Why can't Sup Forums have an honest discussion about the negative effects of capitalism on culture?

Why can't Sup Forums have an honest discussion about the negative effects of capitalism on culture?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=huNH8a2XXHM
youtube.com/watch?v=4MKD8lhmgJY
youtube.com/watch?v=sU_pDM1N7i0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Lets discuss communists trying to erase culture.

Hi. I'm a lifelong Democrat and adamantly pro capitalist.

What's up!

Communism is Judaism for the goyim. The Jews get to be the societal masters, the elite, under their communism.

>How can you criticise capitalism!? Commie!
Or something along these lines. Sup Forums is no better than an old grandpa with a neverending hatred of the Russians. You won't be able to talk about this here without being called a commie for criticising capitalism.

No no no .. communists are trying to erase history. It's the Nazis trying to erase culture. Seeing as how, you know, culture is comprised of people and people are what makes culture and the alt right Nazis want to literally kill or eradicate or banish entire cultures.

What "culture" are we talking about?

This isn't going to be one of those disingenuous /leftypol/ "Hello, fellow Sup Forumsacks!" threads where you try to convince us that socialists would preserve national/ethnic identity and socially-conservative mores, right?

If you're a self-hating white communist, you are the worst of Shabbos goyim, probably indoctrinated in (((college))).

You're basically acting like Jews because you're following the Jewish manual, whether it's the Communist Manifesto by (((Marx))), Rules for Radicals by Saul (((Alinsky))), all the Frankfurt School bullshit from Jews like Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer...

You are the definition of useful idiots. The only ones who will benefit when whites are gone or if you get a "revolution" is Jews and no one else. Stop hating yourselves.

The thing is, leftists does not work, most neo-commies never worked in their life yet they claim to be "the working class".

They live with their parents, and their parents does not vote left.

Not to mention they like to cry about "ebil nazis" yet the nazis were actually "the workers' party" (which is today the name given to communists), nazis were the first socialists to succeed, between the capitalism and the communism.

Capitalism has the least amount of negative effects out of any economic possibility

Only when executed without prejudice

We can and we do, but we also acknowledge that communism is objectively worse. Reject BOTH international capitalism & international socialism. Embrace nationalism and recognize that economic systems are a "means", not an "end" in of itself.
>competition = good
>placing your personal profits over your responsibility to your nation = bad

youtube.com/watch?v=huNH8a2XXHM

Honestly because most of the negative effects come from Marxists who want to blame it on capitalism itself.

Think of it like this. Romanticism is a capitalist movement. Postmodernism is a Marxist movement. Which one produces the more pleasing sounds?

Because these retards immediately assume you're a communist, even if you reply multiple times that you think communism is autistic too. They just can't admit they love Jewish cocks. Nobody benefits more than Jews from capitalism in practice. Even if they begrudgingly live with capitalism, they more than likely will rationalize as the lesser of two evils. It's retarded and lazy to not wanna figure out something better.

>inb4 whats ur big fuckin plan then big boy

Not my job to read books to you.

To be honest, you can't have an honest discussion about anything on pol. Too many reactionary autists.

>capitalism's apparent successes—such as technological advancement, increased income, and increased leisure—could never outweigh the social dysfunction and degradation of everyday life that it simultaneously inflicted.
>authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: "All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."
>social life can be understood as "the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing."
>commodities have supplanted relations between people, in which "passive identification with the spectacle supplants genuine activity [...] it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images."
>the spectacle obfuscates the past, imploding it with the future into an undifferentiated mass, a type of never-ending present
Also
>In a capitalist society, the worker's alienation from their humanity occurs because the worker can only express labour—a fundamental social aspect of personal individuality—through a private system of industrial production in which each worker is an instrument, a thing, and not a person
Thoughts?

Marxist economics are absolutely fucking retarded, but I read some commie criticisms of capitalism related to how the industrial revolution changed the way people perceive the world, and I want to know people's thoughts. But I just get called a commie for raising the critiques.

Because the effects on culture mediated by capitalism are not exclusive or inherent thereto. Marxism and many third-positions posit themselves not just as economic ideologies but as general theories of philosophy, and indeed without this philosophical core they are baseless.

Capitalism does no such thing; it is neutrally looked upon as the most natural and effective way of organizing an economy, given present conditions at least. Under communism and fascism everyone is ordered and conditioned to basically worship the state and revere its great revolutionary economic system nonstop. Capitalism is just a way of producing and distributing goods that exists independent of other aspects of life, which are discrete from the profane and any worldly desire.

Ironic how one of the most prominent Marxist criticisms of capitalism is to falsely equate it with materialism, yet the Marxist philosophical core acknowledges virtually nothing outside of the material.

These effects may be mediated by capitalism, but there's no reason why any other sufficiently developed society would not end up the same. Unless they couldn't develop to such point. Are you suggesting primitivism as an alternative?

Sure I'll talk about it.

I should clarify though before addressing your questions and concerns. I consider myself a progressive capitalist. I believe capitalism is best equipped to address cultural problems and drive us to a better place.

I know there are problems with capitalism. And it lends itself to cultural problems. So I think as Patriots and humanitarians, we should fix those problems. Which would just make us all richer and happier anyway.

I believe this, fundamentally.

Anyway.

>capitalism's apparent successes—such as technological advancement, increased income, and increased leisure—could never outweigh the social dysfunction and degradation of everyday life that it simultaneously inflicted.

I would argue the legitimacy of "simultaneously" and I would argue that it does outweigh the problems. As cruel as that is to say. Medicine. Travel. Communication. Data. These are bigger to our species than the saddest sob story.

What kind of pain lies behind metallurgy? How about the wheel, or fire?

But that's just quibbling. Maybe the internet is worse than the slavery required to make it? Who's going to measure it and how compromised are they? It's still just quibbling.

It reminds me of that "you're drunk" - "well you're ugly and tomorrow I'll be sober"

The positive benefits of capitalism would remain positive with or without exploitation. And they have in the past or in experimental bubbles.

Patriotism and humanitarianism can, and should, fix the problems you speak of. It's important to destroy evil in the world, but not at the expense of progress. Our species must move forward.

Still. Slavery, poverty, violence. These are not tools of progress. They need to be removed as well.

>authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: "All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."

Oh. Says you. And this has been an argument presented thousands of times in our past. Is this conversation not authentic?

Can't do anything about all the geniuses that don't understand their vote counts for virtually nothing (at least if you're voting bipartisan, but then third party gets no fed funding and constantly obstructed by established puppets lol) beneath late stage capitalism.

>muh standard of living, muh jew overlords throw muh bone. u commie want split muh bone. reee

Like I said, try to move on about it. Sucks that everyone is politically autistic, but they definitely won't listen to reason here. It's not edgy enough.

Why are you comparing capitalism to nationalism like it's a choice? They're not on the same spectrum. Are you fucking stupid?

I actually like Varg-style tribalism, but I don't think it would be sustainable in the modern world with potentially threatening outside powers. National socialism (with businesses and industries that damage society in terms of traditional values / behavior and character dismantled) seems preferable to what we have today.

The negative effects are essential to drive human society.

No-one bitches when their food is big cheap and nutritious. The problem is jealously of people that are better than you not the system.

Capitalism doesn't recognize national boundaries, who's selling, what's being sold. Stopping globalism is going against capitalism.

>natural and effective
Completely disagree here, it may be the most "efficient" on the global scale, but there is nothing "natural" about opening a sweatshop in a foreign continent or engaging in speculative trading which can destabilize your nation for example.

Tribalism (proto-fascism) is the most natural method of organizing society and it is the least destructive to culture. I agree with your critique of marxism, but I think your inclusion of fascism into the same category was incorrect.

Marxism and lassiez-faire capitalism are BOTH wholly materialist ideologies, one wants to take all your shekels, the other wants you to keep all of them. Fascism conversely, is rooted in idealism. I think that the current state of our society (which is both exceedingly rich and disgustingly decadent) makes a very strong case for idealism.

My grandparents may not have "loved" the Great Depression for example, but they certainly weren't afraid that society would descend into anarchy & race war. I can almost guarantee that would happen very quickly in Modern America following another Depression-tier event.
A loss of material may be painful, but a loss of idealism is fatal.

youtube.com/watch?v=4MKD8lhmgJY

We do. There isn't much left to debate about. Freedom > Comfort

Not sure why this concept is so hard to understand. You do not have the right to hand people's freedom away so you can be comfortable. That is on you, if you don't like it here or your current location doesn't have enough employment opportunities you need to stand up and travel somewhere you can find your comfort.

You are inducing that the cronyism and degeneracy you observe is the direct and unavoidable result of capitalism. Rather, capitalism has only sailed this wave.

This historical cycle has repeated countless times regardless.

I would rather live in a less-comfortable society where people could look at beautiful scenery or delicious food without their first thought being to pull out their phone so they can commodify the experience and use it as social capital online. People subconsciously think of everything as a product now, even events in their own lives.

>social life can be understood as "the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing."

Again says you. Not to be rude or anything but comments like that aren't empirical, and aren't a constant.

I'm a father, a husband, an artist. I'm more than "appearing" and so are many others.

>commodities have supplanted relations between people, in which "passive identification with the spectacle supplants genuine activity [...] it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images."
>the spectacle obfuscates the past, imploding it with the future into an undifferentiated mass, a type of never-ending present

I just .. I disagree.

You're asserting that capitalism destroys the humanity of humans. How? Where's your data? How does this occur and what are the numbers?

And even if you found the answer to this, great, we'll bottle the solution and sell it. Or make people rich administering it for free. Whatever.

***
Imagine, if we decided, the state exists in the free market?

What if the state has rights too?

What if the state competed?

Look. Gang bangers and slave drivers .. they approach desperate, impoverished kids from shitty cultures. They're like "hey what else you gonna do?"

Whether it's MS-13 or Kony, these people monopolize the markets for exploitable people. Pharmaceutical companies too.

So. What if there were alternatives? What if there was an answer to the question "what else you gonna do"?

What if college was cheap, cops were better trained and more plentiful, food and housing were given to the homeless? Not just in America but globally?

It's not like we wouldn't get richer offering this shit anyway. It would create jobs and contribute to local economies, placing currencies into circulation.

Plus. At that point. While it wouldn't eradicate all gangs or all drug addicts or all homelessness or all slavery but at least it'd offer a solution. At that point if you're all fucked up it's kinda your fault.

>le roman merchant is better than u cuz he collected more fiat imaginary shinies

How can we enact legislation to remove wealth as the biggest influence on politics? How can we do that while also jewproofing (not meaning proofing it against only jews) our system? You don't think we're too far gone yet?

Because capitalism does not effect culture; culture effects capitalism. Capitalism is a private property contractual economy. That's it. It enforces whatever social mores exist in society. When government funds distortions of social opinion via academia and media, you get progressive hegemony. The government funds progressivism because it is democratic and democracies incentivize promoting a narrative which justifies it's avaricious expansion. If cultural Marxism was because of capitalism state media like The BBC would be paragons of ethno-nationalism. This is obviously false.

We must abolish government media and academia. To do so we must abolish democracy itself. Only then can we have a reactionary social order.

You are right, which is why Commies and NatSocs are nearly identical in their belief systems when it comes to the economy.

Which is also why both are degenerate retards who need to be physically removed to have a good society.

At this point we can't really claim that if someone is a loser or all fucked up, it's their fault.

Capitalism has laid a lot of hurdles in front of cultures.

"I'm drunk but you're ugly and I'll be sober tomorrow"

Capitalism is drunk right now. And it's a mean drunk. We need to sober up. Embrace patriotism and humanitarianism. See the zen in it, and the profit in it.

So, I support progressive ideals that move toward removing hurdles.

***
But I fundamentally disagree that the bad outweighs the good. Being ugly is worse than being drunk. Not progressing technologically as a society/species, is worse than any cultural pain inflicted by the current generation of capitalists.

And as I say. It's so easy to sober up and do the right thing.

So like I said.

I'm a progressive capitalist

>If cultural Marxism was because of capitalism state media like The BBC would be paragons of ethno-nationalism.
Wait, what? Can you expand on that, because I don't really see why that would be the case.

I don't think that's entirely true, I believe a majority of the natsoc and fascists would be willing to talk about it but they are already on the anti-capitalist side. The problem lies in the people who unironically see trump as a god, and ancap/lolbertarians and with them there will be no discussion.

Actually culture was pretty good in America until the marxism started to spread then it went to utter shit.

If you are jealous of someone it's because you view them as better than you. Not my fault you view them that way.

Because you never bring one up you fucking retard.
Then when you do, you do it in a passive agressive way like the psychopath that you are.

"Leftists" decided to try and exploit the culturally degenerate features of capitalism rather than consider the meaning of high or vernacular culture.
The Nazis made similar mistakes actually, dispite the anti-degenerate art movement they still produced top down tack in response to outside tack.

Leftists are now helping the culture industry deflect and scapegoat society itself for supposedly being a consumer, a passive one at that.

"African" Americans are the irreproachable conduit for American pop culture which is a top down social engineering tool.

Who were the biggest and most organized potential threat to capitalism? (And i mean Capitalism not "freedom" which Americans conflate with freedom because of the cold war)
Why were they a target for cultural dismantlement?
How have grandiose projects of the delirious abstract helped with the objective realities of the working class?

I would love to talk about the negative effects of capitalism on culture.
But what is culture and who shares it but an ethnic group? How can their be one iteration of culture?
You have to talk about cultural collectivism, which "the left" hates (when whites do it) and have deliberately sought to undermine that.

But you're strawmanning me as jealous. I'm ~97% of wealth and I still think it's evil to undermine other's right to representation with money.

by capitalism do you mean crony capitalism with the fed and subsidies and regulations? it misallocates resources and makes us poorer. less wealth means less art because we have to work harder to maintain the burden of all that waste.

if you mean voluntarist market economics, then it's a boon for culture. a richer society can more easily meet its basic needs, so it can tolerate more people being diverted towards the arts. and with that art having to exist within a market, it will better reflect the values of its best citizens.

obligatory

>Le wealth distribution is great meme.

Fuck off and keep your filthy hands off my property. Its basically impossible to not have the basics in life (food, shelter, warmth) in modern western countries.

Your kneecapping approach removes the best from society (Why work hard when Jimmy gets hand outs?) and replaces it with mediocrity.

Cutthroat capitalism is too far but we haven't had true competition for a century. We already rolled out 90% of socialism and society got weaker.

Consumer culture
Narcissism
Hedonism
Selfishness
Materialism
Scatter brain
Sex as a product
Amorality
Globalism
Commodity fetishism
Alienation from work
Society of the spectacle
etc

>alt right Nazis want to literally kill or eradicate or banish entire cultures

You categorized the entire alt-right as "Nazis", which is incorrect.

Many white nationalists believe in mutual nationalism: AKA - all ethnic groups and nations should be able to celebrate their culture and advocate for their interests. Most of the left thinks white people should be deprived of this though.

The main debate arises over how much influences immigrants should get to have over the host country's natives, and how many immigrants should be allowed in.

Also, Marxism has been extremely iconoclastic throughout its history, as destroying culture and nationalism has been one of its primary goals, de jure or not. Don't try to deny it.

user, hate to break it to you, but if these 'useful idiots' are able to quote Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer, Marx or Alinsky then they arent useful idiots
the definition of useful idiot is first off an idiot, as in the modern human, materialistic and uneducated, (aka normies). While i would disagree with actual communists/marxist leninists i would respect them more than i would respect the average person

Capitalism has nothing to do with representation. That's the government and cronyism.

in crony capitalism, if the products aren't selling, then they use their influence in the government and media to manipulate people into buying it

if there's not government, and government-controlled media, you can't brainwash the people, then companies have to slash prices and/or make something people actually want.

once we're not making stuff that suck and being manipulated into buying it, we'll be making stuff we do want, and not working as hard or as long because we're meeting our needs without making a bunch of other stuff.

then we can spend more time on ourselves, our families, and our friends. we can be who we really are, and our economic system will adapt to it rather than the other way around.

the problem with capitalism is that over time the number of people that accumulate wealth goes down.
we haven't seen the real destructive effects of capitalism yet, but when time comes we will default on all debt and the entire economy collapse.
to keep the illusion of capitalism going we allowed impoverished people to take credit so it gives the illusion of an economy that is running smoothly.
if we stop credit and default on debt tomorrow, then the economy will collapse. but until then - everyone is happy.
people who defend capitalism are idiots. the moment we allowed the private sector to negotiate with the government (lobbying etc) then we already signed our doom.
there should be an ethical side to profit making, whenever you like it or not

Capitalism is all about the quickest way give your customer a dopamine release, which is done by overloading on sex, violence and easily accessible laughter which all follows the same basic template. All Marvels superhero films being copies of each other, all animated pixar films being reskins of the same thing is due to the need to replicate the same flaring of neural pathways over and over for the customer to keep handing over shekels. Same deal with food, overload it with salt, sugar and fat until it becomes addictive. And it's a never ending race to the bottom since people get used to the high and you need to keep topping it with more and more extreme yet accessible primitivism. It's why American culture infests the whole world as successfully as it does, basically for the same reason Afghani poppy culture infested the entire world as well.

You can have genuinely nuanced and enlightened culture in a capitalist society servicing small sectors of the population that can't stomach the overall mainstream direction, but it will always be on the brink.

How would you legislate to keep the inevitable oligarch from gaining inequitable political power through his wealth?

There is nothing to discuss. Culture is basically the history of White people and captialism is a recent part of that.

In short: get fucked, commie

Fuck off. Get on your bike!
youtube.com/watch?v=sU_pDM1N7i0
That is what is causing the migration crisis.

>Implying we live in a free market
It's gubberment controlled via regulations, or sneaky hidden organisations. name on industry that isn't.

why bother, its the best thing weve got going right now and other people are trying to destroy it. once weve settled back into accepting that its the best way to live then we can talk about fixing the negatives

the scapegoat of da joos allows Sup Forums to maintain its view on capitalism as an infallible system

So basically

>Happiness

Most of pol wants to Audit/remove the Fed. Once that happens, all of the (((capitalism))) nonsense will stop.

What you describe as capitalism is actually socialism with make pretend free markets. This is how the Jews subvert and control everything via banking, they print unlimited money to push whatever agenda they choose.

Qe 1-4, helicopter money, bail outs and regulations. All 100% socialism, and 100% jew trickery. If you don't support full removal of central banking, by proxy and default you support war mongering for the economy.

There's no middle ground here

If it wasn't for that literally everything would be a DVD of Avatar covered in lard and frosting.