What is it that attracts spoiled, upper class teenyboppers to anarchism/communism...

What is it that attracts spoiled, upper class teenyboppers to anarchism/communism? Don't they know that their parents who pay for their existence would the first ones to have their possessions confiscated and wealth redistributed?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=uuvUy9e2tvs
youtube.com/watch?v=s6zO-qhQx_8
youtube.com/watch?v=xqXAW2snGMI
youtube.com/watch?v=S-O7FowQssk
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

SHART

It's a rebellious instinct in teenagers. It's even worse, most of them don't even follow real communism, they follow social liberalism and the whole "kill all fascists/racists XD" mentality only

And it gets worse. These ideas are being normalized by capitalists, distracting us using idpol or some stupid shit

t.commie

Also, guy in the OP kinda knows his shit compared to the rest, but is so far in idpol that he can't be saved

>Everything in their lives handed to them
>Desperately want a struggle to identify with because they can't identify with any real strife

It's what they're taught and exposed to in public schools in white suburbs with low crime rates and what's on the mainstream media. It's very aggressive in the public schools, even more so now than ever before with all the gender degenerate shit a lot of them are caving to and indoctrinating students with.

Then you go to an inner city, with shitty schools and black kids and you get this. Very different atmospheres.
youtube.com/watch?v=uuvUy9e2tvs

>it's whats taught in public schools
aside from colleges, no, no it's not


Social media has grown prevalent with youths, and they get exposed to meme communism and meme anarchism a lot more now

Because if you see how the upper class live and then how the lower class live you kinda feel like our current system is fucked up.

We are in a unique position to understand that our quality of life so far exceeds theirs with no connection to OUR effort that your mind must try to find some sort of justification.

I cannot simply say that he lives in a studio apartment with 9 family members while I live in a 3000 square foot home with just my two parents because I am a noble man and he is a peasant.We are past such convenient class systems. We are taught since birth that we are all equal in station. So then how can you justify such inequality of life?

So you have 3 options:

1. never think about it or politiics or anything.
This option is chosen by 90% of people.

2. Decide that your parents MUST have acquired their current excessive wealth from their own efforts and exceptionalism; which justifies the current inequality. Despite the fact that all proof of such deeds happened before your birth.

3.Decide the current system (capitalism) is unethical because the efforts of your parents MUST NOT have been so incredibly superior to those of the less affluent as to justify the current inequality. Despite the fact that all proof of such deeds happened prior to your birth.

You wouldnt be asking this if you werent a low class peasant. Its instantly apparent to anyone who grew up among those people.

This. I went to public school in NY state of all places and our mandatory half-year econ class was literally nothing but a capitalism propaganda shitfest. We had to read a book on how rich people are rich because they're frugal! and do activities like compete to see who could staple the most amount of paper loops together into a chain in one minute to show us le harder good-goy worker gets paid more!

Then my participation in government teacher was a total fucking neo-con. I distinctly remember him argueing that it's ok to make laws against people being being nude in their own house if their window is open because 'muh children could see and it would scar them'. Also, he unironically defended special intrest groups and lobbyists. It's whatever but my point is, he was a republican muppet.

I know my experience might be unusual but truth is, even in college my professors were largely pretty conservative. Admittedly my sociology professor half-defended Marxism but I had an anthropology/geography professor who gave us a 'global warming is basically bullshit' lecture and my local and state government professor was right-biased as fuck. She went on a rant and encouraged the whole ' people on welfare are mainly leeches and should be drug tested' argument. My philosophy professor was a catholicuck who spent literally half the semester blowing smoke up Aquinas' and Plato's ads, while we basically read a paragraph of Hume, Nietzsche, and Schopenhauer and the like each before blowing on past. This was a SUNY school too btw.

That shit communists have stolen the "libertarian" word for them. Libertarian means the exactly opposite of communism.

It is about liberty and minimum possible state intervation. God damn it.

Read a book

>libertarian
>socialism
how the fuck would that even work

You know 9/10 Stefan Molyneux is right.

Look at their backgrounds, their history, in their videos they sometime slip in bits of their past that give away why they think the way they do. Hell look at the "how did you become a socialist/communist" pages on reddit same shit.

They're always talking about being raised by single mothers with nothing and their divorced father remarries and earns good money so they blame capitalism for daddy never being there or for why he's having a good life while they aren't.

Then you've got those ones that grow up with successful parents but still try to be rebellious and even blame their own psychological problems caused by their parents on Capitalism.

Contrast that with Libertarians, frequently they get triggered into politics from government meddling in their lives or the lives of people they know. Or when they get a job/start a business and realize how hard the government makes it.

Very interesting how much the origin stories set people in stone with their beliefs, there aren't many Thomas Sowell's around that go from hardcore Marxist to Classically Liberal on evidence.

youtube.com/watch?v=s6zO-qhQx_8

>that one civics teacher who was actually good at remaining neutral and would EFFECTIVELY argue on both sides of the issue.
>never figured out his political positions
He inspired me to become politically engaged. Thanks professor Eliazer you Jewish mother fucker.

>that history professor who would invite small children to debate her so she could show how superior her unique brand of smug liberalism was
Everyone hated you, you smug bitch

>that one red pilled history professor who is the most woke person you have ever met.
I still read all your books. Look up mickey huff motherfuckers. He is based as all hell.

You should read a book.

Have you ever read anything about Mises? It's basic. Really.

The communists stole the libertarian word for them.

Brazilians interpret it in a completly different way, it is the way that should be interpreted.

a misunderstanding of how life works while being treated unfairly in some areas of life and possibly being treated very well in other areas

Socialism means "workers in control of the means of production." not "muh big gubermand"

>love live and memearchy
He got BTFO'd on leftpol, you shoulda seen it

>The communists stole the libertarian word for them

The term "libertarian socialism" was first used in the 1860's by Joseph Pierre Trudeau, after fearing persecution by using the word "anarchy"

It's a mixture of both. Should be interchangeable and functionable.

He's not upper class

In any case it doesn't matter. Marx, Engels, Kropotkin etc all came from decently comfortable backgrounds but firmly believed in communism. It's about which class you fight for. There are workers that side wrongly with capitalists too.

> That meme
hahahahaha holy shit.

> Thanks comrade I'll fix your car later
bull...shit
> Want to work for me?
> Do I have a choice?
Muh work or starve fallacy, nature is exploiting me
> Dude want to join our football team, we have the best coach in the league
> COACH?! That's a fucking hierarchy you bourgeoisie!

Actually the word Libertarian was used to refer to libertarian socalism before starting being used to refer to libertarian capitalism.

What's the difference between libertarian and liberalism?

This
What retards today call Libertarianism is just Laissez faire Capitalism and the unrealistic idea that if government stayed out of social issues they would go away.

more like you are a nimrod who doesn't understand the first thing about capitalism and k

a syllable.

Ok, I read the meme, I read Rothbard, but never saw that quote. It is really interesting.

So, what do you think about the Mises/Rothbard/Friedman?

Maybe some of you are young of course, but my parents are late baby boomers and my dad especially has the entitled boomer attitude. They had it made because they lived under a post-war economic bubble where you literally get a fucking two years degree and walk into fat union job and pension anywhere if you just give the boss a firm handshake and determined glare during the interview. All of America's competition was developing or otherwise reeling from the war while we were living it easy. These pampered faggots think they are responsible for it and their hard work got them where they're at and have the gull or naivety to tell us we should expect the same thing in significantly worse economic environment. Meanwhile they've done everything in their power over the last few decades of being in social and political power to make everything worse. Piss away our treasury on every worthless war they can find (ok they did oppose Vietnam to an extent they can have a cookie for that). They fell for the (((reaganomics))) meme. They flat-lined lower and middle class income growth. They began this hideous anti-teacher, anti-school movement and gutted education.

tl;dr: boomers really are spoiled entitled faglords, their parents are essentially responsible for their success and they're basically a bunch of shit.

Two syllables

Lib-er-tar-I-an-is-m
Lib-er-al-is-m

Ism has two syllables

Most of the problem are created by the state. It is obvious.

Spain is bascially charging people for using the sun to produce energy. For example

Autism. I'm not even memeing right now. Every anarchist or commie I know is on the spectrum

Why is it that in the an-commie part, the person is represented as willing to help and in the an-cap he is not? Anarcho-communists always dodge how they enforce their system if someone does not want to comply.

Being an anarcho-commie is one really easy way to make yourself a super special snowflake. It's also retarded though.

How is that different from being charged by an electric company for using their power? Paying taxes is less than out of pocket prices and all government "profit" should be redistributed to the poor.

>Anarcho-communists always dodge how they enforce their system if someone does not want to comply
>implying the same thing doesn't apply to ancaps
Anarchism is just retarded lad.

When will the "libertarian socialism is an oxymoron" meme die? It was used first, and it was taken away by anti statist capitalists.

>bull...shit
Mind explaining?

>Muh work or starve fallacy, nature is exploiting me

This is literally how Ancaps think. If you don't know this fact, then you haven't spent time around them. Also, I don't get what's so wrong with helping you fellow neighbors.

I remember you, comrade. Do you go to /leftypol/?

>liberalism
>a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.

>libertarianism
>an extreme laissez-faire political philosophy advocating only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens.


>So, what do you think about the Mises/Rothbard/Friedman?

To be honest, I don't really know much about them. Sure, I know the ideas they advocated for and their accomplishments, but still, not really

>Anarcho-communists always dodge how they enforce their system if someone does not want to comply.

Through a militia. I don't really know anything else. I'm not really an ancom.

Holy shit, just read your other meme, we found another third world communist.

That's why you are so dodge and a memelord, you are a fucking communist.

>only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens.

So, just like conservative republicanism?

These are people who play mainstream video games, they play garbage like Fallout and think "LOL DUDE ANARCHY IS SO COOL LMAO", or they'll play the WW2 CoD games and when they're in the Russian perspective missions they think "LOL COMMUNISM IS SO COOL DUDE LOL COMRADE DUDE LMAO".

What is it that attracts spoiled, upper class teenyboppers to libertarianism/fascism? Don't they know that their parents who pay for their existence would the first ones to be sent to the gas chambers?

How does Anarcho-Communism even work?
>The State controls too much, the people are oppressed!
>The State controls too little, the people are oppressed!

aka:
>Mom and Dad told me I have to work hard in life. Fuck the system, and fuck my parents, I want someone else to spoon feed, only then will I be independent!

>Holy shit, just read your other meme, we found another third world communist.

When did it imply that? I'm not third worldist

>So, just like conservative republicanism?

No, not at all

I do go on /leftypol/ sometimes but I'm not a communist. Who do you think I am?

So what's the difference?

Boom. Fucking /thread

> Mind explaining?
> This is literally how Ancaps think. If you don't know this fact, then you haven't spent time around them. Also, I don't get what's so wrong with helping you fellow neighbors.

It's bullshit because in one side they're making an assumption on human behavior or how people will act rather than focusing on the structure of the ideologies themselves.

They put a utopia on the left side where people just help each other and there are no disagreements or slackers, whereas the right side the person can either work for this person or starve, without any other context on the society, the options available and the fact that human existence is responsible for the need to seek sustenance.

One side uses the example of fixing each others property and the other one shows someone apparently starving, so why the fuck would they compare apples to oranges as far as scenarios?

There's nothing wrong with voluntarily helping people, I'm an Ancap, we go on about voluntarism all the time, but Ancoms attribute someone offering an opportunity in a world of scarcity as coercion when it's in fact "nature" doing the coercing.

The whole meme is just pants on head retarded compared to the originals.

Meant to (You) this post

Why should it be redistributed to the poor if they created nothing?

Welfare state destroys any society, it does not promote hard working. It creates a cattle that votes to whichever person is giving more welfare.

Brazil is a the single biggest example of this. We are charged 50% of taxes and everyone lives in poverty, any country that has chosen a libertarian (free market capistalism, not the leftist shit) has evolved as a country really fast.

Singapure is the most obvious example.

The state is corrupt and the money will never get to the right pockets. It is inneficient.

The countries that have the greatest equality are also the poorest. Just check the Gini coefficient.

USA is great because it has grown in a free market capitalism.

>anarchism is bad
spotted the cuck

youtube.com/watch?v=xqXAW2snGMI

youtube.com/watch?v=S-O7FowQssk

>Mexico
>Not third World.

Oh, come on, you can do better.

Brazil is a shit hole too, but I admit it.

Hmm well i think a pretty close thing to workers in charge of production would be a corportation, specifically a worker owned corporation, which i know exists in free market capitalism, so what is the different of that and your socialism?

>thinking inequality is bad
>thinking any other political/economic system makes inequality better
your problems are with human nature and possibly crony capitalism, not capitalism

Name the country in the list of the top 10 strongest countries on Earth which is anarchist/libertarian.

>gutted education

Are you retarded? We pay more per student than any country in the world with jack shit to show for it.

Because you are paying the government more than you would pay the electric company. Because soar power costs more. They are forcing you to spend more than you would neet to otherwise in a free system.

They were born into having things and never want to not have those things, but also dont want to actually have to earn them or work for those things.

so you enjoy being a little cuck boy as long as you can live vicariously.
Israel thanks you for this.

Oh sorry. I thought that you were the one who started the "liberals are not leftists' thread a few weeks back. You had the same flag

In what way is American conservatism "libertarian"? Most conservatives are socially restrictive.

>It's bullshit because in one side they're making an assumption on human behavior or how people will act rather than focusing on the structure of the ideologies themselves.

>They put a utopia on the left side where people just help each other and there are no disagreements or slackers, whereas the right side the person can either work for this person or starve, without any other context on the society, the options available and the fact that human existence is responsible for the need to seek sustenance.

Humans aren't inherently evil or selfish enough to not help others. It has been proven time and time again. In the Soviet Union, even if it was a shithole, men and women alike loved doing their job. They felt like they were achieving the greater good, instead of just support some greedy assface. USSR nostalgia exists for a reason, y'know

> but Ancoms attribute someone offering an opportunity in a world of scarcity as coercion

In an Ancom society, if a man wouldn't or couldn't get a job, what would happen? And if the workplace conditions were hellish? It's like if I went to the desert, and I offered a dying man a million dollars for a drink.

CEO's would still exist in free market capitalism. And they would have monopolies, thus letting worker controlled factories not stand a chance

Just because I live in the third world, does not mean I am a third worldist. That's an actual philosophy.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the terms here. I thought the whole point of the constitution is restricting government power. The way you described libertarianism as limited government sounded a lot like republicanism to me

Hey, if little-to-no government is to your liking, you're free to move to Somalia.

>b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b--b-b--b-b-b-b-b-but NIGGERS!!!!!
There's no-one there to stop you from making Somalia an Aryan nation.

It's like every anarchist and commie never lived it. Every pseudo anarchist i knew in college was some overweight intellectual that wouldn't have lasted a week in anarchy. they would've had a tire pushed over them and been raped to death by the first night.

Poverty without oversight or welfare or charity is about as close to anarchy as you can get and it's hell, son.

That's because we have a higher GDP. The amount we spend on education as a percentage of our own GDP was slashed under Reagan and Bush and has altogether stagnated inbetween and since.

The founding fathers were liberals with libertarian tendencies. That's all. They are way different then the neo cons of today.

Somalia has a bunch of governing forces. It isn't libertarian.

I'm living it right now senpai

It's effectively libertarian because it's a shithole.

Who told you that in Soviet Union was like that?

That is nothing but communist propaganda.

What about Ukraine?
And Chernobyl incident?
China? North Korea?
Mafia?

By the way, population feelings doesn't prove nothing.

It is a shit system, it has been proved time and time again. By counteless countries with countless people dead by the hands of the system.

Communism, socialism, welfare are parts of the same shit.

And yeah, don't live in denial, Mexico is a industrialized underveloped country, just like Brazil. It is third world.

> Humans aren't inherently evil or selfish enough to not help others.

Of course people can choose to help others, that's what I said about voluntarism. There's all the difference though making a meme comparing a utopian scenario with a dystopian scenario without context or consistency, at least the original meme had consistency.

> It's like if I went to the desert, and I offered a dying man a million dollars for a drink.

No it's not. We live in an age where there are multiple ways to get what you want, multiple opportunities and multiple sources. It isn't the same as a person guarding an oasis in the desert, but even so Ancoms recognize that people require the ability to own the fruits of their labour and their possessions or else human survival wouldn't be possible, yet they ignore when someone's labour is direct at land, houses, or business'.

If there's one thing Libertarians have shown is that they value consistency, which is why they attack each other more than anyone else, I don't see the same rigor with Ancoms, they take an emotional stance on 1 or 2 issues and then try to build a framework around that, continually lumping on mud to fill in the gaps, it doesn't hold up.

what the fuck is wrong with his skin?

does he do meth?

because either their lives are devoid of meaning and want to find something to fight against or they are uncultured people who didn't knew anything about any other political stances or had no knowledge of it's effects in the past

I was like them. It's pretty fucked. I bought into it because I liked the world view that came with socialism/communism. A belief that we can all be literally equal and there's no room for hate or anything of the sort. It wasn't until this election that I honestly considered that living life as if the world wasn't so fucked is actually a bad fucking idea

Now I'm trying to catch up on lost time by learning history, studying politics, and being caught up on current affairs. I actually just dropped the $133 required for The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon. Full version of course, not the abridged.

if workers were really better at controlling the means of production, they would outcompete "greedy CEOs", oh wait a hierarchal structure is more efficient

People inherently believe in fairness. They clearly dont follow this belief at all, but they still hold it sacred.

So yeah if human nature exists within capitalism then I have a problem with capitalism.

>Belief in total freedom
>Belief in no freedom
>These kids believe in both

Like how? Anarcho-communism doesn't work on a logic standpoint. How can you be for freedom but against it at the same time?

>be teen/very young adult
>get acne

>Communism starts where Atheism begins.
>Link between atheism and autism
Did we just solve the puzzle?

I am an Anarcho-Fascist :^)

the system does not work when their is partiality and lack of justice

when you can sit on your ass and survive because hard working productive people are coerced to pay for a welfare junkie, it becomes a vicious cycle because they question why they are working at all with this double standard

fundamentally it is the transgression of force which makes an unfair system, and when people aren't playing by the rules the whole system turns into chaos, that is the state creates a figurative 'anarchy'

>we can fight human nature and win
>my subjective view of fairness is the same ias everyone elses
>my subjective view of fainrness should be mandated upon everyone even if they dont feel the same
>this whole time i could have been joining a commune instead of trying to convince everyone else that my subjective view of fairness is the right way and should be enforced
>i know my subjective view is correct and other peoples is not because i am smarter than other people especially those who disagree with me

congrats stalin you figured out what none of these other #sheep could see youre so intellectual please make your views the rule of law only you can perfectly engineer society

why do you talk out of your asshole? Look at non-nigger libertarian-esque nations, they are all richer and more successful than your wildest dreams

>Who told you that in Soviet Union was like that?

>That is nothing but communist propaganda.


I see elders carry around pictures of Lenin and Stalin around. I've watched interviews. Sure, it was a shithole, but maybe we could learn from them in some ways.

>And yeah, don't live in denial, Mexico is a industrialized underveloped country, just like Brazil. It is third world.

Never said it wasn't. I'm just not a third worldist.

Again, huge monopolies would conquer all. Most men would be too poor to form together and get a factory.

>No it's not. We live in an age where there are multiple ways to get what you want, multiple opportunities and multiple sources. It isn't the same as a person guarding an oasis in the desert, but even so Ancoms recognize that people require the ability to own the fruits of their labour and their possessions or else human survival wouldn't be possible, yet they ignore when someone's labour is direct at land, houses, or business'.

Answer me this: what's to stop a man from getting all the water he can, and sell it at extreme prices? What's to stop a CEO from abusing the workers horribly? What's to stop a company from damaging the environment horrifically ?

Voluntarism is a meme.

It's like I said earlier with the desert and the bottle scenario. I guess the man was acting voluntarily, huh?

They're also weak and be crushed like your skull under my boot.

i just identified a real life autist

>Communism, socialism, welfare are parts of the same shit.
Right? Socialism is just half-communism with a facade of being new and different. You don't want to go anywhere near communism, as far away as possible.

>le Ancom meme
It has never existed and will never exist since communism requires a totalitarian state to enforce shitty conditions and prevent people from making better choices.
>muh worker-owned...
then go ahead and start a worker-owned corporation, libertarianism allows for worker-owned corporations to function, but communism doesn't allow non-worker-owned corporations to function because they are 'evil'.

How did you craft such a masterwork straw-man from my small post?

>my subjective view of fairness is the same ias everyone elses

Absolutely not. I just dont want other peoples view of fairness imposed on me and I think that profit incentive is too complicated a concept to base a society around since 90% of the population will never view a balance sheet in their lives.

>Socialism
>a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

>communism
>social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.

Read a fucking book.

>I just dont want other peoples view of fairness imposed on me

IF THAT IS THE CASE THEN YOU HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT CAPITALISM

also that wasnt a strawman thats what you said just rephrased take your view of fairness and make a voluntary commune where you and other "benevolent intellectuals" can live in a perfect and prosperous nation state

>real communism, they follow social liberalism and the whole "kill all fascists/racists XD"
care to expand?

cute, sad we can actually fund your weekly food supply airdrops

Basically, edgier Social Democrats or modern day liberals

>Again, huge monopolies would conquer all.
The state is a monopoly and it props up monopolies through favoritism and lobbying such as bailouts. The free market breaks long-term monopolies through profit incentives and price signals.

>Most men would be too poor to form together and get a factory.
Something called a loan, economic illiterate

I think it's because they assume that everyone would suddenly have the same high standard of living they already enjoy.

>Implying that people happily entered in a radiation zone to burry a melted nuclear plant just to get cancer.

>Implying that Ukraine is not fighting for their lives to see themselves free of the Russia hands. By the way, being a communist is a crime there.

> muh monopolies
> it's just IMPOSSIBLE to ever start a workers co-op...it can only ever be done via confiscating an exiting business

Fucking, lol. This Mexican faggot is so predictable.

>literally the same concept with different word salad
Try actually understanding things instead of acting pretentious.

There was some billionaire kid made a documentary on this, he interviewed some other billionaire kid who got disowned for being in the documentary. Was funny as shit.

>Something called a loan, economic illiterate
And if they fail and can't pay off the loan? What happens then?

>The state is a monopoly and it props up monopolies through favoritism and lobbying such as bailouts. The free market breaks long-term monopolies through profit incentives and price signals.

Do you even know what monopoly means?

>economic illiterate
It is your people who think that Ancaps came first and think that Austrian economics go by the scientific method

It doesn't

Communism includes socialism

You said this:
>Right? Socialism is just half-communism with a facade of being new and different. You don't want to go anywhere near communism, as far away as possible.

Why don't you try to understand that you need to read a fucking book?

>Implying that people happily entered in a radiation zone to burry a melted nuclear plant just to get cancer.

They didn't. The USSR was falling apart then.

The mexican is wrong, by I get him.

Third world countries are all like this, the polititians want people to be poor and stuff. They brainwashed him, by telling that the poorness of his country exists because USA and capitalism.

Take a look at a standard high-school book from Brazil:

>IF THAT IS THE CASE THEN YOU HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT CAPITALISM

What about authoritarianism or pacifism or just plain isolationism?

What stops me from simply killing anyone I see inorder to prevent them oppressing me?

And I simply made an observation about a desire for fairness being part of human nature. I see no reason that would lead to communes

>Third world countries are all like this, the polititians want people to be poor and stuff. They brainwashed him, by telling that the poorness of his country exists because USA and capitalism.

Yeah sure. Don't forget that it is our president, who has privatized our oil and energy. It is the American factories which come here and exploit the workers.


You don't know me, and you don't know this country. Fuck off