Left Ideologies

Do you know anything about communism, syndicalism, anarchism, mutualism, or other similar ideologies? Even if you don't agree with them do you think they make any good points?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8vMypCinkRk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They make a good theoretical point about limited/no government but they utterly fail at economics. Once their economics fail the state begins to fail, and rather than embracing the stateless society espoused by their ideology they panic and crackdown using government force because once they're in power they don't want to give it up.

All leftist countries inevitably become dictatorships as the government needs to seize more and more power amd grant less and less individual liberty to keep the failing economy and country afloat.

I don't know anything about syndicalism, anarchism or mutualism.

Anyone care to introduce me to it?
Books to read, "idols" to follow and listen to?

Labor theory of value gets me. Honestly I can't get it out of my head when I'm at work. I wish there more co ops in capitalism but they seem unworkable for obvious reasons.

No. The more left you go the more deluded you get

>Communists fail at economics lol XD

>Literally has never read Das Capital because it's too hard for him

I know commies aren't human and given any reasonable expectation of escape a man should burn down their squats while they sleep and drop any smokers that get out.

But yeah, keep knocking over trash cans, that seems to be working for y'all.

Anarchism,syndicalism and communism has been proven countless times to be failed ideologies. waste your time on something else.

Name one communist state that didn't end in a trashed economy and lack of necessities like food

There's a lot of overlap between them, the first Anarchist was a Mutualist, Piere-Joseph Proudhon, and either many or most syndicalists are anarcho-syndicalists.
Anarchism (Different types) - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Mikhail Bakunin, Max Stirner, Peter Kropotkin, Lysander Spooner, No Treason
Books - What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government
Syndicalism - Georges Sorel, Rudolf Rocker, Noam Chomsky, also check out the CNT-FAI, which was an anarcho-syndicalist trade union federation in Spain in the 1900s.
Mutualism - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Lysander Spooner
Books - again, What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government

It's hard to go too in-depth in an introductory post but this is a good starting point.

LToV is not a leftist ideology any more than monetary economics a right side ideology.
Its just a way to describe things that provides a basis for marx's leftist ideas

Tax Heavens like Singapore are an exception.

Not that much. I know that syndicalism spawned fascism.

...

Anarchism really makes a good point with anti-authoritarianism and anti-establishment.

Singapore has a gimmick, its not a great comparison ill agree.
But it does prove the importance of good governance

Venezuela was trade embargoed/under subversion or some type of financial economic warfare from much of the world's most powerful economies, plus their oil is of extremely low quality and extremely high in sulfur, not at all like the oil in the Middle East or in many other places.
Singapore is located on one of the best natural ports in the world and is basically playing it on easy.

i was looking to stock up on toilet paper

Leftist ideologies are inherently dysgenic.
>from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
As you redistribute more wealth, you steal away the competitive advantage of the best and brightest members of society. More of the dumber & less productive people are now able to start families & have children.

Subsidizing dumb babies, while disincentivizing hard work is a dumb policy.

>not answering the question.

Why do defenders of failed leftist ideas always deflect?

because at the end of the day it's not about whether or not the ideology works
they're rationalizing being complete leeches off of the real working class while still having the moral high ground

>Labor theory of value
Even modern Keynesians reject that garbage. Labor has no inherent value, and the theory doesn't consider consumer preferences. The product of the labor and how well it satisfies consumer needs/wants is what determines value.

> People who don't know anything about these ideologies and just repeat the same criticisms they've been conditioned to parrot
Do you consider workers leeches who aren't entitled to what they work for or something?

The basis on their ideology is sound, if you agree with the fundamental idea of sharing your wealth. I think the only way communism will work is when we are either post-scarcity or at the very least eliminate the human element from government. This means using an artificial intelligence of some kind and adopting a crypto-currency in place of a federal reserve. That's the only way I can see basic income working. Also, being post scarcity helps but I think the former is more attainable at this point.

>do you think they make any good points?
They make valid complaints but provide nonsensical "solutions".

>More of the dumber & less productive people are now able to start families & have children
As opposed to Blessed Nippon, Land of the Gods, a deeply capitalist country, where almost nobody's having any children.
Stop talking out your ass, burger, you've no idea what half the terms you use mean.

Anyone who advocates for a overbearing statist government needs to be dropped from a helicopter immediately.

However, money and capitalism are the greatest freeing things humans have experienced living standards wise in its (known) history. There is an interesting notion of a society without monetary exchange called Contributionism by Michael Tellinger.

>if i cherrypick one contradictory example, it disproves the general rule and the logic behind it

In a post scarcity society you wouldn't even need an economy. So does socialism only work when the fundamental problem of economics (scarcity) is completely gone? Is that even a victory? At that point any economic system would work.

>Do you consider workers leeches who aren't entitled to what they work for or something?
some people shovel gravel
some people do brain surgery
if the labor itself has the value and not the product of the labor then gravel shoveling should be one of the highest paid professions

Post scarcity is unreachable because human ambition has no limit.

No, seems like you misunderstood the other point I was making. We'd need a way to adapt to our current system of credit, as it goes in cycles. AI could do this more efficiently without a human element involved. Cryptocurrency use helps to ensure "fairness" because we can't print money on a whim using the federal reserve. These two elements alone would stabilize themselves accordingly to distribute available wealth without producing debt.

I don't really agree with LToV and am fine with different people being paid differently but that doesn't universally disqualify all of Leftist ideology.

>he thinks that labor can organize itself without a govt.
>he believes in the LTV
>he thinks a classless society could exist
>he thinks that property is theft and everybody is equal

I know. Post scarcity is a red herring.

> but that doesn't universally disqualify all of Leftist ideology
no, but this does

The federal reserve isn't the creation of any free market, it is not inherent to capitalism. Neither is fractional reserve banking.

> an israeli defending capitalism
Well colour me surprised.

Fine then. Replace Japan with Germany. Or France. Or Italy. Or Austria. All quasi-capitalist countries whose aging populations are only kept afloat through immigration. Your "country" doesen't fit here because it's filled with religious fanatics who pump out babies as an act of faith, to "reclaim the holy land". But without the zealotry, Israel would be right there with the rest of them.

You completely side swiped and misrepresented the argument. Japan's birthrate is low across the entire population, their IQ is not dropping due to some perverse incentives.
>Shrinking population =/= dysgenics.

African fertility is absurdly high and they're still dead last on the IQ scale. They (and you) need to stop breeding now before we're all flooded with retards.

Explain this to me: why are left-wing ideologies so obsessed with multiculutralism and social engineering? I mean, I think a lot of their economic points (tax-funded healthcare, less hours, higher wages) make great sense, but they always have to combine it with totally toxic cultural destruction.

...

Thats not what labour theory argues. It just tries to frame value in terms of labour input, but like most of economic theory, does not assign specific values.
That said, the very idea of economic value is vacuous and subjective

On fractional reserve I'm not sure I agree. It might be against what most Austrians advocate for, but I can't see how it should not be a market choice in a free market.

...

No it doesn't, and that book you listed isn't nearly quantitative or complicated enough to give you a good understanding of economics.
That's only the new Neo-Left bullshit which is fundamentally capitalist or neoliberal for the most part and does away with economic considerations in favor of retarded ones focused primarily on identitarianism and making up problems where there are none.

Never said it was. I'm mostly speaking about the USA. To be completely fair though, there aren't very many examples of how well a totally free market would work in practice because that would require the entire economy to participate. It's easy to see how a capitalist society could immediately impose rules and regulations on itself to protect its members... Hence it becomes a product of it.

>that book you listed isn't nearly quantitative or complicated enough to give you a good understanding of economics.
i doubt you've even read it
if you have then answer me this: why does it benefit both the owner and users of a toll bridge for rush hour traffic to be charged a higher rate?

> fractional reserve banking

Whenever I see this, I assume you are probably a fucking idiot who has watches a couple of youtube videos on how 'banks create money out of nothing, those filthy jews'

I can already tell you that it's basically at the same level of Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson. If you really want to learn check out Ariel Rubinstein, learn Game Theory or Decision Theory, learn Quantitative Econometrics, etc.
Here's one, without Googling, do you know what the Fisher Equation is?

I think that Marx and Engels made many good points, and in a word in which magic is real, their philosophies would dominate.

>kept afloat through immigration

So you're referring to public pensions and socialized healthcare systems as capitalism?

Population is aging because we're living past beyond any other point in history. People are not dying.

>Any of those countries, but specially France
>Quasi Capitalist

60% of what you earn is redistributed within the population. It's more quasi communist than quasi capitalist. How can you own the means of production when 60% of what they produce does not belong to you?

I guess thats a fundamental problem with banks in a free amrket. They will always collude and a free market has no realistic means of preventing collusion

Then how in holy cows' name do you explain India's spectacular growth? Or China's? Your argument is severely flawed, your sources are missing and here-s one tidbit of knowledge you should hold on to. IQ is far closer correlated with nutrition than it is to heredity. (Daniza M. Ivanovic et. al."Head size and intelligence, learning, nutritional status
and brain development" - 2004)

> secret police
> anarcho-syndicalism

Try harder, you emu rape-baby.

How is fractional reserve a problem with banks in a free market?

It certainly is a problem with banks in a non free market. Government bailouts, too big to fall, etc are what makes fractional reserve appealing in the first place.

In a free market all it would take is one bank offering full-reserve banking and people interested enough in that service, and one bank with fractional reserve crashing, and you would never again have fractional reserve.

Because culture/race/intelligence variances create inequality.
>How do you equalize the different cultures?
Eliminate all culture/religion.
>How do you equalize the different races?
Eliminate race distinctions
>How do you equalize intelligence/ability?
Eliminate the outliers.

Ironic that it is leftism demanding that all of your edges must be worn down so that you fit nicely into the slot you've been assigned....worker unit.

youtube.com/watch?v=8vMypCinkRk

>That's only the new Neo-Left bullshit which is fundamentally capitalist or neoliberal for the most part and does away with economic considerations in favor of retarded ones focused primarily on identitarianism and making up problems where there are none.

It doesn't change the fact that virtually everyone in 2017 who leans left economically ALSO advocates for multiculturalism.

Well every bank would claim to do so while reserve lending in secret

>that would require the entire economy to participate
I don't know what you mean by this

>It's easy to see how a capitalist society could immediately impose rules and regulations on itself to protect its members... Hence it becomes a product of it.
The difference is that involvement is purely voluntary, so if it did yield negative results it would be eliminated by the same market. Another difference is that producers are accountable to consumers unlike politicians.

I can't say I disagree, I always questioned whether voluntarily contracting with fractional reserve banking violated anything, although the typical argument against it is that it violates property rights through fraud on the part of bankers by claiming that there are two completely different owners of the same money. Not to mention the inflationary aspects of aspect of it.

I don't really care about jews.

>Rubinstein
no
we don't see the world the same way
we're pretty much not even the same species
instead of coming on here and trying to use big words you don't even understand to sounds smart why don't you just move to one of your utopias and live your little dream
most of the world is left of the united states and the idea that we can have ONE place for people that want to be free THE LAND OF THE FREE is too much for you and your jewish overlords
the time for arguments is over
I wish you dead

That's fraud though. Free market has contractual obligations.

I do end up agreeing with leftys on a lot of issues.
They pick a lot of obviously non partisan issues i.e. Climate change, saving whales etc which anyone would agree with Just soo they can backdoor their communist agenda. While nobody's paying attention to it.

>its illegal
>so banks wont do it
Thats why they will collude

Virtually nobody leans left economically, Neoliberalism is overwhelmingly fucking dominant.
> Inb4 liberals, tax redistribution
Neoliberal markets are so orthodox that challenging them in economics is basically viewed as heresy. The only people who advocate for Leftist economics are basically the equivalent of heretics.

I know of an image board where a bunch of anarchists gather to discuss their "ideology"

They don't recognize ancap :(

https:// 0ch .org/

So much salt can be mined there

Pure socialism and communism lasts until resources run out which will be enevitable and because it puts all power in one entity (government) itll lead to corruption and power abuse

Also because they only work under heavy regulation anarcho communism is memetier and an oxymoron

Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer. I do recommend to read, for example, Marcuse. Just to make sense of it all. It's also very funny to beat some SJW intellectually. That really pisses them off too as they think they are the intellectual elite.

I know that people whom support it needs to be thrown out of helicopters

If there's fraud then certainly it should not be allowed, but if a bank is good with investing money and decides to offer interest-free loans, no commissions, etc in exchange for a fractional reserve account, without fraud, then that should be allowed imo.

I mean, that argument "two completely different owners of the same money" could also oppose escrows, betting, lottery, etc.

So you're assuming they will never be found out?

One hurricane or one hack and you get a bank run, also assumes that people won't put their money in this other bank that promises full reserve and has the "seal" of guarantee by a well-respected bank inspection company.

Yugoslavia

1) You can't have a completely 'free market' if you're forced to pay tariffs, right?
2) Yes.. which is why I made my first point to replace the human element (politicians) with artificial intelligence... Voluntary by who's standard? Law is a double edged sword, keep in mind. Many laws come from what's voluntary in context, context which you may or may not agree with. So, let's say you buy a product in a completely free market. This product causes skin burns and sends you to the hospital. You'll probably post about it or some shit and people will hopefully subsequently never buy the product. However, you're footed with a bill from the hospital. So, from there in your voluntary and free market, how do you propose the producer is directly accountable? With the NAP? How do you prove the intention was to harm you? What if they have way more money than you do?

>He doesn't support Pinochet, what a cuck

>I mean, that argument "two completely different owners of the same money" could also oppose escrows, betting, lottery, etc.
I think a more accurate analogy would be selling titles to two different people for the same property

actually, le intellectual fegget unironically tried to sound smart by mentioning game theory, the very reason collusion in a free market is extremely difficult

>In an oligopoly, firms are affected not only by their own production decisions, but by the production decisions of other firms in the market as well. Game theory models situations in which each actor, when deciding on a course of action, must also consider how others might respond to that action.
>The prisoner's dilemma is a type of game that illustrates why cooperation is difficult to maintain for oligopolists even when it is mutually beneficial. In this game, the dominant strategy of each actor is to defect. However, acting in self-interest leads to a sub-optimal collective outcome.

Don't forget that left wing ideology freed the overwhelming majority of the people practically from slave labor.

The ego and his own, Das capital and communist manifesto. They are all contradictory to each other and seem only nice to someone with half a brain. Simply also read anthem by ayn rand

...

>socialism didn't work because the capitalists refused to trade with us

whoa, rare flag spotted

The best leftist ideology is libertarian socialism

>The best leftist ideology
that ain't saying much

>1) You can't have a completely 'free market' if you're forced to pay tariffs, right?
What are you talking about? Who is forcing you to pay tariffs? If someone requires you to pay a fee to use something, you aren't forced in any way, you can choose whether or not to, or to use alternatives.

>which is why I made my first point to replace the human element (politicians) with artificial intelligence
Value is subjective though, how would a computer distribute resources fairly in a utilitarian fashion to make sure everyone is satisfied? The market already does this. If you don't like steak you don't have to pay for it or for anyone else's steak.

>So, from there in your voluntary and free market, how do you propose the producer is directly accountable?
You already answered this question. People will never buy their product and they are forced to absorb their expenses in producing/advertising it. Not to mention that their reputation will be affected harming the economic viability of any future drugs they might decide to sell.

haha you thought you could bait me into calling you a newfag?
WELL GUESS WHAT, YOU'RE A FUCKING NEWFAG, NEWFAG

How do you defect in a situation where everyone is doing something illegal?
You cant, because you incriminate yourself.
Remember the prisoners dilemma only works if the benefits of defecting is greater than cooperating

Marx's criticisms are at least interesting. His actual "solutions" are retarded though. Some people can't separate the two.

The collusion goes all the way to the top, like government now

>replace the human element (politicians) with artificial intelligence

Constantly low employment rates, lack of access to consumer goods, rampant poverty despite workers owning and having equal say in businesses and ultimately collapsed in on itself and sparked the Yugoslav Wars.

>How do you defect in a situation where everyone is doing something illegal?
that's different
I was talking about a free market, anti trust laws increase the cost of opting out and actually reinforce oligopolies

If labor value theory were real, the single mom who works two jobs to feed her five kids would be a billionaire and rockstars would make less than minimum wage. Wealth is not determined by labor, it's determined by two things; supply and demand

They are becoming more capitalist, and if you really believe the Chinese iq tests then I've got news for you

>Das Kapital is for retards
>Recommends Ayn Rand, who is an international joke at this point

Haha.

Leftist ideologies that claim to want to reduce the state don't understand that you need a state if you're going to have a leftist economy.
There are two reasons for people to do good things in this world. One reason is that what they are doing benefits them, but also benefits other people. The other reason is that they're forced to do things that benefit other people.
In a leftist society there is an expectation of altruism, but no incentive to be altruistic. Therefor there must be state sanctioned force to make people do good.

yes but youd need a state that isnt colluding itself to do that

1) I mean, every country needs to be onboard with the idea. The market needs to be completely free. The market consists of all of the people within it, not held to mercy of a government.

2) Not everyone will be satisfied on it alone, this is supplementary basic income, not a paycheck. Everyone would receive part of the pool based on more thorough needs. Government is a machine as it stands already. The problem is human bureaucracy slowing the gears down. Government workers aside from maybe some protection agencies would be eliminated, freeing up a lot of government spending on themselves. I think I read around 22M people work for the US government.

3) You seemed to miss the part where I said you, personally are footed with a hospital bill and where I asked how you hold this business responsible. Businesses get sued for shitty products all the time and somehow absorb that cost. The difference is, the costs of making a crappy product in our market is magnified by fines and regulation that would go to your hospital payments and potential reimbursment.. I'm asking what would happen to you without it, not the business.

w-who? i can't find it on the map my friend

Please explain this. The webm, that is.

>1) I mean, every country needs to be onboard with the idea. The market needs to be completely free. The market consists of all of the people within it, not held to mercy of a government.
Why would every country need to be on board with this idea? I don't get what you're trying to say on this point. Yes a purely free market is defined to not have government intervention. Also, the idea that people have to agree with a free market is fallacious, it assumes that people have a right to coerce others involuntarily.

>The problem is human bureaucracy slowing the gears down.
The problem is the arrogance on the part of socialists to believe that they know what other people want more than themselves. How would a computer know what I need/want more than I do? This idea reads like science fiction. Who would create the AI? How would needs of various people be weighed against each other? How does it determine which needs are more important?

>You seemed to miss the part where I said you, personally are footed with a hospital bill and where I asked how you hold this business responsible. Businesses get sued for shitty products all the time and somehow absorb that cost. The difference is, the costs of making a crappy product in our market is magnified by fines and regulation that would go to your hospital payments and potential reimbursment.. I'm asking what would happen to you without it, not the business.
Ironically the government actually puts liability caps on a lot of negligent behavior to limit how much people can sue. A good example would be the cap on liability for the BP oil spill (that also encouraged more risky offshore oil drilling). On the topic of the hospital bill, I would have my insurance company pay it or seek a settlement with the drug company.

To add on to the last paragraph, look what happened with United Airlines after the recent controversy, or Chick-fil-a after it stuck its nose in politics. Both were held accountable by consumers, UA publicly apologized, changed their rules, reached a settlement with the doctor, and etc. just to save face.