/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Here's the AMA that was advertised last week. Ask me anything. Most questions should be okay.

>kills your entire family
glasses are for NERDS
how do you respond without sounding like a fascist American?


>hard mode, you cannot criqtuque maoist literature

Its clear to me that there is genuinely no possibility radical politics that is both effective while being mainstream, modern service economies in the first world have made such organising/educating so herculean that it's pointless and the surveillance state alongside the lack of any void of radical politics in the mainstream has made any revolutions that occur merely radical reforms
>Bangladesh'e spontaneous revolution against Sheikh Hasina just resulting in a more liberal government
The only thing I think is politically radical without being preachy to the average prole is being positive of suicide
<wait really?
Yes. Everything in our modern culture rebels against pro suicide messaging even when we were at the peak of "wokism", that truth held up. Telling people when it comes up in casual conversation (of course) that if life literally becomes too impossible that you'll just end it all is something that cannot be rebuked
>It's your own choice, anyone making moralistic arguments against will be painfully aware they're forcing their views on you
>It is a perfectly rational response to the current economy of stagnant wages, decaying welfare, 0-hour contracts and rent-based digital services
>Opposed to emotional suicides taken up in the height of the moment which is what most proles thing about
>Positions the injustice and lack of action by the masses as the forefront of your decision
I speak from experience since this has genuinely worked out well in radicalising coworkers and other acquaintances. This is all I can offer to the current issue the left face which is the death of mass politics as a whole. Id recommend reading Benjamin Studebaker, he's been a great help.

I think it’s a myth that Mao single handed kill 80 million people that is a complete fabrication the healthcare system in the USA kill more people than any communist country ever did that’s my opinion though

I recently found out that 4chins word filters "graebener", the last name of a certain rock thrower.
I didn't expect them to guntguard for a fat latinx fascist.

🗽UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅
>"We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine, and the machine is bleeding to death." Edition

Thread for the hellish discussion related to the scourge of the earth, the destroyer of nations, the king of coups, the sultan of sanctions, the emir of the embargo, the autocrat of austerity, the doge of deregulation, the baron of busting unions, the prince of privatization, the lord of loan sharks, the patron-saint of proxy wars, the sponsor of settlers, the guarantor of genocides, the Divided $nakkkes of Amerikkka™

🏈 💵 🌭 🍔

🛠️ Strike Tracker ⚒️
https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/

🇺🇸 Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md

📺 Live News 📺
(sponsored by USAID)
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Anonymity is an important part of imageboards. It's important for our freedom on the Internet. The problem is that anonymity has to be bought. Bitcoin has become speculative in the financial world. An asset hoarded by states. People don't understand the purpose of this crypto-currency. Even people who explain Bitcoin find themselves up against a crowd of people who understand that it's an innovation, but these people are going to buy it thinking it's a revolution. This is unfortunate… as they risk losing a significant amount of capital in order to achieve their pecuniary goals. Bitcoin has a supply of 21M BTC, the problem is that the network lives from the exchange of bitcoin. If it remains stored by people, the miners will not be able to make a living on the network. Admittedly, the problem may seem remote, but it can't be ruled out, and then the quantum threat looms over BTC: if it isn't resolved, it will be relegated to the rank of former cryptocurrency great.
Anonymity is an important part of imageboards. It's important for our freedom on the Internet. The problem is that being anonymous
For these reasons, which seem problematic to me, we need to move towards libertarian assets that are not subject to corrupt finance, as Bitcoin is. Monero appears to be a solid, clearly anonymous asset that outperforms BTC, which acts in decorrelation to it. What's more, it has a clear plan for its transition to quantum. Monero is bigger than you'd think: its assets have risen from around $65 in 2020 to over $350 today, demonstrating the relevance of this cryptocurrency compared with others. It's gaining ground, but I don't expect it to emerge as BTC's rival in the years to come. For libertarians, however, it possesses the qualities that would enable it to defeat speculative finance as well as the states - it's out of control, like the Anonymous group. As a result, it frightens the latter, since citizens the world over deserve this breath of anonymity in a world where everything has to be checked.

I honestly think the world would be a better place if nazi Germany still existed to act as a 'white Japan' to counterpoint neoliberalism, there would be much less racial conflict and concern about degeneracy, infact it would probably encourage anglosphere and western Europe to fully embrace immigration and degeneracy because all the rightoids would just become wehraboos.

>Easter
>family comes over
>talk to older cousin since haven't seen her in about 2 years now, and want to catch up
>big mistake, she's really deep into maga and for some reason violently against women's rights despite being a woman herself, being half paralyzed and on perma-disability(???)
>have to avoid political conversations entirely now because she will endlessy dick-suck Trump and excuse any and every awful thing he's done, right down to the point of screeching "FAEK NEWS, FAEK NEWS" and/or crying when shown undeniable evidence of his crimes

it's so fucking tough because she's genuinely a good cousin and I enjoy her company, but it annoys me to deal with someone so close and mature yet so heavily brainwashed at this point in life. What are some ways I can aid her with disillusionment? She's heavily against corporations, so I feel like that could be a potential starting point for it

Alternative title: Why you shouldn't need to read theory to know what's up under global capitalism. Start doing populism you idiots.

Many here have taken issue with me in the past when I have said that 'in order for investors to get what they spend, the workers must spend what they get', or with my claims that this can explain:
- Capital Accumulation
- Boom & Bust Cycles
- Political repression of workers

I hope to expand upon what I mean by these statements and convince you of their truth, and thus show you that my argument is sound and based on trivial intuition, thus no need for any fancy theory.

First of all, on the simplest case. Whilst I do not generally approve of 'simplifying assumptions', here I think they are valid since I am making a monetary argument: I hope to show the logical necessity of the simple case, and show that the more complicated cases of our real world are simply emergent properties of this base case and do not invalidate it.

We will start with an economy that has fixed capital and four economic 'functions' an actor can take: To 'invest' the money one has available (by spending on productive assets), to 'spend' the money they have available on assets which are non-productive (though perhaps which are vital to subsistence), to work (which brings in income) and to receive income from investment. In the case of the investment function, it is obvious that the productive asset yields surplus, and that this surplus returns to the one investing. From our assumptions we see, this surplus must come from other actors in the economy.

Anyone who is familiar with Kalecki will immediately see where I'm going with this, and I hope it is obvious to you that no one will 'invest' unless they reasonably believe they can get surplus value from their investment, which means that everyone else in the economy must be, in aggregate, spending money into the hands of the one investing. This is in fact, Kalecki's basic two-sector model. Since the total capital flow in the economy must be made up of investment and consumption, then we say

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.