Its just da joos! If we got rid of them our system would work perfectly!

>its just da joos! If we got rid of them our system would work perfectly!
>its just the nignogs! If we got rid of them our system would work perfectly!
You're all a bunch of idealist classcucks.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=80X0pbCV_t4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

no one is saying id's be perfect you chimp.

it'd just be a lot better.

is that you, Donald? >.>

pic related:

>a meeting of an your average American Marxist-Leninist party

it's always the globalists

...

Societies where the goals of all parties are aligned are the strongest.

No one can argue with this.

Honestly, that picture could have been way worse. When I think of LARPing, I think of something like this.

>an archaeologist

Zizek is now an archaeologist to?

Wow, I'm voting for Hillary now

Yeah, global capitalism is evil. I agree, OP.

Who said anything about ML?

Globalism is the natural result of capitalism with modern technology.

spooky, m8.

As long as there is more than one class, there will always be divergent goals.

Pls don't. Voting will be futile in the upcoming election.

dude boffer swords are legit. you haven't lived until you've darth maul battled a bro.

>capitalism
>evil

>most successful countries in the world are capitalist
>the tool of the elites is socialism and communism, which are destroying western civilization
>oh, no, but it's capitalism that is evil

Thanks for buying into the meme. You're just helping the Jews further destroy your civilization.

>the elites (i.e., the ultra wealthy) are systematically spreading an economic system that plans on taking their wealth away

my god, it's pure ideology

wrong

capitalism allows the lower classes to reach their levels because the cost of entry into business and other areas and wealth are less.

They are rich, they try breaking that bridge so they remain in power.

Why do you think corporations support minimum wage increases and small businesses don't? Corporations will survive, and they will lose current and future competition.

Not to mention Socialism creates two classes - peasants and rules.

Also, let's ignore the fact that the elites have repeatedly, consistently, knowingly, and methodically tried to (or succeeded in) toppling literally any leftist country, revolution, movement, or organization in the history of the world.

>capitalist countries launch military coups and crackdowns against any legitimate leftist movement
>socialism will never work :DDDDDDD

Also,
>jews are a rich and powerful elite
>who advocate a movement that villanizes the rich and powerful
lol wut

>capitalism allows the lower classes to reach their levels because the cost of entry into business and other areas and wealth are less.
I hope you realize that isn't a coherent sentence. But regardless, not everyone can be middle or upper class. And who is and isn't is not decided on merit.

>Not to mention Socialism creates two classes - peasants and rules.
>What is market socialism/mutualism/syndicalism

Fuck off back to /leftypol/ you infectious roach.

How can socialism, an economic system predicated upon the elimination of private property, POSSIBLY benefit the people in the world who own the vast majority of private property?

Oh, wait, it can't.

wow rly makes u think

Because they own the largest industries and the strongest lobby groups in the government

No one from the middle class and lower can rise up because the excessive cost of entering and maintaining the business field.

It's just smoke and mirrors to solidify their power.

youtube.com/watch?v=80X0pbCV_t4
Is that Zizek?

What did I trigger you in your safe space?

retarded idealism, the post

>implying those in charge of the largest industries and the strongest lobbying groups wouldn't be the first to be gulaged.

>Getting rid of the people committing crimes is idealism
>Destroying the entire system and replacing it with a system proven to fail dozens of times over is logical

then tell me why it's the elites that are funding movements like Femen and BLM?

Why is it elites that are promoting socialism in the media? Why aren't they promoting capitalism?

You mean the people pushing socialism in the first place? They'll be given medals as heros of the revolution, and granted even more power as party officials

Reminder that Hitler was anti-capitalist.

Your unwashed Slovenian marxist idol certainly does. Leftism is an outdated concept.

because leftypol is retarded

Because Femen and BLM have nothing to do with SOCIALISM you dumb faggot.
Degeneracy is inherent to liberal capitalism.

>Because Femen and BLM have nothing to do with SOCIALISM you dumb faggot.

Well that's just wrong. Their main sponsor is this communist shitbag

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

>the reason people commit crimes is because of muh genetic and not the material conditions
>we can't improve on the system we have, this is the best we can do

Femen and BLM are liberal organizations, not leftist. Just look at the BLM candidate in baltimore.

They are promoting capitalism, BLM and FEMEN are controlled opposition, the rest of their resources goes to deregulation or whatever their current project is.

>Degeneracy is inherent to buying and selling things that people want

yeah, ok. Capitalism is a completely neutral ideology. If you demand conservative media, you get conservative media, like we had for a very long time in hollywood.

If your culture is weak and demand for degeneracy is there, supply goes to demand.

Socialism is not only an economic way of thinking, but a social policy, being FORCED EQUALITY.

>>the reason people commit crimes is because of muh genetic and not the material conditions
Blacks raised in upper class trapping still commit crime at a rate 3-5x that of their peers
>>we can't improve on the system we have, this is the best we can do
>A system proved wrong a dozen times over in less than 100 years is better than a system currently working that has worked for several hundred years

>Soros
>man who made wealth on speculation
>communist
Holy fuck your post hurt me, physically.
>blablabla
You sound exactly like communists you dumb idiot.
Capitalism is a broad term. I'm talking specifically about liberal capitalism.

Is this what actual socialists really believe?

>don't worry guys we'll take all the capital and redistribute fairly trust me
What actually happens in practice is that the government owns and controls all the capital and everyone else is poor.

>literally funded Robery Mugabe, a well known communist
>BUT HIS DAY JOB IS STEALING MONEY THAT MEANS HE CANT BE A COMMUNIST

Again, socialism is smoke and mirrors for the elite to solidify control over the economy and social policy.

>liberal capitalism
thanks for proving my point that capitalism is neutral and based on culture.

Supply meets demand, faggot.

We better kill all of the kikes and niggers just to make sure. Real capitalism has never been tried.

That is the worst aspect of socialism no one wants to acknowledge

>yeah, just give me all your resources, we'll make sure it's equal *wink*

Humans operate on natural hierarchy. Equality must always be forced in socialism.

When you "destroy class" and make everyone "equal", you just create one class of people, and then you create the people that enforce this equality, aka rules and peasants.

"blank slate" equality is a myth.

Some people deserve to amass great wealth, while others (like you, OP) were born to be ruled like the proles you are.

This is the beauty of capitalism. Although corporatist fascism would probably be better.

>>its just the bourgeoisie! If we got rid of them our system would work perfectly!

*rulers and peasants

That doesn't mean shit except that he's an awful man, though I don't know if it's true. Still, I assure you, he didn't do it out of commie ideals.
We are talking about social issues. In this case demand is created easily by propaganda.
>based on culture
Okay, show me a country where liberal capitalism didn't lead to decadence. Exclude peculiar cases like Singapore.

>George Soros
LMAO. The guy's a liberal dumbass.

>capitalism is buying and selling what people want
What you just described is distribution of goods and services via a market. Capitalism is a mode of production based around people privately owning the means of production and wage labor.

>literally what is the superstructure
You may be correct, and its the material conditions which caused those rate differences thanks to their influence on the culture of different groups.

>>A system proved wrong a dozen times over in less than 100 years is better than a system currently working that has worked for several hundred years
>What is the great depression?
>what is the 2008 crash?
>what is ever single market crash and bank run?
>what is stagflation?
Even communism as you concieve of it improved living conditions in places like China and Russia far better than capitalism in Africa and South America.

how can I?

Capitalism is a neutral ideology where a seller meets buyer demand. That is it.

If the culture of the nation is conservative, most demand will be for conservative things.

Where is the evil capitalism wizard that FORCES conservatives to buy liberal media?

If a country is a liberal shithole, they will have greater demand for liberal things.

global capitalism was adopted because countries kept experimenting with not having capitalism and it wasn't working

>how can i?
Exactly. Because there are none.

>Capitalism is neutral
Give me a break. Capitalism is a system that has been ideological from the start, when it was overthrowing feudalism with the promise of equality, liberty, and fraternity. Capitalism always makes promises, one's it can't keep, so it has to rely on ideology to pick up the slack to keep people happy.

Make all firms owned by their workers. Bam. socialism achieved.

What is your argument?

Look at 50s America. Capitalism was rampant, yet so were conservative values. Kitchen and household products were marketed to women exclusively, and ads constantly showed white families with children.

Companies would be afraid to promote liberal ideas because conservative ideas are what were popular.

Where is this liberal capitalism wizard?

More like countries experimented with not having capitalism and the capitalists threw a hissy fit.

>What is the former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, etc.

>Still, I assure you, he didn't do it out of commie ideals.
>A jew born in Hungary, raised in Britain by communists can't possibly be a communist
>>LMAO. The guy's a liberal dumbass.
>Literally funded dozens of communist organizations
>Not communist

>>What is the great depression?
>>what is the 2008 crash?
>>what is ever single market crash and bank run?
>>what is stagflation?
Market variation, it happens everywhere all the time and can't be stopped by making the government the owner of all the property.

>>Even communism as you concieve of it improved living conditions in places like China and Russia far better than capitalism in Africa and South America.
You mean like capitalist South Africa having living standards comparable to Australia until they let the niggers take over? Or Rhodesida going from better than Argentina, to fucking Zimbabwe after the communists and niggers took over? Or how about China rapidly industrializing in the 80s when the markets were relaxed, tripling the life expectancy within the same timescale?

The closest thing to a success story communism has is Cuba, and that's barely even applicable since it was funded by Russia for 90% of it's life, and now relies on capitalists taking holidays to prop up it's failing economy

>capitalism
>equality

hohohoho

You earn your equality in capitalism. Just because you breath, you don't deserve. It's literally evolution.

>Make all firms owned by their workers.
Oh yeah because that is totally plausible.

What if the workers decide they don't want to own their capital and give it away? What happens in your utopia?

>look at this point in the past
Liberal capitalism evolved into neoliberalism/neoconservatism. It's a globalist ideology.
Which, as you can see, created shit.
>b-but demand!
Who cares you idiot? If it objectively harms society, why the fuck should you support it? Because it's good on paper?
Communism is even better on paper.

shitholes that went from socialism and communism to capitalism and are now increasing in wealth and standard of living?

China especially. Look at Hong Kong. Chinese districts that are made to experiment with capitalism are wildly successful.

except it worked in nazi germany before global capitalist jews fucked them up with goyim fodder

More money doesn't necessarily mean good direction.
This is why it's hard to discuss with Americans. Money is your God. More profit is automatically good, even if it causes chaos 20 years later.

>Liberal capitalism evolved into neoliberalism/neoconservatism.

you aren't even making an argument. you're just saying that somehow an evil liberal capitalist wizard changes conservative demand into liberal demand.

Where is this liberal capitalist wizard?

>Some people deserve to amass great wealth, while others (like you, OP) were born to be ruled like the proles you are.
I'm doing pretty well for myself, going to a great college and building contacts. I just don't like the inefficiency, corruption and stupidity associated with capitalism.

>corporate facism
so just capitalism but more idealism and tyranny?

Who said anything about equality? Unless there is post scarcity, there should be inequality, just not inequality for the sake of inequality.

If the bourgiosie didn't exist it'd mean the mode of production would have changed, which means a fundamental change in the system. The change in the system creates the lack of bourg, not the other way around tho.

yeah people tend to throw hissy fits when they can't own and sell capital

retard, I bet you'd love to be kicked off the land you live on or be forced to live with 2 other strangers against your will

>More money doesn't necessarily mean good direction.
>More profit is automatically good

Gosh, I'm so free living paycheck to paycheck in my ramshackle house. I can truly enjoy culture instead of just focusing on not dying.

The vacuums they leave wouldnt disappear but it would allow a restructuring to prevent the same abuses they commit with media and finance or at least allow whites to occupy them so the genocide would stop

It's made up of your elite.
Let me give you one example.
Free trade is good for big business.
Free trade requires open borders.
Open borders mean immigration.
Immigration means foreign cultures and cheap work force.
Nationalism prevents enroachment of foreign cultures.
Nationalism is rooted in traditionalism, family, religion, history, identity, civic virtue.
So nationalism has to go away, and by attacking things it stems from.

Exaggeration.

>Market variation, it happens everywhere all the time and can't be stopped by making the government the owner of all the property.
So you're admitting instability is an inherent part of capitalism? great! And regardless, I advocate for market socialism which has firms not controlled by the government but the workers who work at them, like co-ops.

>Market variation, it happens everywhere all the time and can't be stopped by making the government the owner of all the property.

>You mean like capitalist South Africa having living standards comparable to Australia until they let the niggers take over? Or Rhodesida going from better than Argentina, to fucking Zimbabwe after the communists and niggers took over?
South africa's economy boomed right after Aparthied ended, and incompetence can happen to any country's government.

>Or how about China rapidly industrializing in the 80s when the markets were relaxed, tripling the life expectancy within the same timescale?
Socialism is only possible after capitalism, China needed to throw off emperialism and go throw state capitalism to do that.

It dosen't quite work like that though, the cheap labour is offset by the increase in security costs and decrease in productivity.

Go watch Empire of Dust. It explains why the Chinese are going to the expense of importing workers from China instead of using the local negros. The nigs steal everything. They steal diesel, truck parts, fucking gravel. They also break things, constantly. In China they replace teh trucks every 5 years, in Africa, with black drivers, it's every 2 because the trucks are driven so poorly and with so little care. So instead of buying a new $100,000 truck every 2 years with a $10,000 per year African, they pay a chinaman $25,000 a year to drive it

>retard, I bet you'd love to be kicked off the land you live on or be forced to live with 2 other strangers against your will
Happens all the time in capitalism.

>So you're admitting instability is an inherent part of capitalism?
No, instability is an inherent fact of life. Price fixing and market controls just inflate prices and cause the poorest to starve.

>South africa's economy boomed right after Aparthied ended
And has since crashed to such a degree it's not even funny. Their biggest industry is security, which is the mulattoes and whites shooting the niggers that try and get into the few functioning areas.

>Socialism is only possible after capitalism, China needed to throw off emperialism and go throw state capitalism to do that.
So you're admitting that socialism is unsustainable and you need capitialism to create a sitiuation where it might work just a little? The end product of socialism is Cuba, a decrepit shithole desperately holding onto it's ideals long after it's become apparent it's not possible to sustain it anymore

So how do you explain immigration to Europe and America?
You're just using an extreme example.
It works exactly as I said it does, only details differ.
But end game of neoliberalism is: no nations, no religion, no cultures, no identities, at least no real ones.
Only endless pursuit of profit, a dehumanized monster. This system will of course collapse, but I'm eager to see it collapse before more damage is done.
Do you want entire world to be like America? Think carefully what you support.

Capitalism
>Hey buddy, we want to build a freeway where your house is. We'll give you market value for it

Socialism
>Comrade congratulations! You have been selected to move to housing project #412, you have 48 hours to leave the area before the military police bulldoze your house and anyone left inside

>So how do you explain immigration to Europe and America?
Retarded leaders that haven't seen the long term effects of "multiculturalism", or in the case of my country, the leaders are deliberately trying to replace the natives to create a welfare addicted underclass so they can remain in power forever
>But end game of neoliberalism is: no nations, no religion, no cultures, no identities, at least no real ones.
I agree, neoliberalism is just communism in blue trappings
>Do you want entire world to be like America?
America in the 50s. I wish I was American, every single day.

Its the Communists

>No, instability is an inherent fact of life. Price fixing and market controls just inflate prices and cause the poorest to starve
Like I said, i'm a market socialist. Lower inequality thanks to co-ops and non-profit financial institutions will make the median worker richer as well as the poorest and create less instability thanks to the way the rich spend and invest their money vs normal people.

>And has since crashed to such a degree it's not even funny. Their biggest industry is security, which is the mulattoes and whites shooting the niggers that try and get into the few functioning areas.
But that doesn't correlate only with muh niggers being in charge.

>So you're admitting that socialism is unsustainable and you need capitialism to create a sitiuation where it might work just a little? The end product of socialism is Cuba, a decrepit shithole desperately holding onto it's ideals long after it's become apparent it's not possible to sustain it anymore
Literally read any marxist theory. Socialism has always been the next economic stage after capitalism.
The end product of socialism is Rojava, a democratic and closely-knit community with plenty of co-ops and self-employment which uses use based property laws.

...

>America in 50's
Not sustainable.

I had the same thought.

I was expecting a sniff or two out of Slavoj's collapsed cocaine laced nasal.

>Hey buddy, we want to build a freeway where your house is. We'll give you market value for it
>Literally what are foreclosures?
>Literally what is the demolition of shantytowns?

...

>ower inequality thanks to co-ops and non-profit financial institutions will make the median worker richer as well as the poorest and create less instability thanks to the way the rich spend and invest their money vs normal people.
That sounds an awful lot like socialism mate. Who says the rich aren't investing their money the best way possible? Why is the uneducated worker better than the man that set everything up in the first place? People aren't equal, and making them equal is the worst form of inequality.
>But that doesn't correlate only with muh niggers being in charge.
No more international sanctions, foreign aid out the ass, forgein investment and know how, yet the economy is still tanking. It's either down to niggers being dumb, or South Africa being cursed by Cecil Rhodes for making the negroes equal
>Literally read any marxist theory. Socialism has always been the next economic stage after capitalism.
You mean the theories championed by a man who never worked a day in his life, and has indirectly caused hundreds of millions of deaths?

>>Literally what are foreclosures?
Idiots buying things they can't afford.
>>Literally what is the demolition of shantytowns?
The removal of illegal settlements on land owned by someone other than the occupiers.

I'm well aware of that, but it was objectively the best time in history for a straight while male

...

>Oh yeah because that is totally plausible.
...it is.

>What if the workers decide they don't want to own their capital and give it away?
They'd have to quite their jobs.

>hat happens in your utopia?
It's not a utopia, it's just another mode of production.

>...it is.
Who fronts the capital to start the business? If ti's the workers, where do they get it?
>They'd have to quite [sic] their jobs.
People have no choice in the form of employment they take? Sounds like communism again there.
>It's not a utopia, it's just another mode of production.
an infeasible and unsustainable one

>...it is.
How?

>They'd have to quite their jobs.
Workers cannot voluntarily choose to work for a capitalist in your utopia? Sounding a bit like the USSR over here.

>It's not a utopia, it's just another mode of production.
Socialism and communism has been a disaster wherever its been tried. So called "good" forms of it are all unfeasible.

>It's just another mode of production which is way way better for society
>It only requires each person in society to remove all selfish thoughts and comply with the needs of the greater community
>Otherwise it will not work
Yeah. Not utopic in the slightest. It's dystopian.

>That sounds an awful lot like socialism mate. Who says the rich aren't investing their money the best way possible?
It's not the quality of their investments, its the fact that they are investing instead of spending. Workers spend most of their income, capitalists invest it, which they expect to get back, money they get back through the workers buying their products. Let's say that when a firm sells a product, 10% goes to the worker and 10% goes to the capitalist and the rest goes to sunk costs. The capitalist will reinvest most of their money while the worker will spend theirs, giving 10% to other workers and 10% to capitalists. Eventually this means the capitalist will be getting most of new wealth created, like they are now. This causes instability when wages flatline, credit use increases, ect.

>That sounds an awful lot like socialism mate. Who says the rich aren't investing their money the best way possible?
They aren't. They will probably be just about as effective. Studies show that co-ops last about as long and are just about as successful as capitalist businesses. Difference is, co-op management is cheaper, so the money goes back into wages, r&d, or lower prices.


>It's either down to niggers being dumb, or South Africa being cursed by Cecil Rhodes for making the negroes equal
Or the material conditions of the country and its political economy putting incompetent people in charge.

>You mean the theories championed by a man who never worked a day in his life, and has indirectly caused hundreds of millions of deaths?
Most economists haven't worked a day in their life, and the death count of capitalism is just about as high as "communism"

>Idiots buying things they can't afford.
With money given to them by idiots who knew they couldn't.

>The removal of illegal settlements on land owned by someone other than the occupiers.
The removal of homes made by their owners on public land.

>that plans on taking their wealth away
'cause as we all know the elites in Soviet Russia were dirt poor

>The removal of illegal settlements on land owned by someone other than the occupiers.
A bank or credit union, like capitalists do now. Preferably a non-profit bank.

>People have no choice in the form of employment they take? Sounds like communism again there.
People can choose between co-ops, self employment, working for a non-profit, or working for the government, that's plenty of choice, only one less than currently. And since there is still a market, it'd be dubious to call it communism.

>an infeasible and unsustainable one
how so?

>How?
A government mandate, a change in property laws.

>Workers cannot voluntarily choose to work for a capitalist in your utopia? Sounding a bit like the USSR over here.
Can you voluntarily, legally, give your money to a ponzi scheme?

>It only requires each person in society to remove all selfish thoughts and comply with the needs of the greater community
...no it doesn't. Where did you get that impression? People will still work in their own self interest, but there self interest will no longer be in as much conflict with the community at large.

>A government mandate, a change in property laws.
So the government just passes a law to change ownership of capital into the hands of workers and everything will magically work out?

>Can you voluntarily, legally, give your money to a ponzi scheme?
You're dodging the question. A ponzi scheme involves fraud. Again, can workers choose to work for a capitalist in your socialist dream society? Why or why not?

>It's not the quality of their investments etc
So they should be spending their money instead of investing, skipping straight to the end product of stagnant wages and unemployment?
>They aren't. etc
Most co-op are run by hippes, and collapse the second anyone doesn't tow the party line. The wonderful thing about business is that there's a man at the top calling the shots, so shit gets done, instead of a dozen dirty hippies arguing over what colour to pain the van
>Or the material conditions of the country and its political economy putting incompetent people in charge.
South Africa is one of the most mineral rich areas on the planet, and the policital system was set up by niggers. So either the niggers are incompetent, or the niggers are stupid AND incompetent.
>Most economists haven't worked a day in their life, and the death count of capitalism is just about as high as "communism"
Capitalists haven't deliberately caused mass starvation and genocide to show how loyal to the party they are.
>With money given to them by idiots who knew they couldn't.
Banked forced to by liberal policies, largely enacted under Bill Clinton to allow "lower income" (black) families to finance significantly more than they should be able to
>The removal of homes made by their owners on public land.
Public land is for everyone's use. When you build a shack on it, you're removing that land from communal use.

>A bank or credit union, like capitalists do now. Preferably a non-profit bank.
Where do they get the money? A non-profit bank cannot possibly have the money on hand to lend
>People can choose between co-ops, self employment, working for a non-profit, or working for the government
They can't choose to work for a private enterprise though, co-ops are run by party officials, and are essentially another arm of the state, self employment would be quickly stamped out as without private enterprise it cannot grow beyond one man, non profit is essentially slavery

>And since there is still a market, it'd be dubious to call it communism.
The market still exists under communism, it's just controlled by the state, as you are proposing.
>how so?
It requires everyone to be happy with everything all the time, be 100% supportive of the state and the mass fabrication of wealth from thin air to allow all the non-proifit and state enterprises to function
>A government mandate, a change in property laws.
So communism
>Can you voluntarily, legally, give your money to a ponzi scheme?
Yes, but you'll likely get it back as it's a dishonest scheme that deliberately obscures the true structure to appear as if it's something good, much like communism
>People will still work in their own self interest, but there self interest will no longer be in as much conflict with the community at large.
Unless you want to expand your business, or work for someone else, or would prefer to buy your bread brand bread from someone other than the government sponsored co-op

More specifically

>If American interests were put before Israeli-Jewish interests, our country would be a lot better off
>If niggers were shipped back to Africa and a culturally and racially unified country could be reestablished, crime rates would go down and society would be better off