This is how the political spectrum should look like. Anarcho communism isn't a thing. Anarchy is a right wing ideology...

This is how the political spectrum should look like. Anarcho communism isn't a thing. Anarchy is a right wing ideology, it is about complete economic and social freedom. It is about removing all forms of government and the people governing themselves.

Complete authoritarianism is a left wing ideology. You can have complete control over the people but if you aren't controlling businesses too, its not complete control. Therefore this way of looking at the spectrum is the most accurate way.

you mean like this?

But muh mental gymnastics.

Left point of triangle is the top-left point on the square, top-right point of triangle is the bottom-right of square, bottom-right point of triangle is top-right of square. Green isn't represented here.

How far off am I?

Whats right wing about complete economic and social freedom?

Right wing is about understanding the importance of having rules and hierarchy.

Beddy aggurade.

I like the tube one.

Right wing is nothing more than a buzzword. It used to have meaning but is now an ammalgam of many fractions. Don't bother with Right-Left anymore. Ideology is what counts.

Anarcho-capitalism isn't a thing either because there is no difference than being dominated by the state and company's. take the bottom 2 corners off. And its debatable that anarcho-communism might be a thing... kinda...

Libertarianism requires you to face the consequences of your actions. You can deviate from the norm if you can afford it, if you can't you better conform because the church runs the charities.

Should be like this, libertarian left is basically HBTQ socialists that want to legalize weed

haha funny cat hahahaha
hahahahahhah
HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHSHSHD

anarcho-communism is a thing. You think Bakunin and a billion other anarchist philosophers wrote about nothing?

In the authoritarian right you could have something like China with there blatant crony capitalism but still very free market.

>Anarchy is a right wing ideology

I'm sorry but..
You're a fucking idiot

Does Anarchy LOOK LIKE a right-wing ideology to you?

Any political spectrum that does not account for views on race is incomplete.

In theory it is a thing, in practice it isn't it's flawed . However with anarcho communism its a contradiction. You can't have no government and economic control.

Left wing anarchy is blatant fascism, only that the state isnt called state but "collective". Hoppe Anarcho Capitalism is the only form of Anarchism that could ever work, because it leaves the option of VOLUNTARILY forming a group open.

What's the difference between anarcho-communism and "real" communism? As far as I know, the end point of communism is supposed to be anarchy.

Communism is a form anarchy, where people have abandoned money, and instead share everything. Of course it is completely retarded to think, that such a system is - in any way what so ever - even remotely possible. Thinking it's plausible to establish a functional communist society is on par with thinking perpetual motion machines are possible. Any sane human being should upon the appliance of any logic at all, realize that it's nothing more of a neat idea that teens can philosophize about.

Yes.

the political compass is a dumb generalization anyways

You can though. In Rojava when the Syrian civil war started all the business owners fled so their workers took over the company.

Really makes you think

The libertarian right is economic freedom + social / personal freedom.

Taken to the extremes, it becomes anarchy / AnCap if you REALLY like the markets.

Basically nothing except that instead of just giving shit away people get labor vouchers as a currency.

Anarchy literally means no government, with todays political spectrum thats as far right and down as you can get. Anarcho communism on the hand is trying to combine a system with a lack of government with a system that is essentially only government

>/Leftypol/ still thinks Stirner was a commie

Christ, he would have hated all of you. He was a pure individualist and didn't give two shits about equality. Read the book or hang yourself, pinko.

Anarchy literally means no government, with todays political spectrum thats as far right and down as you can get. Anarcho communism on the other hand is trying to combine a system with a lack of government with a system that is essentially only government

there is no difference between being crushed under the foot of a company or state. Libertarian right is authoritarian.

Anarcho-communism is also about governing yourself. It's just that the people have voluntarily decided that it's better to work together

Read a book. Communism isn't about government its about worker self management.

Actually anarcho-capitalism because anarchy means no hierarchy but capitalism implies hierarchy for example employer and employee

Even the classical anarchist individualists hated capitalism.

This.

>Anarchy is a right wing ideology
This is what happens when you spend too much time on edgy contrarian Laotian stamp collecting bulletin boards and not enough time reading books

It still doesn't make egoist anarchism a "right wing ideology"

You seem to confuse the hypothetical with ideology, my man.

What do you mean? Capitalism will always lead to exploitation.

Do you want to explain why I'm wrong then? Insulting me doesn't make you right

>will always
That's not how ideology works. Capitalism is the idea of trade and markets. Communism is the idea of sharing.

Whether or not they lead to exploitation is a different topic, regarding the implementation of these systems in practice. Anarchy also leads to exploitation, that much should be evident.

The free market dictates who has power. If you don't want to be exploited by one company, buy from smaller companies. The big company fails. Exploitation stop.

I work at a chair factory. I make 1 chair its sold for 40 dollars yet I only get 5 dollars as my wage. The boss pockets the rest. I was exploited.

Anarcho Feudalism is basically the answer.

Law obviates and absolves morality. If you ban cigarettes, alcohol, guns, etc, then it doesn't prevent people from getting them, neither does it make it any more immoral.

Law cannot coexist with morality, simply put.

Secondly, the most justified political ideology is the most moral one.

Authoritarianism and liberalism are two sides of the same bluepill. Authoritarianism uses the state to enforce traditional morals; liberalism frees us from those laws when those morals decay; the liberalism drives us to regaining a sense of morals (think political correctness), and then we go and enforce our morals as laws (hatespeech laws, etc); it just repeats itself over and over again. Marx wrote about this as "progress". People say that communism is against capitalism; it's not; communism is just capitalism 3.0 .
Free economies will push values that favor the free market; ergo, it's a form of law.

Morality is a form of communication, like language. It doesn't matter what is being said, but who is saying it. We say "White pride", yet we idealize random white guys who have nothing to do with us. We're still left of the spectrum, believe it or not. Most of you only have an established relationship with your friends and family, not other white people. The premise of anarcho feudalism is that a MORAL society be created based and sustained on human relationships, that they be natural, for nature is sustainable. Human families are the foundation of a feudal society.

Then stop working for the company if you feel exploited. Simple.

npice meme

can I save it?

...

anarchy
>all the negative liberties
>none of the positive liberties
normal ideologies
>some negative liberties
>some positive liberties
communism
>no negative liberties
>all positive liberties
"never been tried"
>all negative liberties
>all positive liberties

>worker self management.
aka a government

...

And starve to death because now I don't have a job?

>well you could start your own company

Which has an 8% chance of success. Also apparently i have to steal to avoid being stolen from.

>well you could live in the woods...

But there privately owned.

Nah. The workers in their own workplace instead of having a boss have a democracy.

That's a very poor argument. First of all, you chose to work at the factory. You're choosing to stay, in spite of being "exploited".

Exactly under ideological approaches, your argument falls completely to the ground, as you possess complete liberty. As such, any misfortune that you perceive is ultimately self-inflicted.

>tfw being a radical centrist

...

>Implying you won't starve to death under left wing systems

see
its not voluntary.

That's not communism though that's still capitalism, the workers were in just the new owners/managers.

Except the workers listen to the community and create according to need. They also run the company by democracy.

>It's not voluntary
So you are forced to work in that factory? You do know user wasn't talking about communism right?

>Which has an 8% chance of success
no that's just the average
your chances of success depend on your skills, brains, strategic planing etc.
I'm not saying luck doesn't play a role but you are responsible for the success of your company
you're not rolling a dice

Absolutely this.

If you did this voluntarily knowing these numbers you're stupid: people exploiting the stupid isn't unique to any particular system of exchange dipshit. People will steal from you under the guise of the "greater good" of a state are little different from those who do it for a corporation, except the state is morely likely to squander it being that it doesn't have any profit motivations; it goes to the class of leaches below on top of a different but closely related class of leaches above. The actual solution is for the workers to be better negotiators for their pay; it's prevented when you flood the market with replacement workers who are just as exploitable because "muh borders are imagunary doh" as it makes workers replaceable so the negotiators are more of a liability than they're worth.

Fine. But not everyone has the capital to make a company.

Oh so the companies are doing what the market says they should be doing? Right. That definitely sounds left wing

Being paid to do a job you're choosing to do is being exploited. How circular is your logic before you realize you're just passing your own arguments over and over?
If it's truly "exploitation" then work and be exploited until you can afford to buy some land and get out of the city and start a small self sufficient farm.

Oh wait, that solution would break the nice self contained cycle of logic you've created for yourself in order to justify being a communist and exploit others.

Markets are compatible with leftist ideology's. Google mutualism.

>that wasn't real socialism
We're back to this argument huh?

The actual solution is to realize that company and states are hierarchy and replace the company's with workers democracy.

I didn't say he was being exploited, I was just giving a solution to him being exploited. I agree with you here

>Which has an 8% chance of success.
Or 90, or 1, or 45. Any arbitrary number you wish. Still, the misfortune you perceive is self-inflicted, because of your inadequacy.

>>well you could live in the woods...But they're privately owned.
False. You don't have to respect "private property", but expect repercussion.

You can monetize on your skills, either by working for another man or yourself. Either way, no one if forcing you, and the "exploitation" you perceive, is nothing but a product of your under inadequacies. The threats of starvation are not imposed on you by other human beings, but yourself.

>Its not socialism
>Actually according to no true Scotsman you have to accept every interpretation of what socialism is and defend it

>truth.jpg

The left only made up the authoritarian right to disavow national socialism after the second world war. And then later in the 20th century they invented the libertarian left to disavow the failure of communism.

No it doesn't imply a hierarchy, it implies a system in which capital is privately owned. This implies that in a capitalist system, a group can voluntarily organize their capital into a socialist commune, unlike in a communist system where ALL capital is controlled by the state.

then save up,
seriously if you don't have enough brains to do that then your company is probably going to fail anyways

Actually, Communisn ISN'T about governments. It's the complete opposite. It's about stateless and moneyless societies. Socialism includes governments.

You too confuse ideology with reality. If you want to argue anything, then argue the impracticality of Communism, and the unfavorable consequences of trying to implement it.

t. right wing libertarian

>wah I require food to live and have to work in some way to prove myself useful enough to get food from those who actually make it, I should get things for free
Blame the universe for making you require energy to do things, blame your parents for having you in this world (and failing to make you into a capable adult), and most of all blame yourself for not being able to get food for yourself without living in society if you hate it. Don't blame an idea as broad as "capitalism" for chaining you to a less than perfect existence that requires some effort and cooperation, in which people can and will act in their own self interest just as you are trying to by advocating these stupid ideas.

When has this actually happened in a communist or socialist country?

Wrong person, meant to reply to him, not you, we're in agreement.

...

Where's your head at?

>libertarian left was created in the late 20th century
Who the fuck do you think Lenin was criticising in "Left-Wing" Communism: An Infantile Disorder" ?

:^)

...

>communism isn't about governments.
Then it's contradictory in name because what it implies on its face is a system of redistribution "from each according to their ability to each according to their need", which is the governing of capital and property.
That's why I don't even engage them on the theoretical argument that it doesn't need a government and demand they defend the real world applications of their ideology and explain how it isn't real communism/socialism because they can't without using magical thinking. Just look at his reply to me.

You're moving the goalposts now.

there is literally nothing wrong with hierarchy as long as moving up and down the ladder is possible
not everyone contributes to the society equally

Well that's ideology for you. But referring to past attempts of communism, in order to show the insanity of it, is futile.

It literally wasn't "true communism". Communism exactly requires magical thinking. It's on par with religious beliefs. You can't argue with it, because it has no connection to anything real.

...

Freedom to own slaves lololololololololoololololololololololololololololololololloololololololololololololololololololo Anarchism and Libertarian are left ideologies.
There is no Ancap literature or protests, because Ancaps are a bunch of autistic idiots that only exist on the internet.

>democracy will end corruption
Haven't we been down this road for a while now? Pro-tip: it doesn't work. A good worker doesn't make a good manager. A good politician isn't the best at governing. Demagogues can appeal to everyone to do stupid shit and exploit you just the same, as they did in Athens by appealing to the lower class with riches. You'll wind up back were you started after the council needs more experts to guide them because of this; except with a dangerously strong worker's union (for everyone involved) essentially. You just want bosses with better rhetoric and fewer management skills. As was stated earlier, most companies don't make it. I wonder why that is? Maybe not everyone is capable of running a company.

I agree with you that ancaps are retarded. Anyone who believes in anarchy is

Proudhon was a freemason and a Jew.

Did you buy the chair building equipment, the raw material yourself? Did you go out and market it, did you establish marketplace connections to sell it? If yes, then you were exploited and should find another place to work. If no, then either negotiate or leave your job.

This.

>December 26, 1847: Jews. Write an article against this race that poisons everything by sticking its nose into everything without ever mixing with any other people. Demand its expulsion from France with the exception of those individuals married to French women. Abolish synagogues and not admit them to any employment. Finally, pursue the abolition of this religion. It’s not without cause that the Christians called them deicide. The Jew is the enemy of humankind. They must be sent back to Asia or be exterminated. By steel or by fire or by expulsion the Jew must disappear.

This. Some people can be happy about making less money and owning less "stuff", as long as they are able to maintain a free and self-sufficient life.

This a major thing that differentiates crony capitalism from free market competition. In the latter there is just free competion where you can indeed fail terribly, while in the former you have corporations and the rich conspiring with the government to not let people climb the hierarchy or severely hamper them.

Yes, it is, you dumb fuck. Anarcho-Communists aren't actual anarchists. It is a fucking oxymoron that only exists in the realm of philosophy.

So what are actual anarchists?

r8 my OC plz