Modern politics is completely mixed up

>most socialists are globalists
>most capitalists are nationalists

Logically, the exact opposite should be true. It doesn't make sense why socialists should want globalism, multicultural tension and mass immigration, as that would make it nearly impossible to have a collective economy with collective goals, plus it increases the amount of money needed to pay for everyone by too much. And capitalism flourishes under free trade, which allows for lower prices, bigger labor pools and innovation.

How exactly did it come to this? Am I just crazy?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/shared?ci=AfDfEB9M9gw
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It doesn't.

Globalism and communism are the new "tolerant" thing these days. The way both concepts are looked at by millenials is that globalism and communism are "fair" and that its about taking care of everyone, all mooshy good feelings. In reality socialism and globalism together fall the fuck apart

You just don't see the vision, read some Chomsky man

Capatilism is destined to collapse

Communism is just a tool to enslave people. Socialism is used to brainwash the mass and slowly destroy us. (((They))) can win and will win if nothing is done.

Enjoy the gulags mate

>(((Chomsky)))

>capitalism is destined to collapse

Authoritarianism kills capitalism.
The left is the authoritarian one, right now.
Globalism is the utopia of socialism, everybody is equal :^)

It's not just politics

I can go out and step barefoot into s steaming pile of hot dogshit and THE FUCKING POPE will come wash it off and thank me for it!!!

MANY SUCH CASES!

>>most capitalists are nationalists
Why do people think that capitalism denotes
political affiliation? That is retarded. America
is a fucking republic, so yea, there are plenty
of "nationalists". Has less to do with capitalism that
national identity.

I have mostly socialist leanings

>Socialism is used to brainwash the mass and slowly destroy us.

But what's funny is that people often said the same thing about capitalism; that corporations would brainwash us and destroy our integrity and spirituality just to sell us products and make us consumers.

I think it's weird how in modern times, socialism is now socially liberal, while capitalism is socially conservative. Once again, wouldn't the opposite be true? In socialism you need the populace to be responsible, hard working and in stable families to decrease the burden. But in capitalism it would benefit from high social freedoms because that leads to the most innovation and sales.

Now let's look at wage growth.

Both socialists and capitalists are globalist
it is the alternative right, alternative lite and a few from the left like Gordy that want nationalism to rise
Socialists want globalism because wtf i have state power and infinite votes from the people
capitalists want globalism because wtf i can pay chinks pennies to the dollar and sell it to americans for a markup of 10000%

Socialism is morally superior to capitalism

Socialism is an ideology based upon the delusion that everybody is your equal both physically, mentally and ideologically, do not seek logical consistency in socialism.

Indeed socialism as good sides and is similar to how a family help a child to grow successful but the liberals don't want to accept the fact people are not equal and it can't be helped.

It's just about time this civilization realize Hitler was a genius.

I don't think "capitalism" is socially-conservative at all; look at the "values" that the big corporations have been pushing in their ads and via politicians (mass-immigration, sexual propaganda, etc.) for years.

They tend to be protectionist toward their own interests, which sometimes coincides with economic "conservatism" (aka corporatism), but that's about it.

Capitalism isn't an ideology.

Multinational corporations and big business push the globalist agenda.

More hardcore Socialists are against this agenda within their borders, since it empowers the big business and multinational corps.

Socialism is the belief that none of my people ought to be oppressed. That all people in a country have intrinsic worth, and should be aided by society in times of need.

That those who are fortunate are not superior to the unlucky

Neither secular capitalism nor secular socialism.

God. Family. Country.

Today, yes. But it seemed that, for most of history, socialism was the idea that everyone in a society contributes to the well being of society as a whole. So everyone has their place, from simply laborers, to farmers, to plumbers, to miners, and also to scientists, technicians and engineers; despite being of drastically different skillsets, they all had a common goal and that was the wellness of the "tribe"

If anything you would expect this kind of society to acknowledge inequality and human differences the most.

Funny how socialism always ends up punishing the fortunate for being precisely that.
Healthcare is not a right, you declaring it a right does not make it free, therefore you still need to get money to fund it from somewhere, and the only way for you to get that money is to take other peoples money. When those people finally get tired of it they'll leave and you'll be left with nobody to tax and your entire system collapses.
t. country which was under socialism where most young people leave for west if they can.

You are too young, you are missing the context.

Seattle '99
Genoa '01
9/11

in that period, the left was called NO GLOBAL and it still exists, at least in Europe.

Soros was an enemy of the left wing, anarcho/communist NO GLOBALS, and he still is.

The fight against globalization eas a battle of the left.

Now you have been brainwashed by Breitbart and Alex Jones so you replaced the word "globalization" with "globalism".

Globalization is the dominion of markets over our life. this is a historical left battle:

Vandana Shiva, Josè Bovè, Subcommander Marcos, Noam Chomsky. they were all called NO GLOBAL when you were still sucking from your mother's tits.

Now you have this straw man called GLOBALISM and you think this is a leftie thing, but you are wrong.

Squats, social spaces all over Europe are still fighting against globalization while you created this nonsensical 'globalism' boogey man.

learn your history, learn your politics

picrelated, NO GLOBAL communist riots in Naples 2001

>brainwashed by breitbart and alex jones
Are you fucking retarded?
youtube.com/shared?ci=AfDfEB9M9gw

>The nature of Capitalism in reality is the same as public conception of Capitalism.

Literally nigger tier logic. capitalism is cancer just as much as democracy/demo-socialism.

Horseshoe theory.
Both the moderate right and left are pro-globalization.
Both the radical right and left are anti-globalization.

Socialism CAN work if tribal/nationalist loyalties are present. If, that is, there is a pervasive feeling of community, of commonality. The problem, obviously, is such commonality doesn't exist, due to the decline of Western traditions (to kill tradition has sadly itself become a tradition, viz. postmodernism).

The task is to rebuild the West. Ours is a great calling.

Basically when I think of capitalism I think of House Hlaalu, yet capitalism these days is often linked to religious fundamentalists. It's fucking weird. It's also weird how the capitalist, cosmopolitan cities like NY or LA also tend to be the most filled with super left-wingers. Their social liberalism makes sense, but their love of socialism makes no sense.

>le jooz nu/pol/ boogeyman
back to faggit you go

Not sure if you're right about radical-left (also not sure what this refers too [femz?]) being anti-globalization. Point me to an example?

Age of aquarius will mix everythings in water
you can't resist the zeigeist

The idea isn't punishment, it's fairness. Few advocate absolute equality, all we want is a system which redistributes wealth in a fairer way, spends more on society, and clamps down on big business so that they benefit their workers and society as a whole with their wealth.

Healthcare is a right. It's one of the most fundamental ones. How on Earth could you suggest somebody does not deserve to live because they haven't been fortunate enough to acquire vast sums of wealth?

Hardly fair. In fact, I wouldn't want to live in such a morally repugnant system.

>complains about finance
>he himself is a fucking rich heir of a landowners dinasty whose family exploited workers for centuries

I wonder who could be behind this post

Low wage growth doesn't cause economic collapses. Quite the contrary.

That's not the argument he's making. What he's saying is that a country's economic status is not an indicator of its citizens'.

Not economic, societal. People will begin to recognise just how unfair the system is

Sanders' core coalition is anti-globalisation, for import tariffs, keeping local manufacturing at some national costs, against open borders (with mexicans)

>lmao read
fuck you. i'm not sitting around reading the complete works of every single shithead who ever had an opinion on politics. recap or i'm just going to assume you didn't retain anything and it's not worth bothering with

Yes Yessssss squabble over labels and fight each other cause you have different definitions.

Don't mind me here in the shadows, I'm just trying to prevent further confusion

>leftist collectivist busy bodies will now be know as liberals (as in liberty pfffrrtrtrtrhahaha)
>hardcore stalinists will now be known as anarchists (as in no state pfpfWHAHAHA)
>I'm working on (((left libertarianism))) next, any of you goys have any good ideas?

You don't make sense with yourself. Somebody who isn't able to survive alone doesn't deserve to, at least, reproduce. Going against natural selection will lead to literal degeneracy and ultimately the death of mankind.

There is no reason human shouldn't be as cruel as nature itself.

>unironically believes in traditional communism
>2017

kek

Your argument is flawed to fuck. Come live in Canada and see what free health care looks like man.

I can walk into an ER at any time that I want, sure... But if I cut my finger off while working, like a white person does, I still have to wait in line behind 15 (shit you not, I broke my arm and this literally happened) fucking indians who are fucked on mouth wash and gasoline fumes before I can get in to see a doctor.

funny how much of a little faggot you sound. how about go get a fucking job that has bennies? or god forbid learn a skill that has some fucking relevance to society instead of acting like a fucking sjw faggot, crying for bennies when you really are worthless trash, not even important enough to be alive.

Both communism and capitalism are retarded desu.

this

>Implying Stalinistic socialism in one state wasn't an aberration

How is it fair? It isn't.
If I work my ass off for 8 years and save money to then create business that creates jobs why should I not be rich?
What gives you the right to take away my money? People are not equal, period. A doctor and a waitor are not equally valuable to society. And you trying to take away the doctors money will only makes sure there aren't any doctors. A secretary is not more valuable to society than an enterpreneur.
Once again, you speak of 'we' as if everybody was your equal, they're not.

When the fuck did I say somebody does not deserve to live? They have every right to live, they do NOT have a right to take away what I earned and it isn't even moral. Once again ,you declaring something a right does not make it free. Your only option is to STEAL from succesful people. Also the 'big corporation' boogeyman exists because the government was given power via socialist policies and can now regulate the market and play favorites, thus creating winners because they paid enough money to the correct corrupt politician.

>most socialists are globalists
Let me fix that for you, user:
>most socialists are anti-Western culture because they oppress and steal
That's why it's always accompanied with things like
>cultural appropriation!1!

>im not reading the complete works of
There's a reason he said to read "some" Chomsky, user

Politicians and political movements that support left wing socialist policies don't care about you. They want to buy your vote in exchange for the tasty benny's they'll tax someone else that has the funding in order to offer them up.

If you're not enough to suit, they'll go to the darkie.

If they're not enough, they'll go to the woman.

If they're not enough, the youth will be brought in.

If they're not enough, the gay must be considered. Then the cripple, the college student, the ex-convict.

If they're not enough, the trans will be considered.

If not them, then the foreigner.

If they're not enough, they'll import in the muslim.

They support multiculturalism, to broaden the pool as wide of people they can build a coalition of political power as wide as possible.

And if Achmed wants to pull her down by the hair and slam his dick up in your sister, well so long as they eventually vote as planned, you stop being a bigot and help him squirt out his mudbabies, er, future voters for equality. Your brothers. You'll learn to love them soon. Same as always.

Get to work. He needs his nummy belly bennies. Same as the whore needs her child support, and the gay needs his third bathroom stall. To each according his needs.

How exactly did it come to this?
Capitalism and socialism are neither good.They represent the two sides where the population is divided to make ruling easy.

Thats why the only good communist out of the bunch are authoritarian and not liberal.

Retarded as fuck. but I laughed at the last box.

it's not traditional communism.
is a fight against the financial elites and for the redistribution of wealth.
nobody wants a fucking totalitarian soviet state, NO GLOBALS were left wing anarchists for the major part, or at least they used anarchist tactics.
Rojava is administered with a brand of anarcho-collectivism, and it is theoretically derived from that era, Chomsky and Bookchin are influences on Ocalan thought

>good
>communist
Like you would know Ivan

Deserve to live/ absolute fairness has never been a pillar of civilization
The whole reason healthcare services are provided to unfortunate others is say you have 2 indentical competing countries, the one capable of keeping the most its workforce alive will pull ahead
Providing extra healthcare to those who are never able to contribute has always been just pr

>most socialists are globalists

Socialists have seen their ideology defeated time and time again. They can only get votes by allowing third worlders into capitalists countries

for fucks sake is this your first encounter with hyperbole?

there's a reason he should have said which _specific_ work and the main points he wanted to reference. as it stands he can go fuck himself

>most socialists are globalists
>most capitalists are nationalists

Yes you are either crazy or you are so gullible you take /pol's bullshit seriously

Somebody who can't survive in some arbitrary system doesn't deserve to live a full and enjoyable live? Preposterous.

Also, I do not derive my morality from Darwinism. If we did, we would also presumably condone all sorts of atrocities.

what? why? leftist scum destroy countries how that make it better?

>Socialism is the belief that none of my people ought to be oppressed
No one is oppressing you. No one wants to oppress you. Socialism does not have a monopoly on being against oppression.

>That all people in a country have intrinsic worth and should be aided by society in times of need
This is not exclusive to socialism. This is literally every politcal party ever dreamed up by mankind.

>That those who are fortunate are not superior to the unlucky
Yes they are. People are not equal. It is oppressive to force equality where it doesn't and cannot exist. This is why every single communist society has had to murder millions of people in order to restore order. Of course they deny that some people are better than others, so it's always the more successful intelligent, enterprising and beautiful people in society who get murdered by the more numerous stupid, lazy and ugly. That is not good for humanity's genepool. If anything, you should do the opposite and kill all the stupid, lazy and ugly so everyone is equally excellent.

If you cant ensure economic growth indefinitely for generations to come, where everyone will have money, then we realy don't need communism. But that wont happen, because the rich will only get richer and the poor poorer.

Weed, pedo, open borders, polygamy

Not to say that I agree with Noam but at least try to read some of his main ideas on wiki and come up with some counterpoints before you criticize who you're arguing with

I live in the U.K., I know what free healthcare looks like.

As I said, I don't support mass immigration of that sort so it's irrelevant.

'Free' health care has just led to Britain not being able to defend itself, and more deaths from preventable causes. The top killers in Britain are issues we solved years ago.

Obama set us on the same path we now may not be able to get away from.
Most healthcare advancements came from the US for a reason.
Obamacare: Voters, are you stupid? - CNN.com
www.cnn.com/2014/11/14/politics/obamacare-voters-stupid-explainer/index.html

Why is communism the answer then? I can't think of any good examples for where it's worked in society so far

Why would anyone want redistribution of wealth? I want to be free to make as much money as I can without getting robbed by the state. You are italian, you should know how much your country suffers from excessive debt, the euro and high pressione fiscale.

You want to fight financial elites? Then join libertarians in the fight against central banks and corrupt politicians. If there is no globalist institution like the ECB which fixes interest rates, there would be no incentive for big speculators to aim at shortsighted gain at the cost of the public.

read about system price faggot. family still is the basic unit in the capitalism.

You are espousing the views of those who wish to protect their vast sums of ill-gotten wealth.

I do have skills, but I don't think I am somehow worth more than those who don't. That's capitalism and I want nothing to do with it.

This, fucking this you idiots

Idiot, I mean native american indians (we still call them indians here).

Point is that the degenerate elements of society leech off of the tax payers whenever they can, and they thrive like a parasite.

>most capitalists are nationalists
You sir, are a complete fucking idiot.

"Yes, Germany was back then a democracy, before us, and we've been plundered and squeezed dry. No. What does democracy or an authoritarian state mean for those international hyenas? They don't care at all! They are only interested in one thing. Are you willing to be plundered? Are you stupid enough to be quiet in the process? Yes or no? And when a democracy is stupid enough not to stand up, then it is good! But when an authoritarian state declares, "You do not plunder our people any longer, neither from the inside or the outside," then that is bad.

In reality, money (capital) rules in these countries.

They talk about press freedom when in fact all these newspapers have one owner, and the owner is, in any case, the sponsor. This press then shapes public opinion.

These political parties don't have any differences at all. Like before, with us, you already know the old political parties. They were all the same.

Then people must think that, especially in these countries of freedom and wealth there should exist a very comfortable life for its people. But the opposite is the case.

In these countries, in the so-called "democracies," the People is by no means the main focus of attention. What really matters is this group of "democracy makers," that is, the existence of a few hundred of giant capitalists who own all the factories and shares and who, ultimately, lead the people. They are not interested at all in the great mass of the people. They are the only ones who can be addressed as international elements because they conduct their business everywhere. It is a small, rootless, international clique that is turning the people against each other, that does not want them to have peace."

i'm not arguing with anybody. i might argue if an argument is presented, or i might not, i'm just completely irritated by vague zero-information references to some other author

You can't be against globalism if you support mass-immigration or if you want rapefugees to invade your land.

How many leftist groups in Europe are also anti-immigration?

That seems like a fringe position that only really exists in some eastern Euro nations.

You forgot to mention how you dindu nuffin.
It's lulzworthy that Nederlands is the only Nazi-occupied country that resisted hitlers obsession with killing the unfit, and now makes killing them a big business. Looks like you were born 70 years late.

What if I argued by telling you to fuck off and read some Friedman? Would you consider that a vlaid argument? Would you not rather for me to explain what I mean?

>This

I didn't say someone who can't survive in a capitalism environment should die. As say both ideology doesn't make any sense. Right now the most apathetic bankers and cupid idiots are the most rewarded by the system.

Natural selection should exist but in mutually nondestructive environment like in National Socialism.

>You sir,

Oh. Then that I can understand is bullshit

Nobody is "stealing" what you "earned". They are taxing you proportionally. If you work hard for eight years in the pursuit of wealth, then you deserve some wealth.

What you don't deserve is better healthcare. You don't deserve excessive wealth while others starve.

Does the doctor deserve more than the waiter? Maybe. But should the doctor live a life the waiter couldn't even dream of? No.

Wealth is not distributed fairly. Nor are skills. If you are unfortunate enough not to have a skill, why should you live a poor life?

>a system which redistributes wealth in a fairer way
Stealing other people's wealth and giving it to people who don't deserve it is not fair.

>Healthcare is a right
No it's not. It's a privilege that we are able to afford because of the enterprise and industry of the creative and productive members of society, the very people you said you wanted to steal from in the previous paragraph. Why would anyone be motivated to create wealth when worthless parasites are just going to steal it from them? No wealth creation; no healthcare.

You just described Maoism and Leninism

Except family isn't enough. We need the whole population to work together flawlessly. Else you would see parasitic corporates destroying cultures and trust between individuals.

tell that to the pilgrims

Never said it was.

I said it should be.

>You are espousing the views of those who wish to protect their vast sums of ill-gotten wealth.
In the US, the wealthiest counties are the .gov workers around D.C., which socialist Obama created.
Socialism is always favored by self-styled Nobility, with the same results.

Is Britain different?

kek

>I want to be free to make as much money as I can

so you are actually a globalist who loves free market and wants to get rich, like Soros.
Libertarians are also pro-market so they are also pro-Soros.

There is no way out, if you are against financail elites you have to be left wing

>The idea isn't punishment, it's fairness.
No, it's theft, plain and simple.
> all we want is what other people have
ftfy
>Healthcare is a right.
The fuck it is. You are no more entitled to another persons services than you are their property.
>It's one of the most fundamental ones. How on Earth could you suggest somebody does not deserve to live because they haven't been fortunate enough to acquire vast sums of wealth?
Life is tough.
>Hardly fair. In fact, I wouldn't want to live in such a morally repugnant system.
You are advocating a far more malign system, proven an unmitigated disaster time and time again.

Well is there anything bether in the long term? Capitalism will colapse on itself, maybe not today, maybe not tommorow but in the future.

Communism would ensure equality in wealth and opportunity. Now communism cant be achieved in one generation. Thought education the children would need to learn about sharing, caring and not being greedy, thus eliminating that "human nature", that was breed into us, because we were living in a capitalistic society.

The best way for humanity to survive would be to just start colonizing space, and have planets be self governed.

There's nothing unfair about the capitalist system. What socialists propose is unfair. It's stealing from productive, creative people and giving to worthless parasites. Mass immigration has made this more starkly clear than ever.

>This press then shapes public opinion.

Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.
-Joseph Goebbels

The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the
government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure
almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

>Libertarians are also pro-market so they are also pro-Soros.

It is impossible to be a conservative and stand for capitalism, since abortion, drug abuse and other degeneracies are fruit of consumerism. You are waking up, OP, and it hurts. Try reading The Fourth Political Theory from Aleksandr Dugin and Revolt Agains The Modern World from Julius Evola.

>>most socialists are globalists
>>most capitalists are nationalists

If this is true, then it is probably because:
>socialists have found new mechanisms of solidarity and collectivism which depend on the global movement of people: i.e. identity politics offer forms of global collectivism due to their biological anchors (gender in biological sex, sexual identity in attraction, race in physical attributes, etc.)
>capitalists have discovered that there is not enough growth in global markets anymore, and future opportunities increasingly involve:
> - turning inward
> - a "zero sum game" mentality in a low/negative growth environment...
>and therefore creating new opportunities for growth involves disruption of existing players and things like global trade, multinationals, and imperial projects like the US global order and the EU