/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

u a burger by any change? because that's the only volk that can tell the difference between your liberalisms

You are very right, although i do not think that the protectionist traditionalist anti immigration factions actually want to do what they said they want to do. Look at Trump and how he behaves in his 2nd term. This is the internal contradictions of the right wing position: they simultaneously want to anchor themselves in tradition and locality while still maintaining their unjust privilege earned from imperial plunder.

Liberalism is when concessions and conservatism is when self-destruct panic mode.

>>2630419
Immigration and free trade aren't concessions to the people, you are doing the "liberals are good cops and reactionaries are bad cops" routine all over again, the only thing that will come out of this is that you will get people to vote for Libs in perpetuity because at least they are not as bad as reactionaries

>>2630411
Liberals and conservatives are different branches of capitalist thought.
There is, Liberals (Democrats but also liberals in Europe, including the socdems) believe in the end of history narrative, they see the collapse of the Soviets as the proof the superiority of their political system, their objective is a hyper-free trade based society.
But the Populist conservatives believe that liberal democracy is doomed and wish to create an underclass that is easly exploitable, their objective is a UAE like society where 90% of the population are literal slaves, their plan is to put in place massive anti-immigration programs that render most immigration illegal to have an underclass, they are intentionally worsening climate change to achieve this (Trump's Greenland obsession shows that he is perfectly aware of climate change, despite his denial of it)

>>2630411
Social democrats are against free trade tho?

>>2630526
lol no, im not op but what nick land envisions is something way more horrific and completely different than what op is suggesting

>>2630487
>>2630417
>>2630526

I think neoliberals are the real capitalists, true capitalism doesn't give a shit about nations, traditions, race or conserving anything.

neoliberalism is compatible with trans rights, feminism, free trade, immigration, science, technolgy, transhumanism, ACTUAL social darwinism.

conservatism is capitalism for cowards who can't accept the movement of progress, they cling to a macho and warlike social darwinism when in actuality social darwinism is about who can better perform under a system of money and constant technological change.

chud conservatives think the apex of humanity in capitalism is a white heterosexual male, neoliberals know that the apex of humanity is an indian who weighs 100 pounds, is autistic and the only thing he knows how to do is code.

>>2630531
no it isnt…
nick land's whole idea is that governments literally cannot stop the inevitability of free trade.

>>2630533
you should look into richard hanania to support this hypothesis

>>2630534
Im not talking about free trade. Im talking about nick lands idea that capitalism is an artificial intelligence that will bring itself into existance. Influencing society to create the emergent properties that would make the capitalist super intelligence exist. Eventually making humans redudant and then transitioning on to a stage of post human capitalism.
Ops post didnt really mention this

>>2630533
umm if you like think about it, embracing change is the true conservatism, because everything has always been changing since the beginning of time, therefore change is the status quo, and preventing change is the true progress, because nobody has ever been able to do it yet. think about it

there are 3 distinct ideologies

fascim/conservatism
liberalism
communism

and the people who say liberalism and fascism are the same are WRONG, there are clear differences

>>2630543
>and the people who say liberalism and fascism are the same are WRONG, there are clear differences
unscratched vs. scratched?

>>2630557
>unscratched vs. scratched

what does that mean

for the record I'm communist but I find the differences between liberalism and fascism to be significant enough as to consider them separate, and fascism as something else other than liberalism in decay

>>2630562
Then you've never interacted with non-western liberals

>>2630562
>what does that mean
scratch a lib and a fascist bleeds. never heard that one?

>>2630543
>>2630562
fascism and liberalism are very linked and fascism grows out of liberalism. I think it is very fair to say they are the same. When liberals identify what they think a society of free people looks like, typically with private property rights and market interactions as a way of arbitrating winners and losers enshrined with personal freedoms, and achieve anything like that politically they end up defining a society of free people and then everyone else. The "everyone else" category can be national distinction, but there can and has been distinctions within what is otherwise the same society in the same country like race, or they can even just be workers in general.

The people outside the society of free people are typically deemed as being the ones at fault for that, and in an economic system like capitalism that needs cheaper labor sources they will be exploited and their original sin is a rationalization for this. There will be some liberals who object to the gross and violent ways this sort of thinking manifests, but it's always by degrees like "instead of running the British Raj with so much violence let's do it in a nicer way" or "i oppose chattel slavery but also oppose ending it too quickly which would cause other problems". In this way there is functionally very little difference between a British liberal in the 1800s defending bringing "civilization" to "savages" in Asia and Africa and a modern Obama style liberal defending bringing "democracy" to "authoritarians" in the Middle East. There is functionally little difference between those two people and a fascist, the fascist wants to do the same things that liberals have already been doing to people but they just have a more expansive list of targets that includes people in the home country instead of overseas and goes outside the usual racial categories.

If you value the lives of the victims of liberals as human beings as much as you value any other person as a communist should, then there is little difference between fascism and liberalism.

>>2630588
> There will be some liberals who object to the gross and violent ways this sort of thinking manifests, but it's always by degrees like "instead of running the British Raj with so much violence let's do it in a nicer way" or "i oppose chattel slavery but also oppose ending it too quickly which would cause other problems".

i hate when they repeat fascist propaganda but then pretend to oppose it

"maduro might be a violent authoritarian drug lord but i performatively object to kidnapping him!!"

Amerikkkan Liberals want their brown slaves to bring them ubereats and not take their tech jobs while Amerikkkanconservatives want their brown slaves to mow their lawn and work for a dollar in hour (cash) in their construction business
There’s the difference

>>2630543
it’s just like my goy4 bro if i click elect drumpf is it +10 fascism monthly?

>>2630557
Both libs lmao

>>2630588
This is nonsensical anon, this is a definition that only applies when you think of fascism = killpeopleism (which is what libs like to stereotype communism as ironically). This is basically an external view of fascism that does not tell us anything about fascist epistemology and what they believe their aim is. As you have mentioned, you already can dehumanize people and reify inequality as a liberal, so why the need for fascism? More concerningly, if fascism is just the natural outgrowth of liberalism, why did fascism not emerge before Marxism emerge, and why did a lot of the figures we associated with theoretical fascism, like Sorel or ᴉuᴉlossnW, tend to be people who came from Marxist background….

>>2630671
Let me drop you a true truthnuke. Fascism is not 'capitalism in decay' or liberalism unmasked. Fascism is Marxism in decay, much like how Sade is a perverted deviation of Kant.

>>2630677
>fascism is akschually marxism and not just an authoritarian form of capitalism
Fuck off ᴉuᴉlossnW.

>>2630671
>not tell us anything about fascist epistemology and what they believe their aim is.
They want spiritual vibes and other bullshit. There needs to be a material analysis instead of listening to these retards.

I remember Matt Christman of Chapo positing a while ago that there are in fact competing interests between what he called "financial capital" (the big banks, insurance, real estate, and stock speculation) and "physical capital" (what remains of the manufacturing sectors, resource extraction, and many so called small businesses). And that this forms the material base for this ideological divide between liberals and conservatives.

>>2630678
Capitalism is already authoritarian anon. It is the class despotism of the Bourgeoisie existing as a class for-itself. Capitalism does not need fascism or brown clothed thugs to defend itself from a proletariat revolution, because they already have cops!
Again, this is a lazy external view, where you describe movements from its impacts rather than analyzing its internal dynamics. And we all know here that there is a fundamental difference between fascism and say Joe Bidenist "capitalism as usual". It is just that Marx did not give us the tool to analyze what exactly is different from fascism, so we end up with "fascism is just capitalism but even worse" and the only thing this leads to is that you instinctively put liberal capitalism as the lesser evil to fascism

>>2630683
which is just warmed over oglesby yankee cowboy war shit from the 70's, but still broadly accurate.

>>2630679
Ok let's do "material analysis". The old left believed that fascism is capitalism trying to stem a proletariat revolution. Since the world today is nowhere near on the verge of being taken over by a proletariat revolution, then all the hard right movements rising everywhere today like AfD or even MAGA cannot be fascist. Is this material analysis suitable enough for you?

>>2630686
>hard right movements rising everywhere today like AfD or even MAGA cannot be fascist.
They are liberals as they still operate in a liberal democratic framework. Orange retard assuming dictatorial powers would be fascism.

>>2630686
Let us extend the logic a little bit. Decline in rate of profit causes economic crises, and to resolve these crises the bourgeoisie often turns to foreign wars , and to facilitate foreign wars you need ideological justification which fascism provides… Except that today inter imperialist wars are waged largely by drones and professional armies which means that you dont need to convince most or even any of the workers. You can see how Trump doesn't even bother manufacturing consent for the aggression against Venezuela. As far as pandering to the public goes Trump only pander to a coterie of artifically boosted autistic neonazis on xitter. This lack of necessity to manufacture consent then should mean that the bourgeoisie no longer have any need for fascism, and fascism should've just died out from obsolescence, which did not happen either

>>2630433
You need immigration because educated people do not have kids at replacement rates, ever, period

>>2630690
Here is what i say: fascism will never disappear as long as communism exist because fascism is the shadow of communism. Fascism is all that remains once you remove Hegelian universalism from Marx. One is because when a Marxist became an apostate and lose faith in Communism it usually did not take long for that person to jump into some fanatical ultranationalism either racial or religious. We see this with Pol Pot, ᴉuᴉlossnW, Nick Land after he broke his mind and start writing articles about le welfare state, etc etc

>>2630696
Then what happen once the whole world become educated?? For your model to happen we literally need to keep a section of the world artifically poor and uneducated through imperialism just so they can provide fresh babies to plug the labour gap in our broken system


Wait a second

>>2630701
Total social collapse unless either artificial wombs are made or men become a birthing sex artificially, having a kid would be necessary in the sense that jury duty or conscription or paying your taxes does

>>2630697
This is why i invoke Kant avec Sade! Sade is what happened to Kantian deontological morality once you strip Kant from his belief that humanity deserves some basic amount of dignity, similarly fascism is the revolutionary spirit of communism but robbed of any notion of humanity or human agency. Tis why Land kept posting about how reactionaryism is the cold winter pressing down on the leftist warmth

>>2630702
Although i understand why feminists would reject to forced birthing due to the pains of birthing and the role of pregnancy in enforcing division of labour that historically enslaved women…. I do think good old Marx would agree with me in saying that viewing social reproduction, the process of creating another life, as an inherently horrible duty that can only be approached in a deontological and dispassionate "i have to do this or society will collapse" manner, rather than a joyous and natural expression of human relationship: is a thoroughly and completely alienated and unpleasant way to approach life!

>>2630708
There will never be enough people who want these kids and find joy in birthing and raising them, most people find that level of satisfaction with either a hobby or, even more rare than with parenthood, with their job

>>2630710
probably too soon to say that yet. It's certainly true for people right now and maybe you are right overall but history has a while to bear that out one way or the other. there is a lot of rhetoric to do with the birth rate decline that sort of takes on the tone of us being in the twilight of the human race, and maybe we are but not due to people not wanting kids. There are more people today than ever, it's an open question as to how sustainable that is for the planet or for how long. If people voluntarily reduce that footprint over time peacefully and in ways they enjoy, that's better than the other ways we see population decline, and if we stabilize somewhere around 1 billion or 500 million what's so bad about that?

The real issue of the birth rate right now is how it happens to inconvenience economic systems in the short and medium term, but we hope to liberate ourselves from these systems anyway. how people feel about rearing children after we are liberated is yet to be seen, but will be affected by new ways of relating to each other and the division of labor. It could be better!

>I'm starting to think there is an actual material difference between liberals and conservatives

Oh yeah?

>>2630721
>If people voluntarily reduce that footprint over time peacefully and in ways they enjoy, that's better than the other ways we see population decline
In the sense that old people dying alone in their houses is better than living through a bombing and starvation campaign, is that how you wanna go though? This is what “voluntary” population reduction looks like.

>>2630411
Fascism is a civil war between capitalists within an imperialist country. Fascism only has anything to do with the proletariat due to the conditions which bring on inter-imperialist war. The only reason that the capitalists need to abandon liberal democracy is when a crisis means they can no longer resolve their agreements democratically (through bribes and so on) and so the capitalists are forced to go to war. Basically, fascism is a cover for assassinating business rivals.

>>2630727
the generation numbers are narrowing already to a point where after the boomers are gone we won't see some nightmare of 10 elderly people for every younger person or w/e boogeyman you want to conjure

>>2630728
Like the capitalists have always had thugs to assassinate the proles. The capitalists only need paramilitaries to purge other capitalists.

>>2630411
> protectionist traditionalist anti immigration system.
No such thing, they're all have always been strictly pro-immigration

>>2630533
>macho and warlike social darwinism when in actuality social darwinism is about who can better perform under a system of money and constant technological change.
Wrong, the bourgeois neoliberal eugenics of the RFK class actually believe: "there are too many kids with chronic disorders like autism or asthma, we need fewer babies to survive their problematic childbirths". Technocratic progressive AI guys literally desire to go back to the 19th century of having more dead babies. Its not just the Epstein class, woke black Zionist neoliberals have no shame in mocking the idea of caring about dead babies, your child is next btw:
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/cnn-host-van-jones-apologizes-for-remarks-on-dead-gazan-children/3708184

>>2630647
>Amerikkkan Liberals want their brown slaves to bring them ubereats and not take their tech jobs
Jasmine Crockett saying the quiet part out loud in her dull and low-charisma sassy black voice: https://thenationaldesk.com/news/americas-news-now/jasmine-crockett-says-us-needs-migrants-because-were-done-picking-cotton

There are material differences between every ideology and even every locality of that ideology. American liberalism is different from French liberalism because the American capitalists are different from the French capitalists. That doesn't mean they are totally new things though. MAGA fascism and liberalism might be different in a lot of ways but they are both capitalist ideologies of the ruling class, just different sections of the ruling class.

However, even if fascism as it exists now is fundamentally a capitalist ideology, it definitely has the capacity to bring forth a new economic system. Communism is not inevitable, that is a mechanicist mistake. Fascism could bring the world into an era of actual 'Neo Feudalism' or 'National Socialism', which both really mean the same thing. This would be the most terrible class system of course. Liberalism can also make this transformation and we might be seeing the beginnings of the new class they are trying to develop, though we wouldn't necessarily be able to identify them and they would come with new technology.

If fascism won with Peter Thiel in control, everyone would be enslaved through brain chips and AI surveillance, workers would stop buying money with their labour time and instead their life is tolerated through enough work, capitalism would stop existing because workers don't have to be paid anymore, and it would really be barbarism. It would be much more stable than capitalism and much more efficient, but inevitably this too would lead to a new economic system.

>>2630684
Fascism is not quite degenerated Marxism, though for some people it definitely is, and they both come from the same ideological roots. You're forgetting that ideologies have a material basis. Ideology is downstream from class, not the other way around. Marxism is an ideology of the working class, and Fascism is an ideology of the petit-bourgeois. They are similar in that they are both revolutionary, but those revolutions lead to completely different things.

What makes Marxism different from all class ideologies is that it represents the end of class society. This is why peasants and the progressive petit-bourgeois can be a part of the Communist movement. It is not the ideology of the ruling class, it is the science of the working class. Though it took capitalism and the rise of the working class in order to be able to achieve a classless society, now that it is possible all we have left is to do it. Marxism had to be a science, unlike all ruling class ideologies which primarily exist to justify their economic system. It must be materialist.

It isn't this kind of biblical corruption going on, but Fascism and Communism are not completely separate. But while fascism is a ruling class ideology that cannot move on, Marxism is a science. They come from the same roots, but while the fascists still cling to Hegel, Mao's theory of contradiction has superseded Hegel's main contributions to Marxism and now he is not really that important.

>>2630708
You're thinking patriarchally. You're not a woman who has to spend half her life caring for the children. As long as there is a sex who has to go through awful pregnancy and childbirth, and is expected, groomed all their life into thinking its a beautiful thing, and where they are met with derision and are accused of not fulfilling social purposes and endangering humanity by complicit men and women when they says they don't want children, and who face implicit violent from the complicit men, then this is not acceptable.

Btw I would have children if I wasn't a transhumanist it's just that the kind of thing you're saying is patriarchy. It's a reactionary thing that should be left in the past. If women don't want to have children you can't make them have children, and population decline is not really a bad thing in any way (a higher population isn't a bad thing either)…

Of course a higher population is beneficial to a socialist nation and so a lot of work should be put into researching cloning. The only issue with it today is that it still needs a host in order to work, so it still means putting women through pregnancy. Once we can get artificial wombs working there is no reason for a socialist country to not start producing as many children as possible each year through them. In this way even a small nation like Wales could quickly catch up to its larger neighbours who would likely still be capitalist.

>>2630540
>capitalism is an artificial intelligence that will bring itself into existance
I mean it has already. Its an egregore iirc

https://ianwrightsite.wordpress.com/2020/09/03/marx-on-capital-as-a-real-god-2/
>There is a specific aspect of Marx’s theory of capitalism that I believe isn’t sufficiently emphasised. And that is Marx’s view that capital is an actual entity — a being with a mind of its own that operates independently from us.
>And of course, when stated plainly like this, the proposition seems absurd. How can a large sum of money that is used to make profit have a mind of its own? That doesn’t make any sense at all.
>But my aim, here, is to explain precisely why this proposition is not absurd, but in fact articulates the essential nature of capital, and that viewing capital as an entity is necessary to fully understand the social reality that we find ourselves in.

Yeah obviously. Two wings of the same bird or whatever is just a stupid slogan people say lol

>>2631368
Which I personally dont agree with because its portraying what is essentially an illusion as a functional entity. Sure the collective ideas, actions, and etc of the current socioeconomic systems can create a comparison to a artificial intelligence. But is that really a artificial intelligence, or is that something which looks like it but actually isnt? A illusion, a metaphor.

Basically my disagreement with this is that its trying to take the collective aciton of society and then trying to portray some sorta grand thing out of it. When frankly that grand thing is just a metaphor. Its like saying oil is sentient because it has some of the characteristics of living organisms.

>>2630702
>>2630708
>>2630710
>>2630721
>>2631176
What's with western leftoids and being against people having babies? Why do you people always come up with loony conspiracy theories that literally everybody who ever had even one child was simply forced into breeding by someone or something else? Why is always "women are literally brainwashed into being le incubators by DA MOOOOOIDZ and their patriarchy, so either stop having babies altogether or nut into an artificial cube that will carry your babies to term?"
Very depressing and pessimistic outlook of the world and relationships between people. How do you fucking function if you think people are genuinely incapable of loving eachother so strong they want to procreate and raise babies of their own?

>>2630710
>There will never be enough people who want these kids and find joy in birthing and raising them,
Wrong. People who hate babies are going extinct now that contraceptives are widely available. Nothing of value was lost.

>>2631714
>People who hate babies are going extinct now that contraceptives are widely available
dialectics….

>>2631709
Birth strike is based and revolutionary though

>>2631718
Only if it had included your mother.

>>2631176
>Marxism is an ideology of the working class, and Fascism is an ideology of the petit-bourgeois.
Of course, when we work from such broad definitions, we can extend ideologies any way we want. Marxism can now include peasants and the petty bourgeoisie, as the Maoists said, or spontaneous workplace walkouts, as Operaismo believes, because all these disparate movements represent the "Working Class" fighting against Value Form (again, here we can twist Marx's words for it to mean everything), nevermind that Marx himself would be quite opposed to a lot of these things! And since we define Fascism as 'the ideology of the Ruling Class, then everything the ruling class believes, be it atlanticism, neoliberalism, feudalism, religious clericalism, posthuman Landian singularity, or even pink capitalism, can now be grouped under the same "Fascist" banner, to be stretched and narrowed whenever condition changes. And we call this Ship of Theseus approach to analyzing ideology "Science", although i suppose that even the definition of Science too can be twisted and contracted to suit whatever we need it to be at any given moment

>>2631176
>You're thinking patriarchally. You're not a woman who has to spend half her life caring for the children. As long as there is a sex who has to go through awful pregnancy and childbirth, and is expected, groomed all their life into thinking its a beautiful thing, and where they are met with derision and are accused of not fulfilling social purposes and endangering humanity by complicit men and women when they says they don't want children, and who face implicit violent from the complicit men, then this is not acceptable.
S anon, i already admitted this! I understand why radfems opposed childbirth because of the pain of labour, and role of childbirth in creating the division of labour
But you know what else is painful, backbreaking and reinforces inequality? Labour itself! Does that mean that equality can only be achieved once we fully automatized all labour and the only thing humans will do is gooning 24/7?
Labour and childbirth has existed long before the alienation inflicted by class society, and i believe that they will persist afterwards, because they are expression of human sociality. To create new things and new life is beautiful. (In fact it is already happening now; millions of people willingly become low paying teachers because they care about children and want to sacrifice themselves to raise the new generation. Is this not parenthood albeit mediated by bureaucracy? Is this a "reactionary thing that should be left in the past"?).

Of course, we might as well create cloning and do away with childbirth altogether. It will certainly eliminates all inequality between men and women, and increase potential for economic development as the state now hold control over social reproduction.
However, you have to be aware of two things; one, is that instead of confronting value form to liberate humans, you are actively modifying humanity to suit a fetishized commodity (i.e economic growth). Two, is that this is a very technological, inhuman and bureaucratized solution to the procreation problem. You are railing against Peter Thiel, S anon, but you know very well that centralized mass cloning with the eugenic cherry on top is exactly the sort of solution Thiel would propose to these kinds of problems. And if you are pro this, i would find it very hypocritical if you oppose any other tech driven solutions for human problems. For example, why should we not aim for AI-led socialization? Instead of interacting with other humans, your social circle will consist entirely of AIs living in a simulated environment personally engineered to match your personality, so that no one will be left friendless or isolated ever again, all anxiety and depression will be removed, and i inequality of social skills will be rendered moot. It is a very beautiful solution, although i shall oppose it for the same reason i will oppose replacing parenthood with cloning

in the long run the glaciers will melt and drown us all

>>2631714
you think hating babies is a genetic trait

>>2631766
Genetics reacting to environment with epigenetics.

>>2631443
>But is that really a artificial intelligence, or is that something which looks like it but actually isnt? A illusion, a metaphor.
meaningless statement, if something is functionally identical to an intelligence (which is already a pretty loosely defined and not that well understood thing), then it is one. Its like the retards arguing AI cant be intelligent because it has no soul or its missing a human something, they're just insecure that intelligence is not a human monopoly

>oil is sentient because it has some of the characteristics of living organisms.
some people do argue that for example a society is a living organism, and as "living", just like intelligence, is an arbitrary definition with fuzzy borders it cant be easily dismissed
dont see how it apply to oil though

>trying to portray some sorta grand thing out of it
just because you dont like the implications doesnt invalidate it. Yes, organized things can have features and behavior that go way beyond the individual things and couldnt be understood without considering the whole, theres plenty of examples (temperature and matter states, or sociology for example).

>When frankly that grand thing is just a metaphor
no. Capital IS a feedback control system, thats not a metaphor. Nobody claimed its sentient, it doesnt need to be (though sentient being are a part of it)

>>2637431
>Yes, organized things can have features and behavior that go way beyond the individual things and couldnt be understood without considering the whole
emergence is the term