What does the alt-left need?

What does the alt-left need?

- zero tolerance for religion, islam and christianity is used to control and exploit us(as marx would have wanted it-
- zero identity politics, only focus on class
- realize the bourgeoisie cannot be convinced to give up their means of production and stolen wealth, we have to take it
- no reconciliation with moderate leftists/liberals/sjw who really only reproduce capitalism with their moderate consensus stance
- no anarchkiddies that think their little affinity group and marches will do fucking anything for us


what else?

A better name

neoleft?
paleoleft
orthodox marxist

>Bottom right
>Not recreational nuke

baka

daily reminder the molotovs are used only because the totalitarians banned your guns

>- realize the bourgeoisie cannot be convinced to give up their means of production and stolen wealth, we have to take it
With you and what army, they would easily flee to another country or/and hire mercenaries to fight for them.

>what doest the alt-left need
Free helicopter flights.

ctrl left

>zero tolerance for islam
>zero tolerance for identity politics (aka I won't be screamed at for BEING A FUCKING WHITE MALE)

You're doing okay so far, how do you feel about gun rights?

>commie sucking the enlightenment's dick about the necessity of "blanda up"

Idiots.

Sooo. Regular socialism?

Wow pathetic

>zero identity politics
only focus on class

need tear collection receptacles

- zero identity politics, only focus on class

Congrats, you just lost a majority of your support. Millennials will reject any ideology which doesn't involve leftist identity politics in some form.

He said better

It needs to leave people the hell alone.

>putting popularity ahead of principles

Some more
>no room for maoists
>nationalist

Bullets through their collective skulls.

>what else?

No fedora fags (aka leafs)

I think you got this figured out.

full gun rights is a priority of the alt-left

what's going to make it 'alt'?

that's what makes it alt to me, no more millennial cucks trying to make jamal and geetika feel comfortable when we really want to take over the means of prodcution for working people only

If not for the ridiculous mental gymnastics concerning "personal" vs private property, I could totally get behind that.

But you guys don't even think a person owns their own body, so there. That is the central issue here. If you don't accept that your body, and the results stemming from the actions of your body belong to you, there can be no freedom in a society of your devising. Or reconciliation between the right and left.

In short, bring it, fagget.

To bad man. Alt right isn't taking your stupid fucking ctrl-left. Maybe we can work a bit together exterminating them, and then work out a little civil war after?

See here, they don't accept that as a valid demand. Since you don't own anything you create, and have no right to any resources you claim and develop, anything yours is really their by right. So they'll only leave you alone if you have as little, or less, than them.

The nu-left

>They're unironically calling themselves the "alt-left"
>Tfw I was talking with a leftypol anarcho pinko fag 3 months ago and I told him they would do this, but he laughed

Turns out leftypol antifa fags are just jaded contrarian assholes who don't what the fuck they're talking about.

agreed.

>He's still doing it

Communists are like literal cancer cell: they have to parasite off the success of other not just on an economic level but on an existential level as well.

Top. Fucking. Kek.

the capitalists want you to sell your body on the market, as a construction worker, whore, intellectual or you starve. If the boss says stock this shelf, he literally controls my arms moving to put what he wants where.
communism allows for a societal arrangement where we try to give the body as much autonomy as possible by uncoupling the selling of bodies to the highest bidding jew

Which is to say, you want to replace a reciprocal relationship with a servile one.

Communists and Marxists are cancer.

>that shitty edit
Just be honest and call it the ctrl-left.

Some cyanide pills and clorox shots wouldn't hurt

>Leftist
>zero identity politics

Ahahahaha, that is like having a communism that doesn't fail, a complete nonsense.

i want to place commodity fetishism, or all social interaction as material in order to produce profit (or what you call reciprocal relationships) which are usually an extraction of value otherwise the capitalist would not enter into the agreement, with a system that serves the needs of society - what we need in creating surplus value we waste a lot of human motion, and have to work longer harder hours, and prepare out bodies to continue working (education, psychiatrists, medication, drugs, chores, grocery shopping) - which is another way we lose control of our body under capitalism

>zero identity politics only focus on class
Class is a general identity group you dipshit.

>Bodies

You scum got to the point where you don't see the individuals you exploit as people, only as bodies to further a cancer. At least you are open about your endgame.

All human social interactions are based around exchange and reciprocal agreements, by rebelling against this and insisting upon "fair" central planning all you're doing is creating massive inefficiencies in the economy and destroying natural incentives.

You can't moralize over the ironclad laws of supply and demand, you can only legislate to effect one or the other.

generally in any theory where people are categorized, weberian, marxist etc, economic class is a separate larger denominator than gender, race, ethnicity.

while they are similar, they generally are different terms in theory.

what im saying is less intersectionality, and more orthodox marxist understanding of social groups

Alt-left should be sent to gulags so that the full cycle of evil ends with its creators.

no that is classical bourgeois economics that sees humans as another commodity, which it is under capitalism.

exchange is still selling your body for a price, thereby fragmenting yourself for someone else's interests

What's your ethnicity?.

You have to go after the top 0.1% of the world the people with more stolen wealth than all your local bourgeoisie combined

Most of these elites are Jews so be prepared to get called ebil Nazis when you go after them

But if you don't go after them they'll just arrange for your little movement to fail

aryan

And? Whats wrong with that? For that matter, how is being outright owned by a central command superior to that?

that's a good point.
would you say ignore the rest of the bourgeoisie? and just focus on the .1?

I think there could be ways to reappropriate their stolen value if we have enough force. They usually win b/c regular leftists are too scared to stop international banking, charity tax havens, or even showing up door to door.

What does the alt-left need?

For whoever thinks it's a good idea to kill themselves

>what does the alt-left need?
helicopter rides

Take this scenario:

>own a small business in a small town
>employ 3 other people who also got shares in the business
>make basically the same money as your employees do
>do a lot of the work yourself not sitting around watching the others work
>nobody is rich off of this but makes enough money to feed their families

Would the owner of a business like this where everyone makes the same money and owns a share still be some evil capitalist?

when you enter into the market to sell your body against a buyer who has a lot more power than you, you're not always going to get a great deal. B/c what you have to offer can usually be done by other people. so you're really not worth anything

so first of all you get a bad deal as an individual trying to negotiate a good deal with an entire organization.


second, even if you improve your skills ie. get an engineering degree you are still selling your brain/body for that degree first, there goes 4 years of your life,and they still own you for a certain amount of time/week for their benefit

it turns you into homo economicus either way


but most importantly, if we live our entire lives working to make ourselves saleable on the market, does that not diminish who we are? seems like a cucking in my mind.

Initially yes

National socialism failed because those 0.1% arranged for it to fail

They're all voluntary. You have autonomy. You're a literal slave in the system you retards like to spout which is why it ALWAYS leads to mass starvation and millions of death. You people deserve to be fucking hanged

>Free helicopter flights.
this

there is a small movement to bring about socialism through co-ops. I think the problem is that co-ops are both 'localism' and 'folk-politics' that still rely and can only thrive b/c of the rest of capitalism. For example the reason this business of 4 can live is that exploited thirdworld labour, and farming still allow for cheap food and toasters and clothes,

second. this isn't scalable. Every political project has to be scalable to really change things, you cannot just keep making more and more tiny 'cottage industry' businesses all working and competing for long. there just isnt enough space in the market to fit everyone if wal-mart etc still exists

Im booking that name

>Own business in small town that costed you 130,000 dollars to establish
>Hire 3 other employees and pay them the same even though they share none of the original investment
>Can't pay off your shit because 75% of your income is going to two retarded clerks and a janitor
>At least you're not a racist
This is what the left really thinks.

This.

The /left/overs

>What does the alt-left need?
a bullet to the head

>Zero identity politics
>Focus on class
This is bait right? Nobody is actually this retarded. Right?!

The relative buying power is literally what makes society function. Society requires distribution of labor, and value of that labor is distributed based on the supply of that labor available and the demand for that labor.

The fact that ANYONE can work at Mcdonalds, and therefore Mcdonalds pay is shit, but only some people can be engineers, so engineers pay better, is the application of supply/demand to the job market.

The government can not make this stop being the case, more specialized jobs [not necessarily harder ones] with more demand will always be worth more to people then more common, less desirable labor, even if people in a moral sense say "Society could function without this career but not that one". All the government can do is use its own resources to create artificial supply or demand such as through subsidies.

The Marxist economy works by central-planning [though in the ideal communist state this is done purely at the local level, not USSR-style national level]. This means that instead of the market reading supply and demand and generating an index of worth via the concept of price, state bueracrats have to predict future demand based on current demand, and allocate resources accordingly.

The result is the same thing we've seen in every Marxist state. At first a boom in the economy as industrialization is applied to a third world feudal/traditional economy, then shortages and surpluses due to inefficient resource allocation by the central planners. All Marxist states inevitably collapse after they reach the end of industrialization when their ability to grow their GDP is exceeded by the inherent inefficiencies of the Marxist economy.

Isn't this just old-fashioned soviet communism ?

Why not call yourself that ?

Marx is not relevant anymore, you fucking leaf.

There is a reason that all universities and countries abandoned it.

Only edgy teens who learned about it in political history class cares about it anymore.

>a leaf
check
>a leftist
check
>writes like a teenager/nigger
check
>ideas all fucked up
check... well I guess that goes under leftism

Why is a leaf trying to hatch ideas about anything?

well why do you have to let s/d be our authoritarian theory that controls what we do and who we are?

we're going to need fully automated luxury communism in the next stage. automation is going to fuck up s/d. so either we control the economy democratically (marxist) to make automation work for people, or by authoriarian control (finance/banks/ s/d ideologies) who will choose to make it work for themselves. I dont want to be cucked that way.

>authoritarian Left
Fuck off, you had your run over the vast majority of the last century and fucked up big time.

Nuclear holocaust

You might as well just adopt white identity politics if this is your platform because there are zero shitskins who are going to get on board with whites as equals let alone their stupid 3rd world prison religions being disallowed. You just made a movement only whites could possibly understand and excluded white identity. lol good luck with your (((alt.left))) LARP.

You can't just ignore the laws of economics, you can only apply them to new circumstances and conditions.

You can't just leap from a tall building and say "Gravity isn't my physics theory!" and expect to take flight, you have to build an airplane.

Automation will most likely not lead to mass unemployment, it will lead to the generation of new types of employment, the same as it has for the two centuries this theory has been proclaimed. Even if automation did lead to mass employment, the solution wouldn't be an economy theory devised in the 1800s which has failed in its every attempted application.

self-esteem

independent thought

a father figure

to be honest. if you read the Nazis Party USA's platform, their programme includes stuff like "full living wage careers for every white male, all banks owned by the government and used for working people, full healthcare for all whites"

I guess the alt-left gets pretty close to that, except to extend that to any worker.


I dont udnerstand why the alt-right is basically socially conservative, but wants the banks and hospitals to be controlled by the same ppl that control them now lol

it did lead to mass unemployment, the only reason buying power remains the same is b/c the capitalists realized this and invented something called finance so things could continue to be bought, but now on debt, then the capitalists could also make money by trading debt.

of course that is what crashed the housing market in 2008.

but unemployment and underemployment are an extremely large result of technology.

No, the reason employment is crashing is due to the collapse of American manufacturing due to open trade policies with third world nations with slave-like conditions.

Whenever two markets are open to each other, the value of labor tends to seek equilibrium. The solution isn't communism, its to reform [and possibly nationalize] the banks, and selectively apply protectionist policies to grow manufacturing.

What the leaf said

psh. it used to take 100 000 people to make X steel. now it takes 25 000 to make X steel. those jobs didnt move anywhere, they are gone, and they dont exist in the third world

same with mining, building etc etc

no one can bring them back from the third world.
it's going to be crazy when more automation decimates chinese factories tho, any thoughts what the third world might do?

Not all of those jobs disappeared, most of them went overseas. In any case freed up labor doesn't disappear, it creates new demand to fill it.

Even if we were to reach a point where automation necessitated some kind of basic income, we are nowhere near that point yet, and that still wouldn't be a communist economy.

The biggest failing of most leftist ideologies is the absence of serious hierarchies. People have a natural tendency to look to authority figures for guidance. people also like to take advantage of each other if they can get away with it. Neither of these things fit with the hand-holding kumbaya shit that a lot of Marxists envision. Without some sort of agrarian society, the absence of hierarchy can only end in failure. Beyond this, on a subconscious level all these communists and socialists think they'll be the party elites, they'll be planning the economy, etc. they're not going to be farming the land, working on the assembly line (aside- for some reason some Marxists seriously believe there are enough unskilled manufacturing jobs to go around without reversing 100+ years of technological progress). None of you are ready for the realities of what a classless society is. I am sympathetic to socialist principles (the inefficiency of the free market alone, the unfair distribution of wealth/income, etc) but I think a more viable solution is the creation of a functional welfare state. Improving the lives of the underclasses would be more effective if you stopped trying to lower everyone else to their standard of living.

>Alt left
You mean SJWs?

i think, as some have pointed out in this thread we're closer to maoists or soviets

im hoping the alt-left is what permanently drops the kumbaya part

The industrial revolution created loads of jobs in all the factories and shit. What jobs is automation creating?

US manufacturing output hasn't declined, it just needs less people to do it.

the neat-left.

The Wrong-left.

The alt-wrong.

The tfelt.

The Felt. Actually The Felt sort of works, lets go with that.

But thats not true. The amount of manufacturing done in the United States has plummeted.

a helicopter ride?

I just can't see automatization creating more jobs than it costs.

and personally i dont want to bring back manufacturing jobs, they were agonizing, hard, painful, made people very sick, and were horrifyingly boring.

but if the workers controlled the shop floor, wages could have been kept similar, while robots took over tasks, and hours worked could have been lowered. instead the owners just laid off 75% of the workforce and pocketed what was saved after the capital spent on tech was covered.

to me that is what communism is

We can call ourselves Marxists

In reality things don't work as you're describing. If the "workers" were really doing nothing to contribute to the productive enterprise, they would eventually be cut or outcompeted by an organization that didn't use such things.

>we

hard to know. im referencing from some bertrand russell essay i think called in praise of laziness?

im not sure. if the economy requires X steel. and we can use 100 hours to make X steel instead of 200 b/c of tech, the capitalist will lay off half the workforce, the communist will cut the hours by everyone in half. the same money comes in.

if the X is met that is needed, there isnt a way to outcompete this factory is there?

:3

what are the axis ? x is left/right and y liberal/conservative ?

What you don't get is that there is no "the economy" except as in abstract, all enterprises effect each other.

In reality, lets say you have two companies. One is capitalist, where capital is given by a wealthy owner who then hires labor, one is a worker's cooperative where capital is pooled from employees..

The former has more opportunities to cut costs and improve efficiencies, because he can innovate to reduce labor, which increases income [and ideally the income of the remaining employees]

The latter has no incentive to innovate, because getting the job done faster and then cutting everyone's hours for the same wages doesn't increase his income. Not only that, he has to compete with the capitalist, who can now spend that saved money on labor in other places to expand his business, such as by opening another plant [which in turn would actually lead to a net increase in employees].

The only way to avoid this with the latter company is by making company owned not by all employees but by masses of people with stakes in the company, who can take their investments out if the company isn't doing well. Which in that case, simply leads to the invention of the publically traded stock company.

on the other hand. the publicly traded company needs to have its surplus value distributed out to shareholders in terms of dividends, or profits, while adding no value to the company (except to pay them back for lended capital)

that is why something like public transit is cheaper to operate owned by the state, b/c a profit doesn't need to be skimmed from the top.

but also, why would we want a corporation to cut labour costs so parasitical traders in the public can be paid on others' labour?

Nigger, the natural state of man is poverty and starvation. In your la-la-land manna falls from the bloody sky, while in reality men need to provide for themselves through labour. The most efficient way to do this is through reciprocal relationships based on freedom and respect for property rights.

Your way leads to everyone going hungry, because you view the default state of all life as "oppressive", and lash out against the most efficient, as established through long experience, means of alleviating that state! All in the name of your childish refusal to acknowledge reality.

You're insane, and when you come for the means of production the very workers you seek to "liberate" from their livelihood will be the first to shoot you. Not all, of course, but enough to stop you entitled uni-educated brats. Its not the early 20'th century anymore, and only niggers and academic parasites are stupid and ignorant enough to believe your shit.

Alt-left need a leader, hero of our times like Justin Memedou

>inb4 filthy commie
I'm a national socialist
(trade only for imports)

Because those "parasitical traders" are the ones who gave the initial capital to fund and grow the company in the first place, not the disposable peons who mop the floors and run the cash registers.

You have to understand, there are workers cooperatives in capitalist economies right now. They just usually aren't very big, because capitalist companies are more efficient.

That is really the key point I would impress on you, your ideas do not work. They do not work. We have tried centrally planned economies, they always lead to surpluses and shortages, they always are inefficient, they always collapse. Always.

Communism is shit.

capitalism is shit too.

what are we going to do. give up?

>let's try socialism with a different name
>IT WOULD SURELY WORK THIS TIME