by displaying that even though you use flowery language to convey your point, it's still an idiotic point and you're still a fucking retard. Communism can only be implemented by taking over the benefits of capitalism. Communism doesn't produce unless by essentially slavery, whether it be wage or outright physically. I'm not a fan of unfettered capitalism but Communism has never, ever, in the history of humanity, benefitted the people under it. It gets soft sold as "everything is gonna be fair and you're gonna be able to do what you want and everything will be great". Except, people can't do whatever they want. Certain things need to be done for society to exist. Food has to be grown. Things have to be produced, people need medical attention, people need education, ditches need dug, bathrooms need cleaned. The vast majority of people are not going to want to do those things. You can 100% make a buisness and run it in a more socialist manner under capitalism. You can decide everyone has an equal say, everyone gets equal pay, blah blah blah. There are companies that already do that. They don't scale. The only thing large scale Communism has ever done is cause hundreds of millions of deaths by starvation. Capitalism is you provide a service or product, you can make money if it's desirable. You make something good, you make money. You expand to make your buisness bigger, you make more money and also employ other people so they can make money and it grows exponentially. Do some of those people get greedy and over do it? Yep. But workers at say Amazon aren't slaves. Other jobs or available. Or if you have an idea for a service or product, with drive and effort you can start your own buisness. There is no free ride. Communism and socialism invariably leads to state control of everything, always has. That ALWAYS ends as a detriment to the population. But that doesn't play well with the communist ideals of getting everything they want in life with minimal effort being necessary. Shove your Communism up your ass you authoritarian little faggot.

>>174191
>>174210
No not really, white supremacy is a system that governs the way the structures of society works. It doesn't need a lot of white people in order to sustain itself, it just needs political power to be held by white hands

And as white supremacy reaches to its ends, it's going to attempt to revitalize itself or go out with a bang. It's becoming harder and harder for the white ruling class to maintain the philsophies they engineered the working class to adopt. As more and more white people become traitors to white supremacists, white supremacists will resort to more and more desperate means of maintaining control. So even while they're dying, they deserve to be stomped on while on the ground.

>>174113
Have you heard about the recent anthropological evidence of life during hunting gathering society, you know, the period that not only predates capitalism but predates social class and state altogether? It turns out, 31,000 years ago "primitive communist" society had practiced surigical limb amputations. Which meant they understood limb anatomy, muscular systems, vascular systems, etc., tens of thousands of years before we thought possible (initially we thought these medical and scientific advancements only developed during agricultural society).

Considering humanity has been stateless and classless for a good 90% of its history, which by definition is communism, we now know that communism is not a system that only works under primitive society -- it can work under an advanced society as well.

>>174210
However, I should clarify that the white population declining is only a PART of what makes white supremacy lose its grip. It alone does not mean white supremacy ss dying, nor does the inverse mean that white supremacy is growing.

We're in a situation where there's a multitude of factors at play. Along with the white population declining, the white working class is beginning to lose its traditional ties to the capitalist class. The white working class is developing pro-worker politics, which threatens ruling white capital.

And yes, my politics are "extreme" because by definition, any politics that seeks to change any fundamental aspect of the current system would be radical politics. Here's the thing: politics being radical is not inherently bad, especially if you consider the context of the system itself. What makes racist fascists radical politics bad is the fact that they are anti-working class. They want a police state that enforces an enthostate. They want to revitalize the racist chattel slavery system. Communists, on the other hand, want a workers state. We do not want power to be consolidated by a small class, we want power to be distributed to the whole working class. We do not want a mode of production that depends on endless economic growth, which can only form class interests of the same regard. We want a mode of production centered around commodity exchange rather than money accumulation. We want the working class to own the fruits of their labor and have power over the affairs of their own labor. By definition, capitalists are much closer to authoritarian rule since capitalists want a small class of investors to control society. 500 billionaires controlling society is far closer to 1 dictator ruling society than is 200 million workers controlling society. By definition, YOU are more authoritarian than me.

>>174353
Which part is "flowery?" And where do I advocate for Communism? What I want is a hybrid of Capitalism and Socialism (Democratic Socialism) rather than outright Communism. The biggest flaw of Communism is in it's wishy-washy handling of the state and the complete decentralization of power within said state. Without the ability to pool together resources and industries in times of crisis with a clear line of authority and structure, anyone with a large enough army can come in and take things over with little fight,

You're arguing against your imagination while relying on the idea that Capitalism is the only game in town and that everything springs from it.

>>174185
It doesn't take being more clever than them to realize a lot of this online Left and Right discourse is performative nonsense to get clicks and likes and views. That the people doing the work to push either side's agendas are not doing takedown videos or react videos or are concerned with owning someone.

>>174374
How many people do you think subscribe to you definition of white supremacy. When I hear it I tend to think of a couple of hundred inbreads in white hoods not an unvotable cabal. You're a racist sir. Not the fashionable kind either. The traditional one.

>>17434 (Dead)
Cite. You might find that Social class and the basic concept of capitalism are prehistoric. Heirarchy is inescapable.

>>174389
>>174375
Sorry. I was replying to this wall were.

>>174381
Is don't tread on me extreme? You also believe that all workers think the same way. Have you ever wworked?

>>174384
Flowery? We just see your manipulation of language is all. The more words you use the more difficult it is to pin your ideas down. We see you.
What parts of your ideology are you willing to give up to achieve your vision? I assume I'm speaking to the communist here.

>>174394
First, who's "we?"

Second, not a Communist. Never claimed to be one, never said I was one.

Third, it's all written down. Either deal with what is written or don't.

Fourth, why the hell should I compromise my ideas when the goal is to find a middle ground between Capitalism and Socialism? Assuming I got my way, the point is to mediate both sides, not to make my position weaker. Weaking my position would just mean that nothing changes.

I hope you're just trolling me.

>>174401
You have no hope.
So, I see you. Better? And boy I do see a lot of words. Be concise if you want people on board.
You want a middle ground, a compromise then you have to give up on some of your principles.

>>174375
Shut the fuck up with your 90% of human history blah blah blah. 1st of all. They weren't fucking communist. You made that retarded argument in another thread and it was just as stupid. You don't just get to go back in time write "communism" on a little flag in crayon like the fucking mongoloid you are and stick it in someone where and go "see! We were here first. That's not how that works. You're talking about small tribes that don't have enough people to warrant a government but still have a social structure and hierarchical structure. There has never been a time that there was a group of people and someone didn't emerge as a leader. As soon as you scale up populations, trade and sales come in for profit and leadership takes a cut.

>>174384
See, you say "complete decentralization of power within the state" as a flaw of communism but when exactly has that ever happened? What country has EVER had communism that was not run by an authoritarian government? What country has ever had communism and is not much worse off for it? See, that the problem with you fucking idiots, you read all this horseshit (especially from Marx who was a spoiled rich kid that never actually had to do anything for himself and lived his entire life off the benefits a system that was not communism, not to mention he was a colossal racist that would put Klan members here to shame) and epsouse all this rhetoric about this fantasy land that's never existed, when in reality the experiment has been run over and over and over and in every single instance its lead to mass death and poverty and being controlled by a horrific government. Without fucking fail. But you're so fucking shortsighted that you cannot do something as simple as look at evidence infront of you. You know who has a hybrid form of communism/capitalism? China you fucking bag of shit. The people live in poverty and live with insane inflation literally use grease out of the fucking sewers to cook their food because that's what they can afford to do. The people work themselves to death, barely benefit from it but the products they produce get sold by the government using capitalism to amass wealth. That's what that leads to. They get money, the people starve and then we get little useless pussies like you complaining that you deserve more for doing less. Life ain't fair princess but you can get by with effort here. You fucking bitch, I guarantee you're infinitely better off than 99% of the people in any country under socialism or communism. Which is a shame because I'd trade one of them to come over here and be insanely grateful for the chance to make it with some work for you which I'd happily watch go over there and starve to death for the ideals you apparently hold so dear. Faggot, talk to someone who actually managed to escape communism and get I've here. Listen to them talk about family members starving to death. Having to eat fucking rats to try and survive. People from different families exchange their dead because they're starving and need the meat but can't deal with it being their own family. Or the lack of any wildlife around because everything gets hunted to extinction in the surrounding area because food is so scarce. There's your communism you fucking piece of garbage, I hope you get a taste of it.

>>174406
It's never happened because a purely Communist state has never happened. Nobody who is paying attention to China that isn't a part of the Chinese government believes it's a purely Communist state. It's been a hybrid of Capitalism and Totalitarianism since it's inception as the People's Republic of China, well before all power was consolidated to it's current ruler/president. And any other state trying to reach a purely Communist state admits it hasn't and spends its time working towards being a Socialist government.

I don't advocate for a Communist state nor claim to be a Communist, so what are you arguing for other than to be contrarian to whatever I write?

You are literally arguing for something that has never happened as though it did and conflating it with totalitarianism/fascism

And I hope that you're just shitposting in this thread like >>174404 is.

I CAUSED QANON

>>174404
>>174389
Exactly how do you define "hierarchy" if it does not pertain to a social class that has some sort of distinct relation to labor and property (such as the knight class of feudal society)?

Because if you think by "social class" I mean that people have different roles (such as one person to hunt food, the other to care for children, etc.) then you have a really poor understanding of what "class" means and how it relates to property ownership and labor.

>>174405
No matter how hard you try, you will always be wrong. Communism is a stateless and classless society. Socialism is a workers state, whereby workers own the means of production and rule society by a labor party. Capitalism is an industrialized system of wage labor.

Capitalism has only been around for a couple centuries, whether you like it or not.

>>174442
I will pick your words apart as I have no rebuttal.

Windbags telling everyone how to live their lives. How do you know how to go about my business better than me?

>>174418
You see he thinks I'm shitposting but he knows he has to compromise and can't. It's easier to revert to name calling.

>>174461
Why should I want to play along when you offer nothing in return, countered no arguments being made, have no real attention span to follow along, and say "compromise" as though it's inherent that I need to play along with you on your terms just to do something that does not need you?

It's far better to believe you are shitposting and leave it at that then to believe you are serious and so utterly stupid and lazy that you need handicaps just to participate in basic internet conversation.

>>174470
Belief and more name calling. You expose yourself further.
I'm attempting to keep it tight. It's the exact opposite of how you argue. Your strategy here is one we're all too familiar with. Rivers of text where by you lose interest by the tenth sentence and you face no pushback. Even when you do find yourself in a culdesac there are so many loopholes in your essay that you can wriggle free.
Your political experiment will require concessions from you and everyone involved. So what are you willing to compromise on? You seem very sure that you're right. Your own biases won't allow you to get away with this.

>>174472
The problem with the idea is that in order to compromise, all sides must be equal to each other and willing to provide aspects of each other to create a suitable compromise. And that's not the case.

Capitalism has been the driving force behind America's economic and political movements since the 1800's and remains the primary motivation behind much of what America does. Capitalism holds all of the power in this country, and power is never given freely nor can one compromise one's self into power. It is either given in the expectation of upholding the system which keeps the powerful in power, or taken by the undermining of said system and it's eventual destruction.

On the other side, Socialism has no real power in this country and the few gains that have been made through Socialism have been minimalized politically and socially. The economic system, despite it's rise in relevance in 2016 with Bernie Sanders, effectively has no power, and compromising with it has no meaning save for performative spectacle and furthering the illusion that the Socialist movement that has been rising since 2016 is more of a threat than it actually is.

So, compromising with Capitalism is meaningless because Capitalism has all the power and has no reason to part with it without the threat of force. And compromising with Socialism is meaningless because Socialism has no real power and is desperately struggling for anything to give it legitimacy and a foothold to do more than small measures. So, if anything, I would have to undermine Capitalism and weaken it enough to take power away, and take enough control of Socialism away from the people at the head of it in order to force a situation where compromise is possible. But at that point, there would be no need for compromise. I could just take power for myself and institute what I wanted with no real pushback. And between compromising between the powerful who cannot be expected to compromise, the weak who have nothing to compromise with, it makes far more sense to just take power and throw them both to the wayside.

Unless you can say otherwise. But at this point, we both know you aren't going to, even if you wanted to.

>>174483
Are you advocating revolution or just pointing out what has to take place to fulfil your vision?

>>174484
Both.

>>174518
If this is you then I don't need to speak to you anymore.

>>174087 (Cross-thread)
>>174457
Except definitions and basic assumptions are literally the basis of every argument (in math, if you want to show anything about two sets, then you need to define rigorously what a set is in the first place. In biology, if you want to model the population of say, rabbits, you need to make basic assumptions you think will hold for that model. The list goes on. Bad definitions ARE a thing and are one of the most critical issues of debate). That's how arguments are built, which is exactly your problem. You're not interested in coming up with a genuine, robust argument. You're only interested in whatever conclusion you want and to seem like you're "winning" a debate.

If you can't define every single political term you use rigorously and precisely, then how exactly is your political language going to be rigorous and precise? If the definitions you do have conflict with your basic intuitions and concepts, then what use are those definitions?

So I ask you again: Exactly what is hierarchy? How do you define it strictly? Is it just the existence of different roles in society, maybe not even political roles but also domestic roles (such as roommate A does the dishes, roommate B does the laundry)? If so, then why do you seem to believe that just any plain set of roles has the same affect as a particular political set of roles? This is very simnilar to how people reduce all property ownership to private property ownership. The concepts and reality of distinct types of ownership exist (in the same way there's a difference between renting and owning), so it doesn't make sense to group them all together (which is done dliberately to make the working class align itself with the capitalist class). For example, I own a laptop for personal use. But my relation to that laptop is not the same as an investors relation to a laptop they invest to sell for profit. So it would make better sense to define my ownership as personal ownership and theirs as private ownership. The same idea applies to the difference between "social class" and "hierarchy"

Maybe think more critically about the ideas you consume and ask yourself how those ideas came about, eh?

>>174553
Why would a powerful class willingly withdraw their power? Why would an economic system based on continual growth support any interest (via compromise) that would only stagnate that desired growth for the mere needs of the working class?

The other guy is correct. Revolution is the only way the working class will get any of its issues and needs addressed for the long-term. However, a revolution is not like a call of duty mission. It's not just blasting bullets and whatnot, it's actually 80% logistics. It's a mass general strike to cripple banks, landlords, and other investors. A rent and mortgage strike, a labor strike, etc. It is the formation of a labor party that actively represents all workers. It is the formation of a central workers military to protect its own communities from counter-revolutionary forces (look up how the Nazis invaded several USSR territories, destroying houses and stealing resources like grains all while war was already going on). It is the formation of a university set to educate workers on the history of labor and the theory and political aspirations of labor.

The capitalist class is able to maintain power not just by being the ruling force of production, but by being in every aspect the ruling material force of society. They own the printing press, they own the publishing and media companies that produce the contents our culture consumes. They own/fund or bureacratically control the educational systems in place. They define and enforce the legal system, of which its basis are the property relations defined by them. By controlling every major structure of society, they also remain the ruling intellectual force of society.

Which is why a proper workers revolution must, by any means of organized force nessary, dismantle such structures for our own control. Rather than a small class of investors and bureaucrats ruling us, it ought to be the working class as a whole that democratically runs our society.

>>174633
It always comes down to I don't have what I think I'm owed and I'm willing to kill for it. Revolutions are not peaceful. You're actually a disgusting human being. Yeah, name calling but that's how I feel. I'd actually throw in with the racist before I had anything to do with you. Have a good day.

>>174487 (Cross-thread)
>>174657
I'm well aware you'd rather throw down with the racist before me, which says everything about capitalist sympathizers.

And we ARE entitled to the fruits of our labor. How exactly does a capitalist own that which exists independent of capital? A capitalist could dump billions into production, business infrastructure (e.g., parking lots), firms, research and development, etc., and none of it would ever materialize any profit without the mass labor of truckers, researchers, package handlers, tech support workers, receptionists, retail workers, engineers, and so forth.

So yes, absolutely the working class is entitled to all capital. Yes, revolutions are not peaceful -- only because capitalists will use their monopoly on state violence before ever allowing a peaceful transition away from capialism.

Whether you like it or not, this system is going to die for good. A workers revolution isn't even necessary. Have you noticed how the global capitalist economy has been increasingly drifting away from the real economy? Rather than markets being strictly affected by things like import/export policy changes, changes in supply and demand, changes in technology, etc., instead our markets are being increasingly affected by speculation and ficticious capital (such as cryptocurrency, hedge funds, etc.). The issue here is Capitalists view the economy as an interchange of money, which is why there is this obsession with endlessly accumulating money. But the reality is: the economy is an interchange of commodities. The economy is like the relation between a sea and the fish. The sea of fish represent commodities, the sea itself represents money. The idea here is: you don't get more fish by dumping more water into the sea. Without any revolution necessary, this entire system is doomed to collapse if it is left to last that long.

Thankfully, it most definitely will not last that long. Most certainly we will see numerous attempts of revolutions. Most of these will fail, but one of these will mark an inflection point, in the same way the 1905 Russian revolution became the dress-rehearsal of the magnicifient 1917 Revolution that led to the USSR.

Try actually studyinig historical revolutions; what led up to them, what brought success and what didn't, what players were involved and what interests did they serve, and especially what lengths the capitalists went to maintain power. Look at the Burkina faso government, the Paris Commune of 1871, the 1974 Portugeuse Revolution, the 2011 Egyptian revolution, and so forth. You would learn a thing or two, and maybe even realize the ruling class is the bloodthirsty, subhuman, fucking paraistic class of thieving, greedy leeches. Truly, I want more than them to just be expropriated. For the hundreds of millions of deaths they have caused through war, imperialism, famine, etc (especially the British monarchy) no amount of money could repay their debt to the working class. They (Large celebrities and other large social capitalists, large landlords, and other large capitalists like the Musks and Soros of the world) deserve to be tortured in the most vile conditions imaginable. Fuck them all.

>>174781
lol this guy's still stuck in the capitalist/socialist paradigm like it's still 2004.

>>174867
What about the rest of the world, then? Because there have literally been countless labor movements developing all over the world in the past 5+ years. Chile, Hong Kong, South Africa, Venezuela, the UK, etc..

Sounds like you're the one stuck in a worldview that is increasingly becoming rejected. Touch some grass.

Thanks Internet. I came here to get in a wank before work, but now I've got some reading to go with my coffee. Honestly not a bad trade. Gonna take my blue balls and go listen to some debate podcasts now, I suppose.

>>174879
Seems like the containment board is just for you. Don't scroll down just read this and pat yourself on the back that you found the on button on that deice.

>>174878
>>174781
Your politics and views are foul. Die painfully in a hole.

>>174950
Nah, I'd rather continue spreading my politics. During times of political crisis like now, it is a great period to tap into the frustrated minds of workers irl.

Blame your own political allies. The reason people are increasingly becoming radicalized to Communist politics is because:

1) Us Communists explain political issues and the cause of them much more logically than liberals and conservatives. Liberals point to idealist reforms, which people naturally do not trust to work. Conservatives point to reactionary politics that deflect from the real issues, and when they are finally pressured to give their stance they end up being a mouthpiece for the elite.

2) Capitalists refuse to improve the material conditions of the working class in any meaningful way. Very easily they could offer some major, long-term concessions and instantly it would transform the politics of the average person to be more favorable to capital. If capitalists reverted back to better real-wages, fewer hours of socially necessary labor to afford a living, bring back pensions and improve them, etc., and if politicians actually represented their constituents instead of their lobbyists -- people would never pay any attention to anything I have to say, at all. They wouldn't even be very political to begin with, they'd just be apolitical because there's no cause that motivates them into politics. Unfortunately, Capitalists view the economy as an interchange of money rather than commodities -- so Capitalists are stuck with this internal contradiction that demands endless growth. This will only continue to aleniate workers.

If you hate my politics so much, every crumb of blame goes to your own political allies/representatives. Even FDR understood the need to NOT give the working class any reason to declare class war on the Bourgeoisie after what he saw in Germany, Russia, etc.. The entire political body he was with could not conceivably betray their compulsion for money accumulation, as will always be the case.

Anyway, back to wanking to titties I go.

>>174878
I know the UK quite well. Union numbers are in fact down and the strikes that are the result of their death throws are just making joe public look to the right and hastening automation in sectors where that's an inevitabilty. As for the others? Covid killed the NHS and the strikes will finish it. It really isn't going the way you want. Quite the opposite. The socialist movement as you put it is one of individuals picking and choosing what they do and increasingly allowing them to dictate better terms.

>>174955
Oh lordy, folks say that about every labor movement and every revolution.

You realize politics is more complicated than union membership rates, right? Most Brits are sick of Brexit politics. 63% refused to vote in the EU election a few years ago. But also, UK workers are currently sowed in disillusionment, as they have been for years. Most UK workers are tired of this facade between the tories, the libdems, and the brexit party. There is this deep, underlying desire for *something* different, it just isn't yet immediately clear what that alternative is.

Wide-scale, national (and especially international) change is a marathon -- NOT a sprint. Have you looked at previous revolutions before? They never happen linearly with the political composition of society. Almost each time, uprisings happen spontaneously when just months prior the population was more ocmplacent. There's a good quote by lenin on this:

"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen"

>>174960
Fanny by gaslight.

Imagine coming to a titty site to rant about communism and race. There's some uber faggots in here.

>>175279
Imagine not recognising it's the containment board. Imagine being such a clueless faggot you totally miss the point and forget to hide the thread.

>>174960
What I like about this guy is that admittedly it took some time and many, many words but boy did he expose himself in the end. Full mask off. It never fails.

>>175296
LOL mask off? Did you think I was hiding my Communism at any point during this thread?

I made it very clear, as I always do whenever I talk politics with anybody, that the goal of the working class should be always to relentlessly ascend us toward communism.

Or did you think the "...by any means necessary..." stuff was the part where I went "mask off" I never hide that either. Why do you think we call each other comrades? It has always been a point we've stressed tirelessly that Capitalism is a violent system that will use any force necessary to uphold itself, including by means of Fascism. The only conceivable way we can transition from Capitalism is eitehr its own collapse, which isn't ideal because of our issues pertaining the climate and whatnot (and who knows how long that'll be. The roman empire lasted over a thousand years, we'd much rather not allow capitalism to continue that long) OR by revolt.

There was never a mask in the first place. The only people that really wear that mask are the Capitalists -- where they endlessly portray themselves as the innovators of society, as the providers of our resources ("job creators", "housing providers", etc.) when really, they are the leeches of society that live passively off of the fruits of our labor.

>>175302
You went from Bernie to full on Stalin in about a week. It was joy to be a part of but don't let me stop you, do continue to poison the well.

>>175308
LMFAOOO BERNIE??

You are really, REALLY fucking stupid. Bernie is a social democrat that believes in reforming Capitalism via regulation. Bernie and Bernie supporters are LIBERALS. Their politics are inherently idealistic.

This entire interaction all of my comments have openly supported and argued for Communism. Seriously, you must have me confused with another one of the anons here, which I can't see how considering it's really obvious who is the liberal and who is the communist.

>>168549
/qa/ lost

>>175347
That anon thinks you're me. Even though I've said that I don't believe in Communism and that I'm not a Communist.

Then again, the entire discourse around American politics has become so binary and overly simplistic that anyone not slavishly devoted to American Capitalism is automatically a Communist. Or it's just easier for people to make things overly simplistic in order to adhere rigidly to ideas that are either outdated, ahistorical, or self-defeating.

>>175372
Doesn't matter what anon thinks. The communist is taking you with him.

>>175374
And the Capitalist isn't already doing that? When a small country even as much as provides land reform to provide housing to workers, capitalist superpowers send in their military to destroy their infrastructure and install puppet governments.

Capitalism by nature is forceful against the working class. Communism is forceful against Capitalists. There is a stark difference.

>>175387
Carry on talking.

It's really wild just how smart communists think they are and how much they think they know about what's best for everyone else.

>>175426
And not to forget - Not what they want = capitalist. A god complex bought about by gibs.

>>175426
It's amazing how none of you can come up with an argument that either provides a different alternative to capitalism or justifies why capitalism is the best mode of production we can come up with.

I guarantee your reasonings boil down to "human nature" which itself is a weak premise considering it relies on an arbitrary interpretation of what human nature is and human nature being fixed. If you actually read in depth what dialectical logic is and how we use it to form our worldviews, you just may abandon your academic grifter sort of philosophies on human nature.

>>175428
I don't see the point you're trying to make here. Of course what we don't want is capitalism nor the compromise of capitalists. Neither do capitalists want either of that of Communism. So what?

>>175426
Also, I guarantee you I'm (the communist you're replying to) smarter than you. I have a math degree and work as a data scientist (mostly using SQL and R).

Which is probably not the image you had in mind when you imagined me.

>>175451
No you are exactly what I was expecting. You're always like this.

>>175428
You still haven't told me what you do. What makes you smarter than a mathematician? Because if you think it's believing in capitalism -- I got an underwater bridge to sell you

>>175451
Nah. You fit the bill perfectly. A limp-wristed pseudo intellectual working a job requiring no physical labor while pretending to be one of the little guys. All you serve to gain from being here is letting everyone else know you're an autistic dope who thinks a math degree justifies his murderous ideology.

>>175479
What 175484 said.
You're a numbers man. The loses encountered during a revolution are acceptable in your mind. I think I pity you in a way. Your concept of humanity is stunted and devoid of any warmth.

>>175479
Why does it matter what I do? I can tell you I'm not a communist or a capitalist but I know that concept will be alien to you because you judge anyone not communist to be default capitalist. It doesn't really matter though. Your performance here is all I need. I'm old. I've done a lot and read a lot and with each passing year all I know is that what I know is nothing. Less than that in fact. You? You're either young or a sociopath. One circumstance rights itself. Good luck to you.

>>175555 (Cross-thread)
1. Intellectual labor IS labor.
2. Making good money as a worker does not make me resistant to the interests of lower paid workers. By nature of being a worker, I stand to lose more to capitalism in the long run (the same way the previous middle class did)
3. I never used my math degree to justify my politics. I used my math degree to justify being considered smart. Because it takes an incredible amount of intellectual rigor to go through a 4+ year math degree program, it's one of the most versatile yet most commonly dropped out majors out there. I barely took any programming courses in college and I did not have any programming experience before either, but I became a preferable applicant just because of my degree. That should tell you everything about how highly intellectually valuable mathematical skills are.
4. You never answered my question. What makes you think you're smarter than a mathematician?

>>175488
Ugh, this is what I hate about the public culture about math. People think higher maths is just numbers, just crunching down outputs given some inputs. I can't blame them because that's the most exposure of math people get, but math is fundamentally all about logical reasoning and being able to define relationships and analyze structures.

For example, you take a group theory class and you're going to learn very deeply the concept of symmetry, permutations, etc. (and these are a huge deal in chemistry, physics, cryptography, etc.). You take an abstract algebra course and you'll learn precisely what an operation is and what kinds of operations you can do on all kinds of sets, you will literally get a deep understanding of basic arithmetic that most people take for granded and assume is trivial. The list goes on. Mathematics is not just about numbers, it is at its core about logic.

>>175488
In fact, before I studied math I was actually the "fiscally conservative" type that studied criminal justice first. My plan was to go to uni to study forensic science, become a cop for some time, and then become a forensic analyst.

I didn't become a Communist by getting into politics about Capitalism. Previously, all my political discussions were just about typical things like federal budgets, local policy, business incentives, etc. I actually started questioning the economic system at large when I started developing an interest in math. Local politicians would make statistical claims that didn't make sense, policy arguments that did not logically follow, I started thinking about sustainbility and stability of the system, etc. Eventually I became a Communist a lot like how I became an Atheist. I actually met commie recruiters at a local branch organization to try and debate them. Their arguments made most sense and they referenced me lots of readings about materialist philosophy that made literally everything make sense.

Which is actually why the quality of our education system and journalism are such a joke. Poor mathematical competency has for a long time been a weapon to take advantage of the working class We have researchers still using p-hacking techniques to get bogus study conclusions, and publishers accept them because they want to make money. Journalists will accept this junk science because they just want to make money off of sensational articles. And schools can't really make a committed effort to teach us math and expose us to higher maths because, well, then the general public will be smarter. Hell, we would have taken covid seriously because we'd understand the cor emath behind the sars models, but instead we got a reactionary outburst about mask mandates. When covid first came out I literally grabbed a pen and paper, made some basic assumptions and made a simple model measuring total expected deaths using some calc 2 and differential equations. When I saw the results I immediately took masks seriously, socially distanced, etc.. Not ONCE did I get covid, meanwhile everyone I knew got it at least once.

>>175597
1. The working class do not consider you to be the same as them.
2. Numbers.
3. See 4.
4. You made the assertion that a mathematician is smarter than I am. I don't care. However if you're not attempting to assert your intellectual dominance over us mere mortals to further your politics then what are you doing?

>>175488
1. Yes they do LOL. They mght think I'm privileged, and I am, but most still consider me working class
2. Logic
3. part 4 did not use math to justify my politics. Part 4 uses math to justify my intelligence.
4. See 3. You called me stupid, I explain I'm probably smarter than you as a response, and suddenly you want to pretend you never called me stupid and that I brought up my math degree out of nowhere.

>>175645
1. So you aren't the same by your admission.
2. Yes logic. All your decisions look like equasions to me. Cold.
3. I didn't call you stupid. Your insistence for an answer even from the wrong person compelled me to do so.
4. So you're not using your intelligence to further your politics? I didn't mention your degree in relation to them.

>>175654
1. LOL members of a class do not need to be the same to belong to that class, they just need to share some sort of relation together. For example, we equate things that are different all the time based on properties they share. The numbers 7 and 10 are considered the same under the operation modulo 3 because they both share the same remainder when divided by 3. In fact, we can create an infinite set of integers that are congruent modulo m>1, called the "residue class" which equates all of these numbers together even though they're different numbers. Triangle ABC and triangle GEF are considered the same triangle even if they exist in different points in space if you can construct a bijection f that takes you from ABC to GEF (rotation, reflection, etc.).

The same idea applies to categories/sets in politics. Two republican senators may have some distinctions in their politics and they may be very different people, but nonetheless they both belong to the class of Republican senators and exist within the space of Republican politics. Two workers may have distinct jobs, work and living conditions, etc., but nonetheless if they sell their labor for a wage to live we consider both to be part of the class of workers.

2. ???? This doesn't refute anything. Are you backtracking on saying math is all number crunching now?
3. I thought you were the person that said "it's really wild just how smart communists think they are and how much they think they know about what's best for everyone else" if that's not you, then my question does not apply toyou.
4. No. I was responding to the person mentioned in (3). If that's not you, then again you may disregard the question

>>175660
1. Haha, what IS a woman though? Attempting to smother thick concepts in words doesn't make them less true. You're obfuscating though and I'm moving away from the point. I said they do not see you as the same. You disagreed and then said that they may think of you as privileged. So, not seen as the same then. Am I wrong here? That was the exchange right?
2. I wasn't trying to refute anything. That's my opinion of how you think.
3. He wasn't wrong though was he? You do think you're smart and don't try to read anymore into it than that. No comparisons or amount of framed certificates. That is what you think.

Apparently people spend their time writing paragraphs about nothing on a porn image board

I actually didnt expect much of my thread, just stole it from /booty

>>175668
Welcome to the party pal. Or just fuck off. I don't care either way really.

>>175661
1. You still haven't shown why I'm not working class. Me not being the "same" as most working class people does not make me not working class lmao. If John is a plumber and makes $40k a year with no pension and Mike is another plumber that makes $60k a year with a pension. By your logic, Mike's work is not the same as John's, so Mike is not a worker but John is. That's your argument.

2. That's understandable, you're too smooth brained to refute anything. You must be one of those hicks that view the elite as the intellectual elite rather than the ruling class. Some blue haired college liberal chick making $8/hr is something you'd consider as elite, but an oil billionaire with ties to military contracts is somehow not elite.

3. I am DEFINITELY smart. What did I ever deny that, you fucking dumbass? Most people can't handle going through 1 math course in their degree program. I took 3-4 math courses every single semester. Most people struggle to pass Algebra and Calc 1. I had to go through classes so tough that there were only ~4-6 other students in class. meanwhile even other upper division stem courses still had dozens of students (engineering, etc.).

Tell you what, why don't you take some upper division math courses? Take some real analysis, topology, etc., and then come back to me and tell me a person can pass such courses without being very smart.

>>175701
1. I said they don't consider you the same as them. Where did I say you weren't working class? I'll wait. I'm not going out tonight.
2. Yes, smooth brained. You have defeated me. I don't now where the bit about the elites comes in but I'm sure it makes some sense to you.
3. You didn't confirm or deny it but you did start dick measuring. Good to know though. So smart.

>>175705
1. Finally, so you do believe I'm still working class. In that case, who gives a shit if I'm not the same as most workers? LOL
2. Yes, yes, continue being stupid.
3. You clearly didn't read the whole thing. So now I know reading must be difficult for you. Nice hahaha

Let me guess. You have a shitty job you hate, huh? Work painfully long amount of hours or get paid like shit? It would explain your resentment of me

>>175708
1. I never said either way. And that is how it will remain. :)
3. I don't resent you, I just don't agree with your ideas. I do feel sorry for you. You're so desperate to prove a no one on the internet wrong that that you'll spend hours typing pseudo intellectual drivel, rolling round in the mud with him. Quite staggering for a smart person. And my employ is irrelevant to our tiny discussion. Boy though, wouldn't it boil your piss if you were to find out I was a CEO of a blue chip or something?

>>175713
1. Exactly what I expeected
2. Doubtful
3. You think I spent hours typing? I type like an average of 110 wpm, I've spent maybe 10 minutes of my free time in total typing here. LOL
4. Highly doubt you're a CEO of anything LOL. But IF you were, it shows that you're not against socialism because you think its a bad system. You're against it because it would mean expropriation and forceful overthrow of your position

>>175708
2. Why would I resent you? I'd have to know you.
3. Hours was maybe an exageration. 10 minutes is entirely too much.
4. I assure you I'm a very normal person. Painfully so.

And additionally you never once before your admission claimed you were smart. You claimed your degree justified the consideration that you were smart. Words are important.

>>175715
I had no need to claim I was smart, I only used my degree to justify being smart when that other guy suggested that Communists are dumb.

And I am fully correct for that.

>>175708
He did not say communists were dumb. I paraphrase but I think he suggested that they overestimate their intelligence. Not that they are dumb.

>>175715
Even so, he felt I was overestimating my intelligence (as I seem to be th eonly communist in this thread. The other guy sounds like a social democrat). I definitely am not overestimating my intelligence lmao

>>175729
lol you might be clever but you're winning no awards for charm here my friend.

>>175731
You'd need to know me to know whether I have charm or not lol. I'm pretty lucky to be doing real well in the charm department based on how things have wentin my life, especially during my dating years before I got married (I'm still in my early 20s, btw).

>>175732
>>here

>>175734
lmao even if you think my politics are shit doesn't mean I can't be charming. If we can accept serial killers to be capable of charm and wits it shouldn't be hard to think I may be charming.

death to capitalism tho, I can't wait to see the next major communist revolution. We will never stop trying, ever :)

>>175739
If I think your ideas are that dangerous don't you think I would find that alarming? And you will stop. You on your own you will. I used to be young once so don't write me off as being dismissive. Just wait. It's no terrible thing to be mistaken.

>>175741
Of course you'd find it alarming. But then again, you don't have any real basis as to why you find it alarming. Your anti-communist ideas have been spoonfed toyou by the Capitalist class that most influences the media you consume, the education you recieved, etc. I.e., you did not organically and indepedently decide that Communism is ineffective or even dangerous, instead you just regurgitate that agenda.

And EVEN if I stop, that doesn't mean the working class will stop. I'm only one person, after all. But as Capitalism continues to antagonize large layers of workers, and as the state continues failing to address the needs of these workers -- enough o the population will eventually become radicalized and develop Communist politics. There's a snowball effect behind every single political revolution. The difference is now, workers are largely proletarinized and the economy is industrialized rather than based on agriculture, so future revolutions are going to have greater standing than their predecessors.

So the conversation transformed into a promotion of Capitalistic standards rather than actually proving that Communism works?

I mean, one of the telltale signs of Capitalism that Communism is supposed to be against is class structures and hierarchies. And yet, you have a supposed Communist claiming that because they've achieved a certain status/class structure, that it validates their position and ideas above certain people. No different than when a person with a lot of money claims that because of that money, it's proof of the validity of their ideas.

Which sounds really, really capitalistic and hyper-individual and counter to a system where the goal is to get rid of class structures and hyper individualism and to place the needs of the group above all.

Because why is a math degree enough to get people to believe? You're asking for a brand new system to be put into place, and there are many facets necessary to create a new system. Such as history, economics, politics, civil engineering, etc. Saying one thing is enough to prove something wrong or right is like saying having money is enough to prove you right or wrong.

But what do I know. I don't have a math degree.

>>175739
I can swap out communism for capitalism here and it form a fine rebuttal. "'They're lying' - 'No they're lying'"
I don't know if saying this again will help but I'm not a capitalist either. I'd like you and your opposite number to leave me the hell alone. Your clubs are terrible. We've established that you're smart so why can't you grasp this?

>>175744
How can I possibly prove that Communism works if everybody that argues with me refuses to stay on topic and argue in good faith?

Hell, how can I do that if you people repeatedly misrepresent my own words? My comments about me being smarter than the other smhuck has to do with him thinking I, at the very least, overestimate my intelligence and, at worst, am stupid. Did I say I'm better than him because i'm a mathematician? No. I said that while he is critiquing how smart I think I am, I am probably smarter than him. He made an assumption of my intelligence purely based off of me being a Communist.

jfc

>>175745
What other mode of production do you want if not Capitalism nor Socialism?

Because unless you want us to revert back to feudalism, mercantilism, etc., then you're going to be some variant of a Capitalist.

Capitalism is an industrialized system in which workers sell their labor for a wage from the private owners of the means of production. At least, that is the rigorous definition of Capitalism. Unless your preferred system goes against that in any aspect, then you're a Capitalist.

>>175744
Push over one structure in favor of a very similar if not identical one leaving behind a mountain of bodies and no real change? What a cost. I agree with you. The only possible motivation for this would be in being a revolutionary that you'd gain a higher rung on the ladder and hopefully survive. Or you're hopeless idealist.

>>175747
Whether or not people argue in good faith, the goal is to promote a functional system and to show the work that proves it's functional. Not only to the people arguing, but the people who might actually read this. They can find their own place in it, but they still need an infrastructure to help them figure out what goes where and why.

You had a chance to promote why you think that Communism works and why it is relevant, and now it's about you, whether it's insulting you or promoting yourself and what you're capable of doing.

And if you can't do that, then go back to dunking on people who think you and Online Communists are not as smart as they think they are.

>>175748
See? It's either communism or nothing isn't it? I don't have an answer for you. No one does. All I know is for what you want the cost is too high for me. Smaller number of deaths is better than bigger and you have no guarantees that it will be any better following your purge. All previous attempts have pointed to worse btw. Yeah yeah I was programmed or the capitalists made sure it would fail. The odds are still too steep.

>>175749
The goal of any revolution is to replace the people in power with you and whoever is on your side. So saying "gain a higher rung on the ladder" is kinda redundant. It's a power grab at the end of the day, it's just whether you're honest about it or not. The more honest you are, the better you can position yourself to getting power and actually wielding it for change rather than just replacing the old king with the same king.

That and the assumption that a revolution inherently leads to mass bloodshed. Granted, I don't know if it's possible to have a completely bloodless revolution, but there are ways to limit the loss of life. Slow, more intuitional ways, but there are ways. But to advocate for and promote revolution, you have to accept loss of life at some step and hope that, if victory can be achieved, that it's not pyrrhic.

The question is what replaces the economic and social structures with the new boss.

>>175751
I represented you words as wrote. You saw fit to claim a guy called you dumb when he didn't. Inmtimated that I said you were not working class. I removed doubt.

>>175745
Under a system in which individuals have ownership of the means of production, with their hand at the macro economy they will at large have a vested interest to accumulate wealth at the expense of everything else.

Then, the whole point of investment under such a system is to accumulate profit. Imagine somehow every single investor builds profit as ethically as possible. They invest in research and development to improve the logistics of their production. They diversify their investments and build a brand onto other markets. They invest money into more efficient technology. Etc. At some point, the pace of profit is going to naturally decline (even if they're still making bank). Is the interest for money accumulation gone? Of course not, that will always be part of the motivation for investment. So with every ethical measure exhausted, the only means of maintaining continued growth are unethical. This is where investors will start using predatory marketing tactics (e.g., advertising addictive games with microtransactions to kids) or misleading marketing tactics (e.g., advertising a product as "natural" to make consumers think its safer or better when it isn't). This is where investors will target working conditions and wages as a means of reducing expenses (therefore profit increases). This is where investors will start practicing things like planned obsolescence (e.g., a razor company producing razor blades intentionally more dull so that you buy blades more frequently), shrinkflation (e.g., charging less product at the same price because you know that consumers notice price changes before they notice quantity changes), etc..

Whether you try to regulate Capitalism or even aim for a Laissez Faire Capitalism, that interest to accumulate as much wealth as possible is not going to go away. This is a finite world with finite resources, so any system based on infinite growth is unsustainable and unreliable.

>>175754
You clicked on and responded to the wrong comment. Because I didn't say those things to anyone.

>>175756
Thank you. You are correct. That was meant for commie.

>>175752
The USSR is actually a great example of successful Socialism. Before Stalin rose to power with pro-state politics and reactionary culture-war politics (he was homophobic, pro-marriage, pro-nuclear family, etc.), the USSR under Lenin proved to be quite successful. More doctors entered the economy, housing was multitudes cheaper than in America, joblessness was eradicated because jobs were considered rights, real wages grew by several folds, people's nutrition improved, etc..

It wasn't a perfect paradise, I'll say that, but it certainly wasn't a society of bloodshed and poverty, either. The USSR is essentially the first and only example of modern socialism being successful. And that happened during a time of war and endless amounts of international threats by the competing Capitalist empires.

>>175753
A bloodless revolution is possible. Take a look at the carnation revolution. The problem with a bloodless revolution is that it would only be bloodness on the revolutionaries end, not the state. Reactionaries don't mind bloodshed when its done by the state, because to them the state has full authority to use any force necessary to maintain power.
Which is why bloodless revolutions aren't effective.

>>175754
Read further along the thread. I admitted he claimed only that I overestimated my intelligence (but if we're being honest here, people insinuate things not said, as well). Which I did not, and I explained exactly why.

>>175764
You were most uncharitable to several posters, bordering on bad faith. I will conceade that you are probably on the defense more than most due to your views but glass houses man.

>>175760
You're making me think that Stalin was controlled opposition here. Or did that change happen from within? You're the scholar. I'm not up on my Soviet history.

>>175762
So the numbers are in and for no promising change. I'll stay with the current masters thanks. My family have a better chance.

>>175765
Of course I was unhcaritable lol. Ever try being charitable to folks that refuse to take a discussion seriously?

It's much easier having these conversations in person. Very few people are bold enough to resort to insults or be dismissive when you make an argument face-to-face. On the internet, it's a very different dynamic. That dynamic is even stronger in niche threads like this, especially a tits thread LOL

>>175769
The dynamic is different but you've never met me have you? I'm very charming.

>>175767
If you're American, no you don't.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/08/wealth-inequality-by-household-type.html

With the massive and growing wealth inequality in this country, odds are better that you'll starve on the streets or work for poverty wages with everyone else in your family than getting a job that will actually enable you to survive. With every act of consolidation of power into fewer and fewer hands, your family won't have a chance, and neither will their children (assuming you and they will have children).

At a bare minimum, hard regulations and reforms are necessary to at least attempt to stop this and give you and whatever future children you may have a chance to survive. At the most, a complete overhaul or outright new system is necessary to actually improve conditions so that you and your children have a chance to have real stability rather than praying not to starve.

And none of that can happen with the people in power still at the wheel.

>>175779
Bloody revolution is too much of a gamble. Nope, I can make civilized changes to my life. There are still options before that.

>>175766
That might be a good description of what Stalin was, actually. The man literally did public executions, he had his own labor camps, he'd send police to break into people's houses and r*pe families, he executed Bolsheviks to set an example, etc.. In fact, he targeted Marxists and their families most brutally of all. Look up the story of what Stalin did to Trotsky's daughter, Zinaida Volkov, it's bad.

Stalin was able to rise to power by initially befriending Lenin and having infiltrated the Communist party. When lenin started having health problems, he took over from there. He also suppressed the growth and spread of socialism with his nationalist politics. He was very much against interntional socialism, bu the couldn't just *say* that. He had to frame it as building power in Russia first, and then working to expand socialism later.

tldr; Stalin was a bureaucratic counter-revolutionary.

>>175784
Not real communism. Got it.

>>175782
I'm not saying we must pursue a revolution right now. Especially not in America, not yet.

A proper revolution needs to be organized. Americans don't have much experience yet in politics. Most Americans are pretty apolitical or they're politically incompetent (not necessarily their fault). Most Americans have little experience in unionization, mutual aid, general strikes, etc..

If we tried to do a revolution right now, it would be stomped out pretty effectively by the state. Right now, the conditions are not in our favor to pursue a revolution. Only accelernationists and state agitators really want us to try and pull off a revolution right now.

Before we get to that point, our goals should be to improve the material conditions of workers by being more active in voting better representatives, supporting genuine charitable organizations, supporting workers strikes (not being scabs, etc.).

With time, Americans will eventually build the experiences and knowledge needed to establish the logistics needed for a proper revolution.

>>175782
Yes, that is true. In America, there's voting, protesting, achieving public office in any position possible to try to enact change.

But it's still better to know what your options are, even if they're bad options. Knowing the good and bad and the history/likelihood of said options makes you fully aware of your surroundings and your capabilities and what you may have to do in the future.

>>175785
This is EXACTLY what I mean by you folks not arguing in good faith. You're not even using the term Communism correctly here. The ussr wasn't Communist, it was Socialist. Communism is the ultiamte means of socialism, which is statelessness and classlessness. The USSR still had class and it still had a state, therefore it was not Communist. It did have a workers state, however, therefore it was real socialism.

Fucking A

>>175782
Out of curiosity, how are you going to make civilized changes in your life if we end up having a fascist police state? What happens when the police break into your home to take your guns because politicians are afraid of a Communist uprising?

What happens when there's a global food and water crisis, and now you must pay $30 to buy 16 oz of water or every week grocery store shelves get empty? What are you going to do when a depression occurs and you lose your savings, your house, etc.?

When things get bad enough for a revolution to happen, you're not going to be unaffected by the political and economic environment like some sort of bystander just watching this collapse happen, not unless you're a rich capitalist yourself. Are you? Or are you working class, even if middle class?

>>175789
So it was socialist but not yet communist and how many died before it failed? Regardles of blame. I'm not trying to argue in bad faith but how many more times do we try this? How many will be enough before it's decided it's not the best idea? These are people we are talking about. I'm not not defending the victims of capitalism here before I have that thrown in my face. I'm arguing this point here.

>>175790
All extreme scenarios in favor of your revolution. I'm not for converting. You use the same scare tactics the capitalists use.

>>175792
Yes, it was socialist but not communist.

Socalism is a workers state, where workers control the military, economy, and politics.
The GOAL of socialism is ideally communism, whereby reducing the overproduction and artificial scarcity that Capitalists do, there may be a real effort to drastically mitigate the threat of scarcity (and therefore remove the need for currency), thus there would be no need for a state and no need for class.

It's funny though, because there's no winning here. If I admit Stalin was a dictator, you say I'm denying communism happened. If I deny stalin was a dictator, you'd say I'm denying the devastation of communism.

>>175787
Didactic Materialism as the primary mover when it comes to reaching it's goals of a Stateless society and it's ignoring or outright dismissal of the immaterial will not get you far in a country founded on ideas and social/Racial constructs that dictate material conditions as much as the material conditions do, if not moreso. And America is very much a country founded on the immaterial. Whether it be Race as a social construct or "The American Dream" or "Rugged Individualism", these are the pillars of who we are as a country, just as much as the stuff that the working class can manufacture. These things must be recognized, treated as valid, and dealt with before any challenge to the material conditions and why they are what they are can bear any real fruit.

Because if they aren't, then it doesn't matter if class consciousness is raised in this country. One of the immaterial aspects will rear up to smash down any revolutionary act, especially if all you have to offer is the material.

>>175803
I don't think I was clear. Socialism must occur to achieve communism. Am I right here? Forget my flippant comment about real communism, it was cheap. So socialism has been shown to cause all that and is unavoidable on the path to communism?

>>175807
Socialism is the path to Communism, yes.

If I understand it, through giving the united worker class/Proletariat power over the means of production rather than centralizing it in the hands of the few/Bourgeoise/Elites, it is hoped that the worker, now free of the inherent oppression and exploitation caused under a Capitalistic system, will choose not to adhere to said class constructs necessary to keep said Capitalistic structures intact and relatively functional. That they will choose to get rid of those structures and continue to get rid of those structures until a classless/stateless society is achieved.

And when that classless/stateless society is achieved, then you have actual Communism.

>>175811
Thank you but it's still too high a price whatever the terms are.

>>175807
Then what is the right price to pay?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/04/leonard-leo-federalist-society-conservative-abortion

This is the man who has the money and the resources to make this country into what he wants it to be. And he's making sure you don't have any power to stop that.

And as long as the system stays as it is, he and people like him will have that power and even more. And they'll find more and more ways to make sure that they keep that power and push out as many people as possible to ensure that.

You don't have to be a Communist or a Tankie. You can figure out something entirely different to do. But something still has to be done. And a price has to be payed for it.

>>175807
Yes, socialism must occur to achieve Communism. HOWEVER, Communism failing to happen does not mean that Socialism failed as a mode of production, it only means that socialism degenerated before it was able to achieve Communism.

The USSR's socialism has proven to improve everyday folks lives in so many ways the US at the time could not do. It only disintegrated to Stalinism, which ended up restoring Capitalism.

And no, it's not unavoidable on its path to Communism. There would need to be a real effort to continue the trajectory of socialism in order to achieve communism. If a socialist society fails to have a strong foundation, it will fall to an internal backstabbing the same way the USSR did (or the same way the Burkina faso revolution did, for example). A socialist society must continue to fully break from Capitalism, nott partially. This was the issue of the Paris Commune of 1871. They expropriated their landlords, eliminated debt, improved their working conditions and reduced their workday, etc.. For a few months things ran great, but their mistake was not expropriating the banks, which were in the pockets of the government in Versailles that eventually destroyed them. This mistake was made by the Egyptian revolution in the 50s under Nasser. He proposed some magnificient land reform policies, kicked out the british, and expropriated more than 400,000 landlords. He didn't fully break from Capitalism though, which led to market policies being re-introduced in the 60s under a new leadership, and all those gains for worekrs were instantly lost.

One of the biggest mistkaes the USSR made was allowing Stalin to rise to power, and allowing him to suppress the brodaer objective of international socialism

>>175814
If that something causes more harm than good then I'm out. It's that simple. Why do you think I would defend this anyway? And I opted out that argument, remember? I thought it might be obvious I was about preserving life and anti-suffering. At the very least picking the path of fewer numbers.
You desperately want this and I don't. We both have our reasons and I think I was far clearer explaining my position than you.
I can read. I understood what you had to say but I don't know how I can explain to you why I'm not on board with what you have in mind any better.

>>175812

And you're fine with the prices we pay under Capitalism? You're fined with a recession occuring every single decade, getting worse one after the other? You're fine with the mass impoverishment of entire countries? You're fine with the labor trafficking that goes on in our prison infrasructure? You're fine with each generation having to work more hours to afford a house, like the boomer generation that could afford a months mortgage on 20 hours of work, whereas now the youngest generation cannot even afford to get a mortgage in the first place? You're fine with the increasing homeless population? You're fine with all these economic stressors causing society to deterioriate in every aspect; whereby people are so mentally broken that we on a daily basis deal with road rage incidents, street shootings, and now on a weekly to monthly basis deal with mass shootings? You're fine with companies continuing to siphon our most vital resources, which will eventually drift us into killing each other for these resources when crisis fully ensues?

>>175818
Capitalism again!

read >>175817

>>175817
Except you're wrong that continuing Capitalism is better than fighting for Socialism.

Capitalism causes tens of millions of deaths every single year, and it's about to cause a lot more through the climate. Socialism only requires months to a few years of organized clashes with the police and military, and then after that we can actually recover from the damage capitalism has brought and work on rebuilding a peaceful, healthy, and productive society.

Capitalism, on the other hand, needs to CONSTANTLY at every moment commit violence abroad and violence at home to maintain its militant and economic interests. We pay the cost of empire through our lives, whether by military deployment or by lack of care, yet we experience none of the empires fruits for ourselves. Under capitalism, WE are the costs.

>>175819
Except if you were arguing in good faith, you would have provided an alternative to Capitalism.

Yet, you REFUSE to give any alternative. Either you don't really have an alternative or you aren't confident in justifying it. I'm going to assume you don't really have one.

You know, it's more respectable to just admit you support Capitalism instead of pretending to be against it in hopes for something better. A lot like how its more respectable for a thief to rob you at gunpoint than for a thief to pick your pockets when you aren't looking.

>>175820
You're standing on a mountain of bodies saying follow me. No.

>>175823
And so are you. Except when you do it, you have zero intention in change for something better. You'd rather continue the machine that caused those bodies to pileup in the first place.

If there was a trolley operator killing people strapped to train racks, I'd use any force necessary to stop it form happening. If that means killing the trolley operator, then so be it. You, on the other hand, would watch the operator refuse to stop the train and run people over every single day because you are just that much of a pacifist.

>>175825
train tracks*

>>175822
I'm making the best of what I'm given. You're as hypocritical as me in that sense.
It's also respectable to say you don't know that you don't have an answer or alternative. Smarter people than you or I have come to that conclusion.

>>175825
That's a forgone conclusion. Your path isn't and you can't say it is.

>>175817
I didn't say you would defend it. I'm just giving a face to the problems we're in now.

And I gave options. Voting, protesting, campaigning for office. I can include outreach/education for people who don't know what's going on or don't know their options. Those are good ways to participate, and they don't involve bloodshed. But I would be lying if I said there wasn't going to be bloodshed, or that blood hasn't been shed.

What I want is as many people participating as possible. And hopefully to create a hybrid system between Capitalism and Socialism that will facilitate that.

But you haven't explained why keeping this system as it is is best or why you prefer it. So why is the way things are okay? Especially in the face of growing inequality and suffering?

Better yet, do you have any other options that would reduce suffering?

>>175833
Sorry, but there cannot be a hybrid between Capitalism and Socialism. They both diametrically opposte one another.

Capitalism consolidates ownership to individuals. Socialism consolidates ownership to the working class. The basis of Capitalism is profit accumulation. The basis of Socialism is commodity exchange and workers independence. Capitalism requires a state to enforce its property relations, whereby the working classes are the subject of the state. The socialist state, on the other hand, is run by the working class itself and its two purposes is to represent itself (the working class) and to protect itself from counter-revolutionaries (otherwise opposing countries could run an invasion because a society whose state was most recently debilitated is the perfect time and place to invade).

We could attempt to revert back to the less harsh Capitalism we had during the days of our vibrant middle class, but fundamentally Capitalism can only ever approach one direction in its evolution. If Dems were to provide all sorts of relief to workers that'd be great, but the same problems will reoccur years down the road.

>>175833
Ignore my typoes, for some reason my keyboard is acting weird, it's annoying as shit

>>175852
Capitalism and Socialism are tools of human beings, used to give ourselves a framework for governance and trade and, in a weird sense, a means of communication with each other. As tools, they can be used and reshaped at our discretion for whatever needs we may have. Some tools are better than others, and some tools are terrible except in certain circumstances. But they're all still tools, and they help us create stable societies with each other.

To say otherwise is to give those tools an individuality and immutability to them that they do not deserve.

If human beings were to disappear tomorrow, so would Socialism and Communism and Capitalism and everything else we built. Because we won't be around to maintain it, and there are no guarantees that whatever appears after us will do the same thing. They are not inherent to the world, they are not the thing that guides us. We guide them, and we must remember that we have power over our tools.

>>175855
No, that is very very false. Capitalism and Socialism are both systems. Systems are particular structures that have a pattern of doing things. There is such a thing as systems that are unstable.

When I say that Capitalism and Socialism are incompatible together, I'm not saying that they exist independent of humans. I'm saying that they conflict with each other as organized structures.

I'll use a real life math example of a system and try to keep the math to a minimum. But let's say we have a board of city planners that propose a roadway system, and they hire a mathematician to analyze that system based off of traffic data given by sensors on the roads. What we would actually do in this field is first, create a diagaram and use software tools to help aid any calculations. Then, we describe how traffic in one intersection affects traffic in another (and we set some axioms, basic assumptions about how the system works. Such as all drivers driving the correct direction, etc.). From there we use our software to redefine these relations as a linear combination of vectors, and then this gives us a single matrix that which describes the entire system. Depending on the result of that matrix, it can tell us whether there is something wrong with the system. And it can even tell us what would go wrong if we change some assumptions, such as if we were to shut down a road and that causes the system to become unstable. In such a case the system has an inherent flaw that must be corrected. IWe cannot adapt to that system, instead the system must adapt to us.

So this argument that Capitalism and Socialism are "tools" that we can just use differently is not a sound argument.

>>175855
Hell, we are already seeing the internal contradictions of Capitalism materialize. Before, prices (including stock prices) were largely based on the real economy, i.e., production at the macro scale. Some change in import/export policy (e.g., sanctions) would cause a change in prices. Some change in supply/demand would cause a change in prices. And so forth.

However, as Capitalism has continued to evolve (nothing is ever constant, after all. All that which is material is subject to change), its need for continued growth has created the development of ficticious capital and even ficticious markets. Now, capital is increasingly becoming detached from the real economy. Prices are becoming increasingly affected by speculation (look at how speculation affects gas prices). It is now completely normal for firms based on ficticious capital/markets to exist, such as hedge funds that essentially gamble money by shorting stock prices for profit -- such as the development and mass investment of cryptocurrency (even fucking NFTs, like holy shit, this is our timeline?).

All of that is happening because Capitalists by virtue believe that as long as money moves around, then the economy will be stable. But it does't matter how many billions of dollars you move around if investment continues to drift away from production. The financial crisis' of tomorrow will not only be more frequent, but more impactful as well.

>>175863
How many branches of Socialism are there? How many forms of Communism? Is the Capitalism practiced in the United States the same as the Capitalism practiced in Japan?

There are a lot of different ways to use tools. And we are only as limited as our imagination and our need. And considering that these are ideas and not actual objects, we're not even limited by having to use specific constructs and designs. We can change the terms and conditions if we so choose.

And please make sense of
>We cannot adapt to that system, instead that system must adapt to us

Because it sounds like you're agreeing with me that we're in control. That these things aren't immutable concept with fixed structures. That we can change and adjust them at our discretion.

Because if we couldn't, there wouldn't be multiple concepts for Communism and Capitalism and Socialism and whatever system/tool of governance human beings come up with. It would be fixed, static, and immutable.

The only thing in life that is fixed is that we're all going to die. Everything else is a negotiation. Different ways of doing things. Different tools. But they are all tools. Tools that human beings made and can use at our discretion if we choose so.

>>175866
There are many forms of socialism, but deciding what is best is a debate beyond the scope of this conversation. I got time, but not that kind of time.

Now, Capitalism is different across the globe -- but they're generally superficially different and are different, in some cases, only because of different parameters (i.e., given time, they were evolve to the kind of Capitalism we have in the US as well). Either way, ALL capitalist countries heavily exploit labor, some just focus that exploitation on the global south (look up the political situation on conflict minerals. You're going to see many of the nordic economies that liberals salivate for deeply involved in the imperialism for conflict minerals).

When I said "We cannot adapt to that system, instead the system must adapt to us" this does not mean we reform the system. The point of my example was that there is something fundamentally flawed about the roadway structure (maybe there are too few roundabouts, maybe there are too few lanes, etc.). With your approach, instead of changing the structure you'd make a superficial change within the structure.

So for example, I didn't get into this part but most of the time the kind of matrix I referenced has what's called "free variables", which are variables of the system that do not change. They are not affected by any of the other variables. In other words, the system has fixed aspects that affect the behavior of said system. The same thing applies to Capitalism. Capitalism as a whole is obviously not fixed, but there are several elements of capitalism that are fixed to its structure. What if those are the elements that cause these problems we have? That's why your argument isn't sufficient. Either you need to make a stronger argument or you need to re-eavluate your conclusion.

>>175868
First, "fixed variable" is an oxymoron. You can have a variable or a fixed aspect, but not both.

Second, what you're suggesting is that in order to "fix" my argument, I have to play along with terms I didn't know exist, are not mentioned in the general acceptance of Marxism and only exist for you (fixed variables) and only work for you to prove your point?

No, I will not argue on those terms.

Third, Collective Capitalism as practiced in Japan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_capitalism
The means of production is very much in the hands of the private sector, but it's ignored by the population at large in order to attend to the needs of the many. Technically not a Socialist government, but fairly close. Figure out a way to offset the workload and minimize the amount of resources needed, and there's something workable.

Or the Nordic Model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
Decentralized and going more and more into private hands, but still focused on strong social safety nets and benefits to the workers.

No. I will not change my argument to suit your needs. My argument is that we have options because we built the damn thing and we're in control. So unless you can prove that we aren't in control and that this "fixed variables" are actually real, we stop here and call it a day.

>>175868
The only way a change is made superficial is if we make it superficial or do not consider all of the means at our disposal before making changes. But that only comes if we choose to make the change. If we choose to do something.

And what is easier to do? Change something that is immutable or has "fixed variables"? Or change something that is mutable and under our control?

Are we fighting God, or are we fighting ourselves in all of our finite essence?

>>175874
I-...dude.

It's not an oxymoron. Go look it up. Download any free linear algebra textbook and keyword search "free variable". It's a thing lol.

>>175874
How badly in the tunnel are you that you have to argue against the use of "free variable" instead of acknowledging the concept that fixed elements exist within organized structures?

Japan is still exploitative, especially in its foreign involvement. And I literally explained to you that the nordic model is incredibly exploitative to the whole global south.

This response is so mind-boggling. Even the previous guy that called my ideas dangerous didn't reach this much to make a point. Lord.

>>175874
>My argument is that we have options because we built the damn thing and we're in control.

Good luck addressing climate change. We built our industrialized economy the way it is. So we're totally in control. It's not like companies are the main drivers of climate change, they dump billions of dollars into climate-denial media and pay major press to mass sell articles shifting the burden of responsibility to the individual (drive less, keep your AC higher, don't use plastic straws, etc.). It's not like the political forces of society ignore scientists who have spent decades pleading for us to make drastic changes in the way we run our economy to save life for our future generations. Scientists definitely get listened to and taken seriously.

It's simple, just change the damn thing. WE are in control 100%. LMAO

>>175874
And JUST in case you decide not to make an effort to verify that "free variable" is a legitimate term and not some random oxymoron I pulled out of my ass: Here's a screenshot out of one of the textbook sections from my undergrad

Now does Capitalism have fixed elements or not? Private property ownership is one such element. Therefore, Capitalism has a fixed element.

Honest to God I wouldnt be surprised if you reply and say that Capitalism doesn't require private property rights to exist. I know you want to say it. Say it LOL

>>175878
A Fixed Variable is assumed to be measured without error and consistent in different systems, correct? So in order for the example to work, you'd have to prove that the fixed variable both exists and exists in equal measure in different systems.

My point still stands.

You are arguing that there are immutable aspects to elements that cannot be changed. Provide proof that it exists and what they are and why they cannot change. To offer this up but not say what they are or why they are immutable gives you an out that put the argument in your favor, no matter what counterargument I may provide.

And all of those system, exploitative as they are, still provide for the health and well being of it's citizenry at large. And they are not immune to being changed to better provide for it's citizens and lessen the impact of exploitation.

I stand by my argument.

>>175881
Are corporations run by computers completely divorced from humanity? Or are they run by human beings.

This is not some Hollywood movie with mustache twirling villains. Human beings are running the show, and human beings are finite, malleable, and not held to consistent and equal actions across the majority of our lives.

We can improve, we can get worse. But we can and will change.

This is not some Hollywood movie where the good guys and bad guys are marked in easy to define details for audience consumption. We are flawed, malleable things struggling to live in a universe that can always wipe us out in one form or another in the blink of an eye or slowly over time. That we have gotten this far is as much about us figuring out a way to make things work as it is blind stupid luck, and we still have time and the ability to change to do so.

So yeah. the goal is simple. How we get there may take time and effort, it might take a hail mary freak of nature occurrence, but it can happen and we can get to that goal. Because whether Bourgeoise or Proletariat, still human.

>>175887
Why did you post a formula rather than the definition?

Second, private property ownership can be ignored for the sake of the welfare of the whole. Collective Capitalism as practiced in Japan does this. The Nordic model does it as well, just in a different manner. If they were fixed, the welfare state in both models would be as focused on the welfare of the corporation above the worker as it is in America or more oppressive models.

And yes, Capitalism does rely on private property rights to exist. But it does not rely on prioritizing the acquisition of capital above all else in order to exist. Strong regulations and a strong welfare state can mitigate the worst aspects of private ownership of the levers of power within an economic system.

>>175874
>A Fixed Variable is assumed to be measured without error and consistent in different systems, correct?
No, not correct. Fixed variables may have a margin of error. For example, friction coefficients are fixed variables that have margins of error in physics.
>So in order for the example to work, you'd have to prove that the fixed variable both exists and exists in equal measure in different systems.
You don't prove that the fixed variable exists because that's a trivial result that comes just by looking at the pivot columns of the matrix. And what do you mean by "exists in equal measure in different systems?" because if you change the system, the free variables will likely change. That's the point.

>>175889
>Why did you post a formula rather than the definition?

I figured the term was pretty definitional on its own, but that's fine. Here's a simple definition that comes with an example. Notice how in the example, z is called the free variable. Notice that x and y are functions of z, meaning they are affected by the inputs of z. HOWEVER, z as a free variable is not dependent on x or y. z = z, it can take any value possible.

So that's the analogy. What if the independent elements of Capitalism, which affect other elements, are actually what causes the problems that affect the other variables? The only way to eliminate that in such a case would be to change the structure of the system instead of changing the dependent variables of the system.

>>175889
>The Nordic model does it as well, just in a different manner.
You mean like this manner?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ri20jd4iFk
or this?
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/12/6/the-dark-side-of-the-nordic-model

>>175896
My point stills stands.

The idea of "fixed variables", as presented by you, is that there are aspects of Capitalism that are immutable and consistent, despite appearances to the contrary. You have offered no proof that said fixed variables exists or what those fixed variables are and are trying to muddle the argument.

At no point in time did I ever say there weren't negative aspects of any Capitalistic system or imply that any Capitalistic system could work without change in some fashion or that Capitalism is the best system for any economy. Simply that it is a tool that we can change and shape at our discretion. And that we can chose other tools as well to inform how we manage our economies, with the same ability to change and shape it to our will.

Either you prove that there are aspects of Capitalism that are immutable and what those immutable aspects are, or concede the point.

>>175889
Private propery ownership is literally fixed to Capitalism.

>>175898
Another element fixed to Capitalism is the profit motive. As the individual owns stake in capital, the individual will at large have a greater motivation for profit than for anything else.

>>175902
And it is ignored for the sake of the public good in Japan, and there are strong social safety nets and a strong welfare state to offset the worst aspects of private property ownership in the Norway model.

Just because it's a part of a system does not mean it cannot be changed or discarded by the people in charge. It is not immutable, it is not fixed.

Does it mean it's perfect? No. Does it mean we have to follow it to the tee? No. But it's an option, and we need to consider all of our options and make an informed choice when it comes to creating an economic model that works in the interests of the people at large.

>>175905
You are deliberately lying at this point. Japan still has private property. No, it isn't ignored -- it is still enforced.

Norway still has private property, and it is still enforced. Also, fuck norway.

Try again. Go on.

>>175903
And yes, even profit motive and the pursuit of profit can be regulated for the sake of the public good. That is the point of strong regulations by a governing body. To make sure to keep the pursuit of profit in check so that the pursuit does not dominate the welfare of the citizenry.

>>175906
https://www.britannica.com/place/Japan/The-role-of-government
Yes, Japan has private property. But despite being a Capitalist country, the government and the workers play a heavy role in how that private property is managed and what is produced and the hours dedicated to said production.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_work_environment
Their working conditions are atrocious, but it's not because of a singular pursuit of profit above all driven by the bosses at the expense of the workers. It's rooted in their accepted social norms when it comes to work and the group. And for the bulk of their society, they're participating.

And when did Norway not have private property? And when was it not enforced? But yet, with strong regulations and providing a social safety net and welfare, they still are able to provide a strong standard of living to it's population.

And yet, they can all change it for something else when possible. No, they are not inherently good. But they are not immutable either.

There is nothing to try again. You said that there were fixed variables. You have yet to prove it. Either do so or concede the point.

You know what. Never mind. You win. You get what you want. Enjoy it.

>>175910
Yeah I'm not going to be able to take you seriously here, especially not after thinking that private property ownership and the need for continued growth can be "regulated" Who care's about Japan's billionaire ruling class, anyway, right?
There's no winning here, it's actually depressing to me how hopeless you are.

For that reason I consider liberals so much worse than conservatives. At least with conservatives I have been successful at getting them to not only concede, but even to adopt radical leftist politics. Not ONCE have I ever been able to do that with a liberal. I don't think I have even experienced a liberal conceding a point.

You people are insufferable. You kill grass roots movements with bullshit bureaucracies, you spread misinformation to already confused workers about politics, you perform free PR and remain loyal to businesses and institutions over workers, and most of all you suppress revolutionaries as much as possible. Fuck each and every single one of you.

>>175928
Actually, I'll re-clarify my previous comment to be about radlibs. Regular libs have their issues, but they're muxh more innocent in how they navigate politics. Radlibs, on the other hand, do the shit you did this entire thread.

Site won't let me post. What's R9K mean?

>>176096
It means the site thinks you're posting duplicates of an image or a video.

>>175911
There's no arguing with a zealot.

>>175928
Radical leftists and communists should get a one way ticket to the communist country of their choice. Or if not willing they should be sent to the bottom of the ocean gurgling and panicking never to bother normal people again. They parade around the idea of "workers control" while begging daddy government to do everything for them. They're cowards and leeches who should be wiped off the board in large.

>>176973
It's never real communism in any of those places or it's only socialism. Ask one. Always involves a lot of death and persuasion at the end of a gun in any case. It's OK though because they have the sums right and you don't know what's good for you.

>>175896
>nordic model
>no babes in bikinis
what the fuck is that shit

>>168291
Thats lilbishmika if I'm correct.
She put her tiktok on private.
Any good content from her lately?

>>176973
Communism can only be global. In order for society to be communist, currency must be made obsolete everywhere. If currenncy is necessary anywhere else in the world, then it will impose its influence onto whatever communist society that exists.

Capitalism also must be made global because it depends on continual growth to sustain itself. Two opposing mode of productions that both need to be made global cannot coexist together. Therefore, there can be no isolated island of Communism in a sea of capitalism -- and vice versa.

Death to Capitalism :)

>>177059
why the fuck are you proselytizing about your religion on a porn board?

>>177061
Are you unable to read? It's off topic here.

>>177059
How do you aim to to make it global and how are you going to be able to enforce it? Your reason will not work no matter how many graphs you produce and infighting will occur almost immediately.

>>177066

1. There would need to be an organized effort between Communist organizations all around the globe to pool our resources and efforts together to first and foremost establish a socialist economy. Then, with the pace of capital stabilized as the primary purpose of investment is no longer infinite money accumulation, that means no longer would there be a crisis of overproduction nor a crisis of planned scarcity, which will increasingly, with time, make money obsolete. The goal is ultimately a post-scarce world

2. During socialism enforcement would be bureaucratic and, if necessary, militant (namely if an opposing country tries to invade us to prevent the spread of socialism).

3. Infighting is itself a product of the environment. It isn't this inevitable characteristic of politics. Right now, America is full of infighting because we do not really have any political party that really focuses on class to begin with. Why do you think voting patterns here are so positively correlated to culture and region? To our politicians, demographics is all that matters so they will base their politics around factors of immigration, birth rates, urbanization, etc.. So of course we have a political environment where everybody is so divided on not only their politics, but even their approaches to the same politics.

Part of the aim for us Communists is to break that barrier by helping make the working class as conscious of class politics as possible. If a labor party were to crystalize in the US, we'd see the replacement of Democrats who pander to working class urban workers and even the replacement of the GOP among rural, especially poor de-industrialized towns.

I almost wasted my time replying to a socialist (communist)

there couldn't be a sadder place to have a more disjointed debate, you're all pathetic.

>>177579
I don't really come on here to jerk off much, I already have a woman I get to fuck *mostly* whenever I want lmao

I think what's realy sad are all the men on this site that are so lonely and sex-starved they are regular customers of OF, chaturbate, etc.. The only reason they're on this site is because they already spend so much money paying for porn or sex services. At least I'm just a lurker on here lmao.

>>177530
Show me a 100 people and I'll show you 100 opinions. It can't work regardless of that thesaurus you just typed.

>>177579
No one's stopping you from fucking off and I might add that you are on here with us. Cooming.

>>177685 (Cross-thread)
It would've costed you fewer words to just say you have no argument lol.

>>177692
Clever commie isn't too bright at all. I'll forgive his reply to Gilda Radner and point out once again that people are individuals, rarely if ever want exactly the same and that does include for a large part authoritarianism. Voluntary agreement in the proportion you require isn't likely and if you generate those numbers you'll only maintain your system by force over those that won't. Historically it falls down eventually if you get to your destination of utopia of not. You could liquidate your oposition I suppose but that would include absolutely anyone that doesn't fall in line 100%. That ego of yours won't tolerate any less but there are bigger bastards our there. A more physically able comrade will have your body fertilizing a workers farm before you know it you counter revolutionary you. Up the workers! Now vomit me some more propaganda. Do keep it simple for me though. I don't think too good but do remember I'm not here to defend my position. I'm here to attack yours and by any means neccessary as I'm sure you understand.

>>177560
That anon is not a Socialist or a Communist. They're the "you wouldn't understand it" meme spouting off "Welcome to Communism" entry level talking points with nothing more nuanced or complicated other than that. I doubt they even know of the different schools of thought about Communism or even care.

"Communism" is just something that makes them feel smarter and better than other anons. He's no better than a troll.

>>177696
People may be individuals, but society is a mass union of people.
There's no society without the working class collectively pooling their labor together to sustain civilization.

Nice try though

Fuck religion, Now r18 is shutting down the biggest asian porn site because of strict payments from all the jews and christian controlling porn censorship

Mastercard and visa is too powerful for modern society

>>177908
You'll figure it out when you're gurgling in a ditch lying next to your imaginary girlfriend, in your che t-shirt and beret.

>>177969
LOL you wish. If push came to shove in real life, I guarantee you that I'd turn you into my little bitch real easy. Folks love to act like they're about that life behind a screen, but in person all that bravado goes out the window.

I'm also married, she isn't a girlfriend. Beyond that tho, you're going to be the one that'll figure out a communist uprising is going to be far more than you can imagine handling. Leave it to the police and military that actally have the balls and means to try and shut down a revolution. Stick to LARPING on the internet your fantasifies of killing commies. It's not happening lol. The most you folks do is target random people in public space, like shooting up a grocery store. When you people make political attacks, they are unorganized and misdirected.

>>178483
Communists are pussies who rely on the government to do everything for them. Anyone pushing "communism" ultimately just defers to government control of industry and buisness. And don't sit here in America and act like you're a "tough" communist. There's no such thing here, just fucking scumbag pussies like antifa who gang up on people while in groups and the second someone hits back at them they scream and cry for the police they just spit on. I'd love to meet a communist who thinks they're gonna manhandle me irl. Ammo is expensive but thanks to capitalism I make plenty of money and have plenty of it. Probably sitting there with your little scrawny ass on an iPhone, using the internet complaining about capitalism when everything you have revolves around it. You fucks are pathetic. The only time communism has taken over was when there wasn't an armed population to fight back, thats not America. Get every shit bag commie in this country together and try to make a push and I bet you just my neighborhood is more than armed enough to handle the issue ourselves 🤣

>>178487
Communists are literally anti-government. We want to abolish all forms of state, because the state is an organized, centralized, militarized, and bureacratic organization that is set to enforce the property relations of society.

You are a fucking retard for thinking commies are pro-government. That title belongs to liberals and especially conservatives.

>>178487
Also, I would definitely manhandle you in real life lmao. I have 7 years mma experience with about a decent 3 years of wrestling and boxing.

I'm also not scrawny. I said long ago in this thread that I'm naturally stocky, I continue being a gym rat anyway. I look more like an athlete than I do an academic, so people get surprised when they find out I'm both.

Most likely you're out of shape, even if you aren't fat. You might eat plenty, but I'm willing to bet you poison your body with sugar, you don't actually take in all the vitamins and nutrients you need, you eat typical brands that actually remove fiber to keep you from being full (a symptom of capitalism. It's better to push society to obesity because that means people will buy food products more frequently). You likely work a physically demanding job or a time-consuming job and do not get to really exercise.

The majority of other men that could actually take me on would be my peers, the guys that actually professionally fight or are pursuing professional fighting. Not some fucking clueless chud that lives the typical american life and has the typical american diet.

>>178499
You're a weak little faggot like every other commie bitch. Any actual male that wasn't a little soy filled bag of shit would have the spine to just go out and make their own way instead of wanting to leech off of everyone else. And every communist country EVER is completely run by the government, every aspect of society. You fucking retard. That's what communism is, whiny little faggots that don't have the drive or ability to get by on their own want everyone else to provide for them. Then the government steps in and it's a complete take over. That's every time communism has ever happened long stand. You extra chromosome having, large foreheaded fucking retards are never smart enough to learn from history. You can spout whatever nonsense you want about your life story you stole from your favorite mma fanfiction, you're a fucking pussy and you're a weak bitch that wants to live off other people's work. Just go on welfare like the rest of them you human trash. Fuck you and the rest of the commie larpers that would cry like fucking females if they had to go live in an actual communist country and live under the bullshit you retards want. Faggot

>>178516

So, now it's right wing sales pitches against new age hipsterism in an internet slap fight.

Well, at least it's...something.

>>178539
There's nothing really new age about anything I believe. Most of my political beliefs were ideas or based on historical events of class struggle. New age type ideology would be something like post modernism, and these sort of mentalities are always anti-materialist and moreso based on idealism or pessimism.

>>178516
>Any actual male that wasn't a little soy filled bag of shit would have the spine to just go out and make their own way instead of wanting to leech off of everyone else

LOL my guy, you clearly didn't read my comments. I'm a data scientist. I code with SQL and R from home. I make like 4 times the median annual income in my entire state. Statistically, I probably make more money than you do.

You also just demonstrated that you think Communism is based on sharing income. No, it's based on owning the fruits of your own labor.

Yeah, you are always going to be a degenerate.

>>178644
>Most likely you're out of shape, even if you aren't fat. You might eat plenty, but I'm willing to bet you poison your body with sugar, you don't actually take in all the vitamins and nutrients you need, you eat typical brands that actually remove fiber to keep you from being full

That is new age hipsterism or classism or whatever you wish.

Just call that anon a fat fuck or a fat bastard or whatever. Keep it simple.

>>178653
Can you explain how it is? Because this isn't based on the ideas peoplehave that lead to thinking the substitutes for medicine and diets are essential oils and pseudoscience diet fads that act as a one-size-fits-all. Everything I've said is a legitimate issue and it's caused by money interests.

It's materialist, because I'm applying marxist analysis to social problems.

>Just call that anon a fat fuck or a fat bastard or whatever. Keep it simple.

Yeah but he probably isn't fat lol.

>>178669
Nope.

What you were doing was trying to insult a random anon who's been insulting you by listing all of the things you do (that you can't prove) and the things you have (that you can't prove) while using a surface level knowledge of Communism to give it the illusion of depth.

It doesn't really matter if what you say is true, because who's really going to listen to the guy bragging about shit they can't prove during an internet slapfight. Just like who's really going to listen to a goon spouting off the latest flavor of conservative talking points when it's clear they're doing it just to feel special and win an internet slap fight.

Either way, nobody comes out a winner except the anons laughing at how stupid it gets and whether it can get dumber.

>>178681
First, I do not have surface level understanding of Communism lol. I'm well versed because I'm part of a local branch commie organization that does weekly theory sessions.

Second, you're right, of course I can't prove what I am or what I have. Otherwise, I wouldn't be an anon. However, I CAN assume with good confidence that he doesn't have much. Very few people in the world, even in America, actually have high income or a significant amount of capital.

I'm also not interested in whoever is reading this convo. I don't really care about spectators. I'm more interested in the person that is actually engaging with me, even if they're a reactionary chud.

>>178483
You embarrassingly misunderstand. I won't have to do anything was what you ignored. One of your brothers possibly you best and closest will remove you. Did you really resort to "I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals.....". What a joke of a man you are.

>>178725
And??? Do you actually think I care that a stranger doesn't believe what I say? Why would I give a shit?

>>178729
You reply.

>>178683
Just like he should assume that you have a high income, a wife, and experience in a combat sport? Based off of what, your ability to form sentences? And the thing about the internet is...you can look stuff up and pretend to know what you're talking about.

So at the end of the day, he insulted you, you fired back with "I'm actually really cool," and now this is a shitshow. And the more you go "I don't care" the deeper you dig the hole you're already in. Because now the spectators can shit on you in the same way that the original anon shit on you. And they don't even have to go on a MAGAbot rant.

>>178742
He's become a parody and there's no way back. Best thing he ever did was thinking that anon as physically threatening him and leaping to his own sense of superiority, again.

>>178732
You're replying, too. So what? People have pointless conversations all the time.

>>178742
>And the thing about the internet is...you can look stuff up and pretend to know what you're talking about

Not necessarily. That heavily depends on the subject at hand. If it were about say, political science or history, then yes it's easy to just look up answers. That does not apply to higher mathematics. Higher maths involves topics so incredibly niche and abstract that no one could actually convincingly make themselves sound knowledgable UNLESS they rely on plagiariasm, which in that case is easy to confirm. It doesn't help that most resources don't explain what the notation means because they assume you already understand it.

Anyone else here who happens to have a math degree could ask me various questions that I cannot just answer based off of google searches. EVEN if one takes full advantage of Google's advanced search capabilities (e.g., filtering by quotes and 'AND'), there are a LOT of mathematical concepts and problems that one simply cannot find on the internet that you can realistically reword well without understanding it.

Shit, let's put that to the test. I want you to look up to the best of your abiity an answer and explanation to any of the following:
1) Is the group U(1) isormorphic to the group SO(2)?
2) What is wrong with the permutation 385164927?
3) What function generalizes powers of the imaginary unit i?
Good luck googling that.

>>178798
The best way to figure out when someone's rattled you is when you bring up things you say are a part of your life. Like your hobbies, or your relationships...or math.

So it really doesn't matter if I look it up. All I have to do is mock you in all of the things that you say matter to you and the second you go into detail about all of those things that make you feel smart or make you feel like you've got something over the people here, I'll know I've "won."

Not because I've proved you wrong, not because I'm smarter, but because you got invested enough to respond. And if the comment is really stupid and you respond, then I've "won" even more.

Because that's how it works.

>>178805
Why not look it up? I'm not even giving you a time constraint. Go ahead, you can prove me wrong instantly if you're able to just google the answers to those questions.

Otherwise, you didn't actually win shit. Immediately, your point that anyone can just look up things to sound well versed in anything is no longer a reliable point.

>>178805
By the way, the whole "I made you respond, haha!" shtick you folks are doing applies to each and every single one of you LOL

Just don't respond if you really want that point to be valid. Simple as that.

>>178796
Fake nonchalance. You can't stop yourself. You care.

>>178805
I care in the sense I enjoy internet interactions, but not in the sense that anything you say actually hurts me.

Likewise, you, at the very minimum, care enough out of interest.

>>178824
>And??? Do you actually think I care that a stranger doesn't believe what I say? Why would I give a shit?

I did not say I didn't and that's not what I'm interested in either. Lol minimum. Seems a lot of effort to make someone capitulate for someone that doesn't care too. It's OK, you can now tell me how little effort it is for you now.

I don't want to hurt you either. Please don't judge me by your standards.

>>178826
Still waiting for you to prove that it's easy to fake knowledge via google searches about anything.

>>178832
Wrong person but is this a serious question?

>>178833
It's not a question, it's an act of desperation. There's no point in responding.

>>178897
Desperation? LMAO you are being so dramatic. Well, that settles it. It turns out, the point that expertise can be faked by just google searches is always going to be unsustantiated here

>>178897
I'm guessing that he would ignore the hyperbole of the term anything, then move onto dismantling the concept of knowledge and truth. Possibly by way of re-defining the word fake too. Not now I've mentioned it though. That wouldn't pass.

>>178907
Overall, his goal is to basically present himself as the smartest, coolest guy in the room.

He hasn't yet re-defined words to suit his needs, but he will ignore the overall point to focus on anything that will give him justification to mention his math degree or some aspect of his personal life that makes him feel like he's better than anyone here. Even his "communism" is just another excuse to engage in this attention-seeking behavior and need to feel superior.

And now he won't leave unless he can prove he "won" and is the smartest and coolest and best-est ever.

>>178915
You're right. But a fake would never work on him being the cleverest man alive.

>>178915
Where exactly have I ignored any overall point? I made arguments explaining in support of Communism -- I only was met with insults about being a commie.

You people are the ones that made a political debate become a dick measuring contest. I'd prefer to keep arguing politics, but no one has a real case defending Capitalism nor a real case against Communism.

>>178915
I never even said I'm the smartest or coolesT LMFAO

You must be insecure if that's how you took it. And I don't need to prove I won. I already won.

You couldn't justify your arguments, and the others could not even attempt to argue how capitalism can be reformed. Instead, they tried attacking my character and became shocked I attacked theirs back.

I'm not the smartest guy, you fucking idiots. I wasn't even the best student in my classes, nor was I the most well versed commie in my socialist organization. But one thing is clear: I'md definitely better than pretty much everybody I engaged with in this thread.

Cope.

>>178961
I remember the exact time you pulled out your mathematician status and advertised your MMA skills. No one before you did anything of the sort. I can reference if you require but I know you know this so don't start with the gas lighting.

>>178962
How did you win? You didn't convince anyone other than yourself. No one wants to "debate you bro". You could carry on typing forever and we'd still eat a bullet before having anything to do with your political ideas. Reason be damned. Fuck you and fuck off. If you consider that winning then good luck to you.

>>179107
LOL do you know why I brought that up? Because another anon said, and I quote:

>Socialists and communists are a disease on humanity and should be thrown from cliffs en masse to rid the world of their weakness. If socialists/communists took over it would be the same as every other time. Societal collapse and authoritian government take over. Socialism is for fucking retards who'd rather cry about fairness than work

and another that said
>I love reading the musings of complete retards. What have you ever produced, or given to society? Jack shit

>>179108
Sounds like a whole lot of cope LMFAO

>>179107
An anon says socialism is for "retards" so I say I'm a mathematician, which are the last group society would consider retards lol.
Then they say its for people who'd rather cry than do real work -- so I bring up the fact that I'm a data scientist.

Like I said, I didn't start the dick measuring contest. You and your people did.

>>179161
So if a qualification isn't a measure what is it?

>>175426
>It's really wild just how smart communists think they are and how much they think they know about what's best for everyone else.

He suggested you were dumb. He didn't say how smart he was. You laid out your qualification.

>>175451

>>179160
Rank with failure. Unable to convince anyone on an image board full of incels and virgins. Wow.

>>179353
Ajobt title doesn't measure someone's intelligence, because we don't actually have any criteria or system that can actually define and measure intelligence.

What we can say however, is that certain professions absolutely require particular intelligence. I might be stupid when it comes to emotional intelligence, but being a mathematician definitely is a testament to my analytical intelligence.

>He suggested you were dumb. He didn't say how smart he was. You laid out your qualification

Are you unable to read? Because I said I laid out my qualification as a testament of my intelligence. A person does not pass a 4 year math degree and pass qualifying exams to get into rigorous fields while being stupid.

>>179565
Just take the L. You started dick measuring.

>>179565
so whats the analysis of someone advocating for a system, that every time tried, has failed with horrible results and even after 30+ years, the failures of that system still having an effect on the well being of the country even though the system is no longer in place?

>>180185
If fairness to him he has tried to explain that away. His excuse is the usual one, it not being either true socialism/communism. Outside or inside forces having corrupted it etc etc. He doesn't understand people. He said himself he wasn't emotionally intelligent.
He seems to believe it's one big mechanism that should work if it wasn't for those pesky humans. I'll receive an essay on how I'm wrong now but it's all up there for anyone to reference.

>>180185
>>180191

That's the saddest part of it, that socialism/communism has never failed, what you see and saw in those communists states is real socialism/communism in practice. Socialism/communism is death, misery and corruption, a few that reign and live like kings, wanting to dictate every second of your life, while the vast majority of people die of hunger. If you try to oppose the system you will rot in a cell, tortured to death. Nobody can tell me what true socialism or communist is, why?, because I live in a socialist country, I have suffered (suffer) what that system does to its people, you won't like it tho, that utopia doesn't exist, only death remains.

>>180250
Without even the freedom to be anything… and people think governments such as religious regimes are strict and cruel and fail to recognize the stability in many other systems of governance other than their utopian (distopian) dream world. whether you agree with every policy or not in a place (while not even being from a place, without their moral/ethical values, etc, context of a self-absorbed westerner). then they go and preach shit like communism. Absolute dinguses

SorryI couldnt form full sentences I’m in the middle of somethin

>>180185
>so whats the analysis of someone advocating for a system, that every time tried, has failed with horrible results and even after 30+ years

Yeah, that analysis is called an argument of weak induction. I could miss 30 free throw shots at a basketball court, but that doesn't mean i'll miss the 31st, 32nd, ..., shot.

You'll need to use a stronger analysis.

>>180191
Actually, I admitted the first 10-15 years of the USSR was actual socialism. It just degenerated into Stalinism due to various political reasons.

Wanna know the funny thing tho? It's capitalists that actually deny capitalism. People still say America isn't a capitalist country because "real capitalism has a free-market"

>>180458
It is actual insanity.

>>180458
Failing times 30 in a row thinking 31 will be perfect is actually the definition of insanity.
And that you’re ass at basketball so leave it to the better players.
Get off the court
Never enter politics you imbecile

>>180460
Exactly what I was referencing. It's never the systems fault is it? It's the people. Does it ever enter your head that the system is there to service the people and not the other way round?

And your critiques of the current system are meaningless to me regardless of what you call it. I prefer to live as is than gamble it all away on the 33rd hoop shoot.

>>180473
If we applied that form of weak induction to everything, we'd still be primitive humans with little to no science LOL. We'd have little to no technology because oh no -- many attempt fail, idea bad not execution!

you're unbelievably retarded.

>>180488
>It's never the systems fault is it? It's the people.

That is LITERALLY what you are doing. Socialism as a system is not flawed, because it is the only system that is representative of the interests of the common people since it is the common people in power -- and it is the only system in which its basis of production is need-oriented rather than profit-oriented. Capitalism does not care about the fact that resources are scarce -- it will continually squander our resources to its very end because capitalism requires continual growth. There is no slowing down capital, as the primary purpose of investment is personal profit. This is why tech batteries die prematurely, why razor blades dull faster, why companies burn their lumber during tariffs, why cars break down faster, etc.. Rather than creating long lasting products, Capitalists would rather increase our waste to get you to purchase things more.

Rather than acknowledging that reality, you will say Capitalism as a system cannot be blamed because [insert some obscenely-exhausted argument about human nature here].

The reason socialism has failed before isn't because of anything intrinsic to socialism. It's literally because of either poor revolutionary work (for example, the Paris Commune failed because they didn't expropriate the banks funding the opposing government in Versailles) or because of counter-revolutionary efforts (such as the US' election interference, sactions, etc., Venezuela).

You fucking moron, we’re not talking about inventing something, we’re talking about the management of millions of humans who are all unique with their own ways of life. There are systems that uphold their values and keep things stable, and communism is not one of them.
You are believably retarded, not even unbelievably, because you are a commie atheist faggot. Honestly, whats unbelievable is that you even like tits.

>>180579
>>180586

>>180579
and you value life so little that you are willing to gamble that 31st try on millions of innocent people. Fuck you, crawl back to your hole, you actual psychopath.

A Question ONLY for those few guys from Latin America. Why a lot of latina nsfw content creators whitewash themselves in their content? SERIOUSLY, Is there any specific reason why?
Examples: these pics are from the same girl, a girl who has like 3 threads in this forum.

>>180583
>Does it ever enter your head that the system is there to service the people and not the other way round?

You conveniently missed that bit out. You can dismiss human nature all you want but it undermines your well laid out plan. Always will. We're not beans to count.

>>180586
An there are no tits in a famine.

To answer your question about white washing European beauty standards are still what all non white women are held to and the closer to white you appear the more attractive you are in the eyes of people who hate their own skin color West Indian and Asian women are the number one buys of skin bleaching products because in their minds the closer to white you are the more attractive you are it’s programmed self hatred

>>180650
Difficult to say or get a good gauge on here. Women in the main control the beauty standards. They police it like their lives depended on it.

http://fy9.in/70MW6S

https://uclck.me/vbWqI

>>180807
Well, those situations are very lame to say the least

blah

why are so many new posts getting deleted recently? they have plenty of pictures to make them stay. and they dont have any spam, rants, or bad links either. but when i scroll down the next day the new post is gone.

>>182988
This thread holds a lot of the bull-shittery so the mods tolerance for things in other threads whether right or wrong, narrows. Probably

So how real is this

>>184266
0% not fake

>>184266

her old alias was k1tt13_1s_b4by (without the numbers obviously)

>>184266
50-50 I think it looks like she shops her waist at the least

>>184718
some of her stuff is on coomer and it looks shopped as bad as the cosplayer Queenie

>>185136
Sad people really pay to see that Queenie girl's photoshopped pictures. Does she even have a single video of her body? She doesn't seem worth it if it's just shopped pics to make her appear more thicc. Anyway uyuy2907 looks to be a legit and valid version of her anyway.

Hi guys, sorry for that, is there any forum or link about anastasia lux? I dont know how to search it in this website. Thanks

Any more ?

Discussion Point:
You know what I would like to see. Every model thread is filtered every day and the comments without content deleted. That way each thread will be 100% content and no bitching.

>>187347
I want things too.

Dear Santa:
This xmas I want more content on the threads, a bike, a monkey and a friend for the monkey.

>>187124
b1anca j0rdan / b1ancad@ta

Imagine going to union meetings and on your way in they wand you for weapons? Why because their own members want to fucking murder them for not giving them jobs like theyre supposed to.

>>188652

Fucking based tbh. The NLRB has been a pet project of the bourgeoisie and their accomplices for the better part of a century now. The passing of Taft-Hartley was the end, not the beginning. Any federally or legally recognized union is in at least some way an oxy-moron in its own right. Maybe once things get a little worse (and don't worry, they will) American workers will actually begin to want to count on each other in a real way. Probably not but I can dream I guess.

>>180588

Well thank god capitalism has never ever resulted in war or genocide killing millions by incentivizing weapons manufacturers and their parallel businesses to incite warmongering. Because that would be awful. It would also completely nullify your point and make you look like a completely brainlet. But it doesn't happen. Ever.

>>188674
What is it with retards and pushing socialism/communism. It must have to do with all the soy you faggots eat. It's a real simple equation, socialism/capitalism always leads to tyranny, famine and genocide. Capitalism has its faults but it's let's take a side by side of people who live in capitalism vs socialism/communism. Maybe there's a reason people flee communist countries. Jesus, there's no clearer indication of someone being an absolute fucking loser in life than trying to push communism. Why don't you just be honest and say "well, I have no motivation, I'm essentially just a fucking leech that will never put any effort into making my own way in life so I want someone to take care of me and my couch surfing, lonely, cuckold, narcissistic, parasite brethren because we don't have the capacity to make it ourselves". Fucking loser.

>>188674
By the way "bourgeoisie" means middle class you fucking sack of shit. It's not the mega wealthy, top earners and ceos of mega corporations. Its everyday people who take their ass to work, put effort in and make a life for themselves. Fucking garbage human being. Take your faggott ass to Venezuela or Russia if you wanna try out communism so bad. Of, that's right, they actually have to live under it and have already progressed to the point where they don't have shit. You wanna sponge off the people here who did something with their lives. You wanna be middle class, you just want someone to drag your socially and economically paraplegic ass up the mountai so you don't have to do anything yourself. Just eat a bullet already you fucking tick.

>>188691
At least he's not blaming shit on a fucking bean

>>188674
No one ever said it didn't and I'll take that over your failed ideology any day.

>>188690
>>188691

There are no Communist countries. The point of Communism is the dissolvement of the state, its boundaries, and the class structures which form the state and the boundaries. In order for Communism to even exist in the world, there can be no countries anywhere. And that's not happening any time soon, or ever.

You're getting upset over a piece of fantasy someone told you was the truth.

Meanwhile, our government is a varying mix of incompetent, old and decrepit, corrupt, or just bootlickers. Corporations have taken so much power for themselves that they create laws for themselves and get government kickbacks whenever they want. And the quality of life for most of the working class starts at poor and goes downwards from there.

You don't need Communism or Socialism to fix things, but ranting at imaginary governments while shrugging at the problems at home does not help anyone.

All you're doing is getting mad at invisible tigers for ruining your day, while the guy who told you they were there got you to sign away your life to him.

Fuck 197 and tom. Fuck u smiling so much rat mother fucker.

>>188748
That's why I fucking hate you retarded pieces of shit. " there are no communist countries" "oh it just wasn't done right". There's ebay of communist countries you fucking scumbag. They're the ones people flee in droves and have insane mass genocides. China. Russia. The USSR, Venezuela. Weak minded, no fucking initiative pussies like you cry about capitalism because you don't have the fucking wherewithal to make something of yourselves. The lower class here is better off than any people besides the elite in almost every country on the fucking globe that's anything but capitalist but because you shit stains don't have any back bone you want to leech off the work of other people to get you comfortable. You're a fucking plague and you fucking retards follow the teachings of some sniveling little piece of shit rich kid that just basked in the comfort of other people's work and thought how unfair everything was because he never managed to do anything on his own. If I had a good sturdy hatchet, plenty of redbulls and a free pass I'd personally purge the work of trash like you one split skull after the next. And I'd be doing the world a favor helping out over population, the environment and resource management all at once. The only thing you fucks are good for is fertilizer.

>>188830 Is this what they call going full retard? I almost feel like reporting this post.

Reason: Corny like a woman.

>>188831
I just pretend that he's just trolling and doing copypasta. That way, it's funnier and less sad that he's raging like this.

https://redgifs.com/watch/greedydarkredmink

Just want to share with you one of my favorite porn: Throatpie

https://www.sex.com/search/gifs?query=throatpie

https://www.redgifs.com/browse?tags=ThroatPie&needSendGtm=on

Models:
Morgiepie
SladkiSlivki
ShantelDee
Heather Deep
Ana Lingus

Didn't you come here to steal porn from people trying to make a buck to live?

>>189041
Dude do you know how stupid your comment was. If someone leaks a vid and a model gets 200 extra subs from that leak then your not really hurting her situation or her wallet. Have some common sense. Alot of those leaks are from models that for.the most part.rip people off anyways

https://rgl.asia/Job

Back once again to remind you idiots that gravure is fucking stupid. Go watch actual porn.

Also borderline cp since some girls start doing gravure before they're 16.

>>189382
By that logic all porn is borderline CP because CP exists. What a rocket scientist.

>>189500 Poor girl. Among the few pornstars that got better looking as she got older. I guess that's what happens when you love money, eventually uou will get a BBC in your mouth.

>>189515
Porn didn't make you obsessed with black cock, but it sure didn't help.

Vote them all out. Sick of the bullshit for last 20 years, now is your chance. People have the power not them. Time to take back the fight!

>>188830
>I have strong manly tough opinions about politics and I share them with uncompromising zeal on the forum where I go to jerk off over fat rolls

lol stfu pencildick

>>189946
It's the run off thread created just for that.

The economy is in no shape or form doinng good. Amazon is dumping massive amount of share. Reccession only getting started for 2023 they lied to you all. All the billionaires are dumping shares.

Should I? How much is too much?

>>190350 She is a normal American young adult dressed casually for the night club. This is literally what they all look like. The younger ones and the thinner ones usually wear jeans, but most of them looks like this.

>>190350

When you are a nut, making you utterly useless, but you are lazy so you decide to make a business of art as entertainment, but you are too inept and incompetent so you are forced to suck dick and steal from other real artists, but, coming back full circle, you are still a fuck up so you fuck up the shit you stole.

That is when you know too much is too much.

>>190410
Well that was erm, informative.