/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2606026
>dark enlightenment dork ass losers want to make everyone stupid to justify becoming kings and nobles that cull the excess stupid people
It couldn’t be more obvious

>>2631182
>You truly believe there’s a hierarchy of pleasures in life?
Some online activities are measurably healthier than others. I'd rather my kid be surfing the web and building a personal website than rotting on twitter, live streams and short form videos.
>>2631774
Depends what 'games' you're playing on Roblox, but yeah Minecraft, Vintage Story and Hytale are healthier, and reading is essential.

Sports are overrated though, as someone that grew up on sports. Puts you in the company of anti-social chuds that are usually on hard drugs, and overexposes you to the sun.

>>2652133
Roblox is a haven for child predators.

>>2602627
>>2603824
Gekyume has been exploited since birth. Modern-day Macaulay Culkin.

>>2653398
Retarded take. Dialectical materialism is inherent to marxism. Marx uses it in Capital and even wanted to write a book about it but died before.

>>2653649
Marx uses a dialectical series of arguments in capital, but he never appealed to anything called dialectical materialism, according to Cockshott.
>wanted to write a book about it but died before.
more info? I'm interested. I don't necessarily agree with cockshott, I just added what he said to the conversation because I find it interesting.

>>2653652
Sorry I had read that on leftypol but it turns out it was Engels and not Marx.

>Marx uses a dialectical series of arguments in capital
Didn't he co-author multiple chapters of the Anti-Dühring, where Engels specifically described dialectical materialism ?

>>2653700
the preface toit says it was written by engels with the exception of chapter 10, but nevertheless approved of by marx

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/preface.htm

Engels doesn't really say "dialectical materialism" but heavily implies it:

>Marx and I were pretty well the only people to rescue conscious dialectics from German idealist philosophy and apply it in the materialist conception of nature and history. But a knowledge of mathematics and natural science is essential to a conception of nature which is dialectical and at the same time materialist.

Starmer sending his most strongly worded tweets in response to the Trump tariffs… Amazing work.

Reminder that this is your fate

These tossers have just finished phase one of gutting an entire region, and are now going about business like they are organising a cake sale.

He could survive two Holodomors.

>>2652627
its a better method of Larping about this shit than the way people usually do, most dudes on this site play pretend central committee while begging the mods to make this place a [INSERT LEFTIST TENDENCY HERE] circlejerk

>>2652504
>help develop ways of communicating general theory to just normal people irl.
this fool thinks class consciousness is when you know theory and the more theory you know the consciousnesser you are. what if I told you there are people out there who haven't read a word of theory and have more class consciousness in theri little finger than you'll ever have?

Threadly reminder that 'class consciousness' isn't an ideology, feeling or some other metaphysical nonsense.

In Marxist theory, class consciousness IS the party. And it is counter opposed to union consciousness, which is the economic struggle without a party to turn it political, thus rendered impotent.

>>2653047
What OP and others discussing is the latter if it isn't clear enough.

>>2652504
>"Isn't it crazy how there's factories still producing X in the modern day? Imagine how much better the world would be if those factories went towards literally anything useful for society like housing, food, etc".

Yes, but .. But you can build all the necessary things in just idk, 2 h/day. No need for all the labor. We no longer work so long only to build luxury things for bourge.

Take for example, fast fashion. I bought two pair of shoe in different years, yeah they all were sold at discount, but the sole disintegrated in a year. Idk may be it is polymerization error and that is why they were sold at discount. But if they made intentionally to degrade fast, may be fix the polymerization so the sole is more durable? The top layer still looks very good. Also inner cloth weared out. Also in one model, inside of the shoe, the paper is glued to sole, which will dissolve in water, as any paper.

If some prols/labor wants the fast fashion, ok. But some labor should have right to work less.

Anon said that party is consciousness of the workers… what will party do in this case?

If you made your mind to work less, you can demand that, be militant. If we collect fixes, like in example of shoes, etc, then what is left is to demand that and militancy. No?

Marx never achieved anything, mao gave us socialist china.

Therefore, Mao > Marx

>>2650381
>>2650496
>>2650530
>>2650565
>>2650583
<workers are illiterate so we must talk like this to preach to them
"Random individuals aren't willing to read Capital, that must mean Marx was at fault" is an insane leap of logic.

>>2652387
mass tor baiter making up shit nobody said again

>>2650496
Absolutely right about this. Language has changed wildly in 150 years. General literacy is limited. For someone like OP or FP to insist that Marx must be read directly is impractical, inefficient and illogical. Pointless masturbation which delays or deters the communist mission.

>Cafiero
I didn't know about that copy, cool mention.

>The sincerest of thanks for the two copies of your work! At the same time I received two similar works, one written in Serbian, the other in English (published in the United States), but they both are faulty, wanting to give a succinct and popular summary of Capital and clinging, at the same time, too pedantically to the scientific form of discussion. In this way, they seem to me to miss more or less their principle purpose: that of moving the public for whom the summaries are intended.
Do you happen to know what US publication Marx is referring to? Just so I can look out if it's ever recommended.

>>2646332
Careful anon. There are still retards here who maintain that Hamas won and Israel lost. You will get called Moshe if you continue talking like this.

That's everything isn't it?

It's all PR and you can't outspend the burgeoisie. Like, pro-Palestine people aren't being honest either. Not in a bad way, I just think it's self defeating to promote anti-zionism and justice for Palestinians while divorcing it from the material consequences of what would happen.

Which is to say, the US/NATO losing their control over "Israel" and over MENA and probably collapsing along the petrodollar as regional interests become more prevalent. Or the region needing a forever GWoT to keep the compradors in place. OR whatever, really. It would had a very big material impact in the region and in US/NATO. A movement with those goals is already at odds with every single mainstream party not currently chanting "death to America", if those exist in the west.

Whatever the specifics, losing their unsinkable carrier would be a tremendous material blow for the US/NATO.

My point is, the Palestinian advocates and even the resistance mostly refuses to acknowledge the link between Palestinian struggle and anti US imperialism. THAT is the height of the enemy, that is their actual power. But activists for some reason think that they can battle it out through PR alone, build nothing material and then act surprised when bottom falls out at the whims of the bourgeois media apparatus.

I'm sorry to say, but it will keep happening, and the only thing being achieved in the west is normalizing whatever the Zionist policy is, even now. Because the pro-Palestine movement directs people to play "fantasy-football" within the culture war rather than politically organize. It is not an apolitical, or big-tent issue, it's not a matter of morals. That is the lie from above. As long as that's the line, then it'll continue being a PR thing fought on the culture war, gatekept by mainstream media.

>>2652342 (me)
Like what do these people expect of the places which reap all the benefits but suffer none of the colonial tensions? Do Palestinian advocates really think that moral outrage is just enough to cause the world hegemon and it's close allies to commit suicide by abandoning MENA?

You have to be kidding me. There is NOTHING an apolitical pro-Palestine movement can offer that liberal Zionism can't do better (and with the full support of capital).

>>2640149
people on here still struggle to understand this because they come to Marx before getting rid of their humanist liberal brainworms which causes them to think internationalism is in opposition to "nationalism" when really it's in opposition to imperialism, while "nationalism" is divided into the chauvinist nationalism of the imperialist nations versus the liberatory nationalism of the colonized nations. To put it in lib terms: some forms of nationalism "punch down", and others "punch up"

>>2641733
I've noticed this a lot too.

Anyone actually go to the Canadian Communist Party congress that was held recently?

one struggle

>>2540452
>UK that high in current year
Terrifying.

>>2626848
do you post anywhere else? i dont want to keep having to come to this commie website for good posts

>>2627433
>do you post anywhere else?
no, and im just about ready to stop posting here tbh.
>good posts
my advice to everyone is to just read books.
in terms of my own posting, i can sum it up:

i was first persecuted in a das kapital thread over a year ago, where i stated that marx may be outdated due to his consideration of "money" as a commodity, particularly the precious metals, which contradicts MMT. attempting to prove this to stubborn dogmatists took hundreds of posts. in the midst of this also was an explanation of marx's "value-form" (i.e. A,B,C and D, which are all described in capital vol. 1, ch. 1, sct. 3). here, i was accused of interpreting marx by a revisionist lense called "value form theory", but as per usual, i was simply quoting marx directly.

looking at the thread archives (#1), i appear to then fall into a dispute as to the metaphysics of value, criticising the "superstitions" of marxists, and further highlighting the anthropocentrism of the theory. here, i quote marx again (capital vol. 1, ch. 7, sct. 1), where he states that the reason man has "value" while an animal (or machine) does not, is due to his "imagination"; a nonsense claim, even criticised by someone like cockshott. i make an analogy between men and machines (e.g. slaves), saying that the only difference is the social relation of the wage, which purchases labour-power as a commodity, not as any particular "substance" - thus, if a machine or animal could be paid a wage, its labour would also have "value", since its a social construct, mediated by commodity exchange. this controversy is still misunderstood today, but is totally affirmed by marx's own words.

related to these ontological discussions is also the place of value in relation to price. marxists generally maintain a relation of essence and appearance (e.g. prices can diverge from values, but are ultimately regulated by them, and so are conformed to this tendency, like a centre of gravity). i am not bewildered by this assertion, but only find it epistemologically unsatisfying, since value here appears as an effect (e.g. of equilibrium) not a cause, if we are to attribute a quantity to it, especially if it is measured by labour-time, something immanent to wage labour, as a calculation. for this purpose, i empiricPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2627683
Thank you, comrade Smithanon. I just recently found out about who you were and the lore etc like a month ago but I appreciate any sincere effort posters. You're a bright fellow, and I think that any marxist who believes they are "scientific" in their thought should welcome good faith disagreements. Science relies on refutation to strengthen claims, so the same should be applied to marxian views as well.

o7. I'm sorry to see you go.

>>2627683
>no, and im just about ready to stop posting here tbh.
Fuuuuuuuuuuck. I missed this. RIP big one. You kept this thread alive.

>>2627744
>You're a bright fellow
I take it you haven't read any of the authors that guy refers to lol

He thinks that value ratios and exchange-value ratios are the same in the system of Marx and people have shown him over and over and over and over AND OVER AND OVER that they are not, this has been going on for what, over a year now? Densest mothafucka in leftypol history.

some immediate reforms:
- nationalize property that is used to extract rent
- state owned enterprises competing with private enterprise at low surplus margins and with low managerial salaries
- inheritance tax
- abolish securities trading and speculative finance
- capital tax
- abolish income tax
- profit caps on large and monopolized industries; tax surpluses over the cap at 100%
- phase in labor vouchers; could begin as a % of wages and be exchangeable for things like groceries which the state then reimburses with dollars, or could be exchangeable for dollars until it's fully rolled out, or could be used only in state owned enterprises and their total rollout dependent on total state domination of all economic activity
- buy-outs of insolvent businesses rather than bail-outs
- jobs programs to train and place downwardly mobile petite-bourg in exchange for their property
- anti-price-gouging (not just for consumers but because companies use it to launder surpluses back to themselves through shell companies when profit caps are implemented)
- build affordable housing
- cap hours allowed to be worked per week and implement more robust welfare
- raise minimum wage
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

If that's all you want, why don't you just join your local social democratic party and spend all day shitting on communists as being too unreasonable and too extreme?

I feel bad for having made this thread, it's sort of stupid. I am still curious about materially significant actions I might take, but this is a different question less stupid question.

Democracy would be wholly valueless to the proletariat if it were not immediately used as a means for putting through measures directed against private property and ensuring the livelihood of the proletariat. The main measures, emerging as the necessary result of existing relations, are the following:

(i) Limitation of private property through progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.) forced loans, etc.

(ii) Gradual expropriation of landowners, industrialists, railroad magnates and shipowners, partly through competition by state industry, partly directly through compensation in the form of bonds.

(iii) Confiscation of the possessions of all emigrants and rebels against the majority of the people.

(iv) Organization of labor or employment of proletarians on publicly owned land, in factories and workshops, with competition among the workers being abolished and with the factory owners, in so far as they still exist, being obliged to pay the same high wages as those paid by the state.

(v) An equal obligation on all members of society to work until such time as private property has been completely abolished. Formation of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

(vi) Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers.

(vii) Increase in the number of national factories, workshops, railroads, ships; bringing new lands into cultivation and improvement of land already under cultivation – all in proportion to the growth of the capital and labor force at the disposal of the nation.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

1.Changes in organic composition of capital means that manufacturing share of labour will no longer absorb a huge amount of workers. You can't just deploy workers in a factory anymore, with how complicated and automated shit are nowadays. However I can see on-demand labour deployment in agriculture or services, India and China already do this, however this means that difference between productive capital and rent extraction becomes nul since there are no moe productive, industrial capital.
2.>state owned enterprises competing with private enterprise at low surplus margins and with low managerial salaries
This is my second biggest problem. Everything you said here, from implementation of labour vouchers to universal compulsory education to concentration of capital required an enormous, massive and powerful managerial bureaucracy, which you will need to pay and train significantly more than the average proles. You want to have your cake and eat it too; a state that needs massive managerial bureaucracy but also one without a nomenklatura. This is not gonna happen, because bureaucratic work by its nature is specialized.
3. >Organization of labor or employment of proletarians on publicly owned land, in factories and workshops, with competition among the workers being abolished and with the factory owners, in so far as they still exist, being obliged to pay the same high wages as those paid by the state.
>cap hours allowed to be worked per week and implement more robust welfare
My third biggest problem. Having full employment will result in a massive demand increase. Since we control capital we can prevent inflationary pressure on the currency equivalent but we will still be left with a skyrocketing demand for consumer and industrial goods. Unless you want to face goods shortage you have to crank up working hours instead of reducing them. Again a case of having your cake and eat it too.
However, this is already a step in the right direction. We need labour creation and mobilization program. And we need a massive, well paid bureaucracy to do that. The rest of your platform just need some moderation

Both the following remarks are rather tangential:

I was very curious about something related which is how so many left wingers become habituated to right wing talking points or even positions, like discussions on: immigration, identity, and identarian/nationalist foreign policy. I myself have been duped before by a shallow economism, and noninternationalism effectively justifying all of these things, but I don't know if this is the common trend.

Unrelated, I doubt this is exactly what you mean judging by the examples but there is something to there being a liberal enlightened humanism that dominates the discourse, and is very difficult to escape. It's as if via misunderstanding that anything outside of this view is seen as unthinkable. The essentialism we see shares a common space, but seems largely orthogonal, beyond of course the essentialism concerning the human agent. Perhaps essentialism could even be surrounding the liberal enlightened humanist etc. view.

>>2652505
pic checks out.

The actual left has been successfully decimated and pushed to the fringes. Left and right only mean anything in comparison to something if they mean anything at all this point. That's why mutts call democrats communists while in rest of the world they would pass as hard right wing fuck the poor party even if slightly socially liberal.

Also who the fuck is going the call them out on it?

>>2652476
another example are these anticamp imperial appologizers