/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Clive Davis was rushed to the hospital for lung issues and may not survive another day.

This is important because Davis is a monster who has been far WORSE than Epstein and is a much bigger and more sinister criminal

Davis is one of the most powerful men in the music industry, and there's been rumours for years that he's has been involved in loads of shady shit like running Epstein-like sex trafficking rings in the music industry since the 1970s. It is a known fact Davis was involved in one of the biggest payola scandals in music industry history. He is also known to commit tax fraud/evasion. Plus there is a huge number of musicians whose deaths he was certainly involved in (Janis Joplin, Donny Hathaway, Phyllis Hyman, Luther Vandros, Aaliyah, Left Eye, Whitney Houston, Angie Stone and even Prince). Some say he has CIA connections. Yet he hasn't been charged with anything

Davis buckbroke Diddy when Diddy first entered the music industry. But it gets deeper. Clive Davis is a member of the Study Group (Mega Group), a secretive inner circle of powerful Jewish billionaires. This same organization funded Jeffrey Epstein and gave him his elite connections. We know Epstein was a Mossad agent who was getting blackmail material on the rich and powerful so they’d keep making pro-Israel policies. There is no doubt Clive Davis was absolutely using Diddy to get blackmail material on rappers and pop stars so that they’d stay in-line identical to Epstein. And the Study Group was behind it all.

Davis is also a gigantic Zionist and owns a school at NYU (where criticizing Zionism is against university policy).

Given all this, will Davis finally be exposed on his deathbed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxuR1H7US_M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClzGRCoGlWc

I cope with globalization's destruction of the labor movement by pretending that we have reached the global Lewis turning point. There's just not that big of s global latent reserve army anymore. The capitalists will still be evil but now they will have to explicitly use force or develop technology more in order to exploit us.

In defense of the free market.

When we deal with matters of the economy, it’s important to stay grounded in very real world terms and not fall for the abstractions the wealthy propagandize people with. These are systems of metabolizing the labor of everyone in society and then proportioning goods accordingly. Everyday there is work that has to get done to maintain civilization, and “the economy” describes how we incentivize (or more crudely, reward) doing that work. The control and production of everything takes labor, and the biggest issues with society stem from our considering property or ownership of stock as a means of financial gain in of itself over labor. In a preferable society with equal access to education and healthcare and equal rights for all, those capable of doing work should still be made to. There simply is no society without that economic work incentive, and ours is now being destroyed because the incentive is switching to trading stocks and speculating on others businesses instead of putting effort in to produce or maintain anything. I think these best ways to distribute these goods is for a wage system that distributes a currency exchangeable for goods and services at a market rate. Its a fundamentally democratizing force that should be regulated and limited in certain aspects, but that should not be abolished in favor of anything else, as the rich are trying to do now. I support some economic inequality enough to maintain a petit bourgeoisie, I would even say I’m against a UBI.

The reason i don’t identify as a communist is because I see them as abandoning this distributive system in favor of a more hierarchical approach. In a world without currency, you would either have to rigidly control distribution or provide a civilization so materially liberal I don’t think human beings could uncorruptibly function without abusing the systems of social benefit to an unsustainable degree. This is a monopoly of the state and even a state that is democratically controlled should not wield such power in my opinion.
The difference between capitalism and socialism is that capitalism doesn’t just have a free market, but as our current neoliberal system extols, has businesses controlled by centralized power and authority rested in bourgeois, old money families. These people are given the reigns of power over their own little fiefdoms, given essentially no oversight or real threat of punishment, and even those that work their way inPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

I bet my good friend Donald Trump has done Israel’s bidding and went to war so you’d focus on all the dead children in Iran instead of in the files. It’s pretty crazy, I thought for sure the “thanks for the torture video” emails would put an end to my cabal but it looks like they aren’t even touching Wexner. Well I gotta get back to haunting Steve Bannon. Every morning I soak his scalp in some vegetable oil from the kitchen, it’s a great laugh when he doesn’t just give up on showering.

It work pretty well for a bit in Catalonia, but I'm not really sure the means of revolution adapted to the conditions of 1920s Spain would really translate all that well to modern day America.

A thread to share of what you think are your controversial opinons and takes, here mine:

- mass immigration is bad overall (I'm not against immigration per se, more like unfiltered immigration is quiet bad in my opinion)

-religion in general are bad, reactionary and backwater, and trying to "fuse" religion and left leaning politics are bound to fail because both doesn't mix well

-"liberal" eugenics is mostly right and should be mass adopted

-China is actually a trying a form of modernize socialism with end goal of becoming a full fledged socialist nation when they exhaust the market-capitalism form of relation in the country

-North Korea is a abomination of socialism

-Supporting Russia is stupid because Putin is nowhere near close to be a support of socialism and progressive politics and is just a form of support imperialist politics by because isn't western somehow is good, it's like supporting japanese imperialism back in the WW 2 era isn't western

I've been seeing a lot of neoliberal and generally pro-market positions on social-media for a while now and I was wondering if this was a general phenomena or if it was just me.
In any case, in the event that this is a general trend on social media, how receptive is the average person to that kind of propaganda ?

From where I'm from, most people are pretty left-leaning economically but also have a lot of anti-tax views (which is logical given the burden of 65+ on the pension system). But is this the case everywhere ? I've also noticed that a lot of zoomers seemed to embrace the myth of the self-made man a lot more than the older generations.

Let's rehearse the facts:
>The US bombed Cambodia harder than they did in Nazi Germany and Japan
>The majority of the urban population were refugees from the countryside when the cities were emptied.
>Life expectancy dropped to its lowest point in 1975, before the Khmer Rouge took over. Afterwards, it began increasing.
>The Khmer Rouge successfully did all they could do prevent famine.
>The Khmer Rouge was not peasantist/primitivist. There was investment in light industry, healthcare and education.
>Thousands were killed in the Vietnamese invasion. More refugees fled per year from the puppet regime than from the Democratic Kampuchea.
>The central government ordered a stop to all killings on several occasions.
>The CIA only supported the Khmer Rouge after Vietnam took over to fuck with the USSR. The same CIA that bombed the country to rubble

Am I saying the KR was good? No. But blindly believing in propaganda is stupid.

>>2838086
I'm sorry, "We" are "Winning" by "Doing Nothing"? While the US secures every single node in your dubious tactic of Belt and Road outside of the China-Russia-Iran triangle, two of which are extremely vulnerable (entrenching the quarantine 1*, compounding power asymmetry 2*)
1: how's that worked out for all ML states so far? it is the most lethal and you invite it? who's playing who? "do nothing win" may be the CIA's most successful meme and you drooling suburban Californian MLs love it
2: speedrunning the later decades of the USSR are we? Ah yes China winning hard by events in Caribbean (only stable core of their LatAm strategy)
Great that you now have allies like UAE and Egypt in BRICS after Assad (oops, guess he wasn't immortal, but Ben didn't make a vid no that :( curious) Bright days ahead in west Asia, the key geostrategic zone for the Belt and Road pipe dream to come into effect (connecting asia to africa and latin america) as all arab states in the region let the the zionists "finish the job" for their bottom line.
Chinese chauvinism made them get kicked out of Sahel too, you think South Africa can carry the continent by itself?
As yankees now pivot from Asia to LatAm (Japan, Philippines, Thailand, India, Nepal, Afghanistan, """East Turkestan""", socfash Mongolia) and the British Commonwealth in the timezone - "looking good") and LatAm most already having been made subservient following US successful drug networks wrecking the straight line from Mexico to Brazil; "pink wave" reformists predictably walking on crates went and made themselves associated to drugs and are now stuck in a alt-right malaise for the foreseeable future (you say "look at andean region"). The entire continent is a settler-colonial project that already accomplished its task. Arab populations can't even find the bourgeois nationalism in them in the late stage of capitalist imperialism to free their Palestinians brothers and sisters from the first phases of their genocide. Iran is doing what it's doing purely for regional competition with the Isaraelis and Gulf Arabs. Every single west asian sunni arab zionist state standing firm, no arab spring 2 but arab nationalist.

You are as politically relevant as a radlib and your class collaborationism makes you but another obstacle in the way of proletarian revolution.

Is the whole boomer vs. gen X vs. millennial vs. zoomer thing simply another form of false consciousness?

For example, someone born in 1986 and someone born in 1994 are both “millennials” but someone born in 1997 is a “zoomer” even though someone born in 1994 has a life experience much more like someone born in 1997 than they do someone born in 1986. Likewise, we don’t even know how to define when certain generations end or begin. Is the cut-off for boomers 1963, 1964, or 1965? To what extent does it matter?

It seems like scapegoating “boomers” for everything has become a popular thing to do on social media and I have to ask why is blaming the older generation somehow worthwhile? “Boomers were the hippies who ended up becoming conservative and voting for Reagan” — that doesn’t explain the material factors that lead to the rise of Reagan and neoconservatism in the first place. You can’t simply “blame boomers” when “boomer” exists in a materialist context. Likewise, you can’t blame Gen Xers and millennials for being “vain” or whatever when Gen Xers and millennials also faced material conditions beyond their control. So why are we placing blame on generations? Does it make any sense to do this?