🗽 UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅
>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™
<Untaxed Trump EditionOP Backup Site:
https://usapol.neocities.org/💀 ICE & Prison Resources
(Amerika is the most incarcerated country in the world!)
• ICE tracker using public info and user submissions //
https://www.iceinmyarea.org/• list of deaths at ICE concentration camps //
https://www.aila.org/infonet/deaths-at-adult-detention-centers• visualization of prison population in US //
https://mkorostoff.github.io/incarceration-in-real-numbers/• Organizing in Prison — for when the walls close in (RANT Collective) //
https://www.organizingforpower.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Organizing-in-Jail.pdf• database of U.S. facilities incl. ICE holding sites //
https://alcpress.org/usjails/index.html• list of prison related resources, mailing lists, etc //
https://www.prisonactivist.org/resources• ICE Agent List (incomplete) //
https://wiki.icelist.is/index.php/Category:Agents• US Political Prison Tracker (last updated 2025) //
https://uspoliticalprisoners.com/Jailhouse Reading:
• 📖 Angela Davis - Are Prisons Obsolete? //
https://dn790007.ca.archive.org/0/items/the-anarchist-library-full-list-of-pdfs-nov-2020/angela-y-davis-are-prisons-obsolete.pdf• 📖 How to Defend Yourself During Police Interrogation //
https://www.notrace.how/resources/download/comment-la-police-interroge-et-comment-sen-defendre/how-to-defend-yourself-during-a-police-interrogation.pdf• 📖 National Lawyers Guild guide to being a jailhouse lawyer //
https://www.jailhouselaw.org/• 📖 Critical Resistance - Surviving Solitary Confinement //
https://criticalresistance.org/resources/surviving-solitary/• 📖 An inside-outside publication for abolitionist struggle & strategy across prison walls //
https://criticalresistance.org/abolitionist/• 📖 Prisoners’ Self-Help Litigation Manual //
https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9780199705665_A35159258/preview-9780199705665_A35159258.pdf⚒️ LABOR!
• Live strike tracker with deep stats on who, what and when //
https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/• AFL-CIO [imperialist]'s Strike Tracker //
https://aflcio.org/strike-map• Labor Bureau's Official 'work stoppage' tracker //
https://www.bls.gov/wsp/• IWW timeline for the 20th century (ends at 1999) //
https://archive.iww.org/history/chronology/• IWW Work Place Organizing Guide //
https://usa.anarchistlibraries.net/library/industrial-workers-of-the-world-libcom-org-solidarity-federation-walthamstow-anarchist-group-wo• ▶ Salting | Work Place Organizing 101 (50 minute webinar) //
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SHlCLyM4FY⚖️ Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸
• deep list of horrible shit we (royal we) have done //
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md• Coups and regime changes – master list //
https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list• Wikipedia: United States War Crimes //
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes• /our boys/ (bring em home!) detail abusing Iraqi prisoners [2006] //
https://www.hrw.org/report/2006/07/22/no-blood-no-foul/soldiers-accounts-detainee-abuse-iraq• More than 250 military interventions in the last 30 years alone //
https://blackagendareport.com/us-launched-251-military-interventions-1991-and-469-1798• Visualization of the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade //
https://www.slavevoyages.org/• UNESCO Sites relating to Slavery //
https://slaveryandremembrance.org/• First Hand Documents of the horrors of Slavery //
https://www.loc.gov/collections/slave-narratives-from-the-federal-writers-project-1936-to-1938/📺 Glowie News 📺
(sponsored by the Burger Eagle Freedom Institute (formerly USAID))
• CNN Live //
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/cnn-news-usa.html• MSNBC Live //
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/msnbc.html• FOX Live //
https://www.livenewsnow.com/american/fox-news-channel.html• Bloomberg Live //
https://www.bloomberg.com/live/us• Burger House Live //
https://www.whitehouse.gov/live/• Local News //
https://www.50states.com/ce/• Weather //
https://www.noaa.gov/weather📺 Gommie News 📺
• Jacobin //
https://jacobin.com/~~• Black Agenda Report //
https://blackagendareport.com/• The Grayzone //
https://thegrayzone.com/• Leftvoice //
https://www.leftvoice.org/• Newsanon Filter //
https://leftypol.org/search.php?search=name%3A%22News+Anon+3.0%22&board=leftypol🏝️ Epstein's Client List 🇮🇱
• Epstein's Black Book //
https://epsteinsblackbook.com/• DOJ Disclosures //
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/doj-disclosures• Track AIPAC //
https://www.trackaipac.com/• Al Jazeera visual guide (2026) //
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/10/struggling-to-navigate-the-epstein-files-here-is-a-visual-guideEssential American Politik 📖
• 📖 WEB Du Bois - Black Reconstruction //
https://cominsitu.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/w-e-b-du-bois-black-reconstruction-an-essay-toward-a-history-of-the-part-which-black-folk-played-in-the-attempt-to-reconstruct-democracy-2.pdf• 📖 Eugene Debs - Fourth of July Speech //
https://jacobin.com/2020/07/eugene-debs-independence-day-address-fourth-july• 📖 Power Anywhere There's People! – Fred Hampton //
https://www.hamptonthink.org/read/power-anywhere-where-thats-people-fred-hampton• 📖 War is a Racket – Smedley Butler //
https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html• 📖 Letters From an American Farmer – St. John de Crevoecoeur //
https://americanliterature.com/author/j-hector-st-john-de-crevoecoeur/book/letters-from-an-american-farmer/summary• 📖 Trail of Broken Treaties // American Indian Movement
https://www.usu.edu/mountainwest/files/bennion-workshop/trail-of-broken-treaties-20-point-position-paper-1972.pdf• 📖 The Declaration of Independence
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript•
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript• 📖 The Ballot or the Bullet – Malcolm X //
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/default/files/inline-pdfs/ballot_or_bullet.pdf• 📖 What to the Slave is the Fourth of July? – Frederick Douglass //
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/default/files/inline-pdfs/douglass_july_4_speech.pdf• 📖 A Trail of Broken Treaties – American Indian Movement //
https://www.usu.edu/mountainwest/files/bennion-workshop/trail-of-broken-treaties-20-point-position-paper-1972.pdf• 📖 Custer Died for Your Sins – Vine Deloria Jr. //
http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/Books/CusterDiedForYourSinsAnIndianManifesto1969Deloria.pdf• 📖 Emancipation Proclamation – Lincoln //
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/emancipation-proclamation• 📖 Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville //
https://americanliterature.com/author/alexis-de-tocqueville/book/democracy-in-america/summary• 📖 Common Sense – Thomas Paine //
https://americainclass.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Common-Sense-Full-Text.pdf• 📖 An Indigenous History of the United States – Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz //
https://nycstandswithstandingrock.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/dunbar-ortiz-2014.pdf• 📖 Huey Long – Share Our Wealth //
https://www.hueylong.com/programs/share-our-wealth/huey-longs-share-our-wealth-speechWhich side are you on? - Pete Seeger
▶
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XKMwWZVpPEPrevious Thread:
>>2814739 death to israel, death to the burgerreich, glory to allah, and muhammad who is his prophet.
List some ways you fuck with /pol/tards minds and plant seeds of Marxist thought.
>>2817367i don't talk to poltards. it's a waste of time. a water treatment center filters the shit out of water. trying to convert poltards to marxism is like trying to filter the water out of shit.
>>2817367Remind them that their ideological allies are mostly jews and indians and every "right wing" twitter account they follow is run by a botfarm in india.
Actually this image alone is enough to derail any thread on /pol/ into arguing about how H1B is actually a good thing because their "friend's" family came here from mumbai.
Though the current crop of /pol/tards have basically lost all interest in Hitler and worship a multicultural strand of fascism, so it might just be accelerating the shift to early 20th century ethnonationalism, but even so it's fun to piss them off.
>>2817385this never made sense, America is the only country that uses HFCS in its food lol. how is the UN forcing Americans to consume slop?
>>2817386the hatred of the lolbertarian petty bourgeois reactionary for the UN is based entirely on the idea that it is the seat of the One World Government in Jew York. When really the UN is just the United States co-opting the non-alignmed movement in the cold war for itself through yet another toothless institution that wags its fingers about real problems but can't do anything about them (see for example the yearly flaccid voots to end the cuban embargo)
https://x.com/i/status/2056914097971589465Check the comments, the MAGA base is completely fed up with Israel. However I think they will just become antisemites. Which is 100% the fault of Israel and their proxies, in fact they want this, so they can keep the hurr durr antisemitism grift going.
Thomas Massie should run as an independent.
>>2817414Yes my fren let us gather our meme magicks together
>>2817420Don't be obtuse, right-wing channers are not as cynical and thats why they've actually gotten thrusted into the mainstream while we're sitting here with our dicks in our hands
>>2817414Even funnier, we are supposed to ignore the crimes of someone like platner, however she is somehow going too far by using mean words.
>>2817407They want controlled antisemitism that allows them to play the victim. They don't like the type of antisemitism that removes them from power.
>>2817414wife material can't wait till she gets smeared as a nazi
>>2817431Already happening, with the "progressives" being on the forefront
If 2028 is Thomas Massie against AOC I'd be for Massie
>>2817448"They" already lost the war of words. America has Jew fatigue.
>>2817454shes not wrong tbh
>>2817367I tell them just how badly they fucked up and that everyone hates them
>>2817424>we are supposed to ignore the crimes of someone like platner, however she is somehow going too far by using mean words.the truth nuke platcels ignored
>>2817414basado
>>2817662
>fourth richest man on the planet is afraid of the masses
doubt it
>>2817661Abolish the state as a whole
Abolish money as a whole
Abolish class as a whole
The removal of taxes isn’t even starters
>>2817448bit idea:
>take a bajillion dollars from AIPAC to win a seat somewhere
>win
>immediately resign
>take the money and fuck off somewhere they can't assassinate you >>2817667you have to make that happen. you can't beg the ruling class to make that happen for you.
>>2817665It is not advisable to automatically assume that a member of the bourgeois is not aware of dangers to his class from the proletariat
>>2817671im sure they're AWARE of it. but to actively advocate for social democratic measures like zero taxes for the lower half of the population is another thing entirely
>>2817670No one said otherwise
>>2817672>Even the lower stages of communism have taxesNo. Money. Period.
>>2817673Not really. Could easily tie into the dark enlightenment movement. Or it could be another FDR type ploy.
>>2817414Banning Zionism would be based but it would immediately be ruled as a 1A violation and struck down by the courts. That would probably happen even without the tremendous influence Zionists have in Washington.
>>2817674value will always exist in forms like gold or otherwise. to believe 100% of the value you make in a factory should go to you is a Lassalleanist delusion
>>2817680
Strictly speaking BDS is protected, the government can't arrest you for supporting it. She's talking about outlawing Zionism altogether, not making opposition to it a requirement to have a government job.
>>2817385>>2817386petty bourgeois suburbanite hamplanet chuds with yellow snake bumper stickers on their coal rolling monster trucks, seething about the UN because it forces them to hear dissenting resolutions from the global south will never not be pathetic. Burgers have security council seat and veto power yet they still act like the UN oppresses them. It is actually quite similar to how chuds conceive of communism as "living in the pod and eating the bugs, own nothing and be happy" klaus schwabslop when the WEF is basically totally supportive of their preferred economic policies. They're the mirror image of white collar liberal twitter "marxists" who think communism is when you don't have to do useful labor, but just get to be a chatGPT poet or some shit.
>>2817676>Part of your labor vouchersNot money
>are going to fund the stateThe “state” is not going to be funded by paper. Vouchers are for the workers in exchange for their labor.
The dotp will be funded by material labor. By material resources until the communes are ready to replace them in full.
>>2817677>Labor Time Accounting!Laws of motion
>>2817679>to believe 100% of the value you make in a factory should go to you is a Lassalleanist delusionYou are a very confused person
>>2817684What's the difference between money and vouchers?
>>2817686Vouchers are not exchangeable. They’re certificates dedicated for you and you alone.
>>2817667that's the final stage of communism.
>>2817687
>state is appropriating part of the value you make at work
We won’t have state either in lower stage communism. The dotp is not here forever, will the utilization of the dotp be uniform.
>>2817682Realistically there's always a way to get around the 1st Amendment by being ultra-specific in your criteria for "Zionists" so that it's no longer a speech issue but a national security or corruption issue.
For example donating money to settlers or the IDF can be made illegal under the same logic the government uses to ban Americans from giving money to Cuba/Iran.
If the courts strike it down you can just double down and call their bluff to force a standoff over foreign influence in our government, which would likely be an optics win. Not like Trump's ICE kidnappings are "legal" either but it hasn't stopped him.
This is all obviously a joke proposal though since it would never pass committee let alone go to a full house vote or ever hope to reach the senate. But constitutionality is basically irrelevant when drafting laws if you paid any attention to American history.
>>2817694That is simply communism as a whole. The dotp will not exist in the communist mode of production.
>>2817690+ with built-in expiration dates
>>2817689>you get it from working, then when you purchase something the voucher is destroyed. Money can make money through accumulation and interest, vouchers wouldn’t work like thatWhere do you purchase goods with vouchers?
>>2817690>Vouchers are not exchangeableSo they don't purchase goods?
>>2817686labor vouchers are intrinsically backed by your labor value, dictated by the The Labor Theory of Value, meaning, you don't go (you can't) and buy speculative prices, no one sells (they can't) you speculative prices. you pay for what others worked for, an whatever labor you did is sold by the value of the labor value of your work.
money is prone to speculative reasoning. it is easily used to manipulate value, and turns value into prices.
>>2817679you really have to hold people down and make them read gothakritik:
<Labor is not the source of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labor power. The above phrase is to be found in all children's primers and is correct insofar as it is implied that labor is performed with the appurtenant subjects and instruments. But a socialist program cannot allow such bourgeois phrases to pass over in silence the conditions that lone give them meaning. And insofar as man from the beginning behaves toward nature, the primary source of all instruments and subjects of labor, as an owner, treats her as belonging to him, his labor becomes the source of use values, therefore also of wealth. The bourgeois have very good grounds for falsely ascribing supernatural creative power to labor; since precisely from the fact that labor depends on nature it follows that the man who possesses no other property than his labor power must, in all conditions of society and culture, be the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labor. He can only work with their permission, hence live only with their permission.- Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875
>>2817703So its still money, just with a fixed value?
>>2817705What if the store doesn't accept vouchers, but wants money instead?
>>2817705
he is likely implying that an arbitrary subset of the proletarian dictatorship would be in charge of guarding the warehouses and verifying the labor vouchers, giving them an effective economic monopoly, and giving them the potential to become a new ruling class through corruption. It is the same problem some people have with party bureaucracy. Party bureaucracy and economic management have the potential to ossify into quasi-bourgeois structures unless you rotate the proletariat in and out of these positions through lottery and draft. The problem is party members participate in statecraft and require secrecy and ideological training, therefore you can't rotate workers in and out of those positions through lottery.
>>2817707>So its still money, just with a fixed value?It's not money because it doesn't circulate and can't be accumulated by anybody other than the person who earned them directly. A store under such a system would destroy your vouchers upon receiving them, not store and accumulate them.
>>2817700
>“The administration” is
Not a coercive force that forces taxes upon you or even takes taxes. Simply saying that administration of things “takes value from you” is a bit misleading and incomplete.
>>2817708What if the stores start paying their workers in their own money and creating an exclusive market for the private currency holders?
>>2817712>It's not money because it doesn't circulateWhen you purchase a good with a voucher, it is being exchanged, no?
>can't be accumulated by anybody other than the person who earned them directlySo if someone saves their vouchers, can they buy up a large portion of goods, since the value of the voucher doesn't diminish?
>A store under such a system would destroy your vouchers upon receiving themWhy? Isn't the purpose of selling goods to accumulate capital?
if the value-form exists is just capitalism with red paint
if treats exist its just capitalism with red paint. real communism is iceberg lettuce and teepees
>>2817718
One criticism I have heard over the years is that the people controlling the warehouses would have control over the actual physical goods themselves, which could be arbitrarily hoarded or smuggled out by them, allowing them to create artificial shortages. I think this could be fixed by surveillance quite easily, but having talked to people who work with surveillance data, surveillance is largely a nothingburger, the cams are there to scare people and nobody ever actually puts in the labor time to review the footage.
>>2817723Even hunter gatherers had treats in the form if alcohol and psychedelic plants and fungi
>>2817723it's spinach and wigwams you fucking chud
>>2817725Of course there’s always some anti social element in any society, you fix that by throwing them in jail
>>2817730>the people's cops and the people's prison guards are a pro-social element and aren't like the anti-social cops under the old systemone would certainly hope, but hope alone is not enough
>>2817717>When you purchase a good with a voucher, it is being exchanged, no?Sort of. The seller doesn't keep the voucher. It's simply a certificate proving that you have made a contribution of socially necessary labour, and are therefore entitled to extract a given amount from the common stock of goods. Its essentially a way to represent direct exchange of labour for goods without having to pay people in kind. So there is an exchange, but it's not the voucher itself being exchanged.
>So if someone saves their vouchers, can they buy up a large portion of goods, since the value of the voucher doesn't diminish?Yes, but unlike under capitalism this would simply represent an accumulation of their direct contributions to the social stock of goods. It would impossible for them have a dollar they didn't earn, to use Bill Haywood's phrase.
>Why? Isn't the purpose of selling goods to accumulate capital?Not under socialism. In capitalism the accumulation of capital is a constant and ever growing imperative, without which the entire society grinds to a halt. Under socialism, its a measure that can be undertaken or ceased as needed to meet the requirements of society. If capital accumulation is deemed necessary to improve living standards, deal with population growth, etc. then this would most likely take place at the industrial level. Stores in a socialist system would simply be a means of distribution.
>>2817707>So its still moneyno, because it's not currency in the sense of what actual money is. no money ever has backed its value on labor. for one. labor vouchers are untransferable, because each worker is unique, they are destroyed once you use them (no C-M-C), and most importantly, you can't use it to but means of production, thus you can't use it as 'capital to produce capital' (capital in terms of means of production).
the means of production are created in workers councils where they democratically vote to chose what means of productions are required
each according to his ability, to each according to his needs and distributed to other workers
each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. but the workers can't buy them.
>>2817726>Even hunter gatherers had treats in the form if alcohol and psychedelic plants and fungiwtf they are literally treatlers then. we must return to single cell organisms to achieve real communism
>>2817742And how could I forget sex, sex is the biggest treat of all and it’s endemic to our very bodies
>>2817733Not all cops are like American cops
>>2817749Yeah they're often worse.
>>2817750>>2817749i saw a video of cops in brazil throwing a guy in a trunk, slamming the trunk door on his legs to break them, and then gassing him to death with tear gas canisters in the trunk
>>2817752the issue with gold is that it's transferrable, and can be used as
capital to produce capital.
>>2817739>no money ever has backed its value on laborSo what determines the value of money, then?
>they are destroyed once you use themBy who?
>you can't use it to but means of productionSo you can't buy computers?
>>2817738>The seller doesn't keep the voucherWhy not? How can you keep business afloat without getting a return on investment?
>Its essentially a way to represent direct exchange of labour for goods without having to pay people in kind. Right, which is what we call money.
>So there is an exchange, but it's not the voucher itself being exchanged.Then why have vouchers to begin with if it is actually doing nothing?
>Yes, but unlike under capitalism this would simply represent an accumulation of their direct contributions to the social stock of goodsRight, and if enough people pooled their resources together, they could start their own businesses and create their own money?
>Stores in a socialist system would simply be a means of distribution.That's what they are now; they sell retail from what is purchased wholesale. If a store wanted to raise prices, what would stop them?
>>2817755>>2817749>>2817750The problem with cops under capitalism is that the system they enforce requires and encourages them to brutalize the working class population. I'm sure you'd still get a lot of chuddy types with a chip on their shoulder under socialism, but you wouldn't have the same systemic imperative for hostility to the general public.
>>2817756i wasn't commenting on the previous discussion about labor vouchers, but on the erroneous nature of your argument about no money ever being backed by labor. historically the value of gold was backed by labor, and gold itself backed the banknotes, it's just that it never went to the miners, but to the mine owners. I would rather people not use erroneous arguments to defend labor vouchers, which are a good idea, save for implementation details that will need to be worked out in practice.
>>2817758>How can you keep business afloat without getting a return on investment?Because it's not a business. This is not a capitalist society we're talking about here. The return on investment would happen at the societal level, i.e. your labour vouchers would represent your contribution of socially necessary labour time absent deductions for maintenance and expansion of capital, support for those who could not work (children, pensioners, the disabled) or those who worked in materially non productive fields (soldiers, doctors, scholars, etc.). Therefore the consumption of every individual would be proportional to their contributions.
>Right, which is what we call money.No, money is itself an object of exchange. You can in theory take money and turn it into more money without ever actually producing anything. You could buy another currency, or precious metals, stocks, real estate, baseball cards, or anything else and turn this into profit through resale. There are people who make billions doing just this. At the end of it you have more money than you started with and yet have not increased the social surplus of goods at all. This is impossible with labour vouchers. A core feature of money is circulation. Under a labour voucher system the only way to accumulate money is to contribute more and consume less, in other words by being a greater net benefit to society. Under a money system you can (and indeed must) do so by being a greater net drain.
>Then why have vouchers to begin with if it is actually doing nothing?What it does is make capitalism impossible.
>Right, and if enough people pooled their resources together, they could start their own businesses and create their own money?No, because there would be a state monopoly on industry, and printing your own money would be illegal (just like it is now).
>If a store wanted to raise prices, what would stop them?The fact that they are a state enterprise and cannot set prices as they choose.
>>2817760>I'm sure you'd still get a lot of chuddy types with a chip on their shoulder under socialismwrong, there are simply no cops in socialism, there are at most proletarian militias during the DOTP, then in socialism all that shit will wither away, if you deny this you are a state capitalist jewish nigger
>>2817771Maybe when it comes to basic law enforcement, but frankly I wouldn't trust what amounts to national guardsmen to solve murders.
>>2817771>there are simply no cops in socialismi am always suspicious of totalizing and handwavey statements like this. they ignore the actual hurdles of implementation that exist in the real world.
>>2817769>Because it's not a business. So its a store but not a business?
>The return on investment would happen at the societal level, i.e. your labour vouchers So the vouchers are a measure of a monetary return on investment in the store, after all. The more vouchers spent, the more the enterprise can expand, right?
>No, money is itself an object of exchange.And you exchange vouchers for goods, correct?
>Under a labour voucher system the only way to accumulate money is to contribute more and consume lessYes, which we would call "saving money", and this money can then be invested.
>No, because there would be a state monopoly on industrySo it would be state capitalism?
>The fact that they are a state enterprise and cannot set prices as they choose.Why not? What if the state wanted to extract more and more from consumers?
police are not the only method of law enforcement available to a government. in fact they should be the last resort for crime. you shouldn't require police patrolling the streets harassing random citizens unless you actually want them doing that, in which case the government itself is broken and it's not a police issue.
like presumably under communism the labor union element will already exclude or filter out those looking to do deliberate harm to others or cheat the system. if you find out your comrade is smuggling goods or engaging in some kind of fraud or polluting his community with drugs you'll be compelled to report him to the leadership of your local party or union and government agents can be assigned to deal with it, like FBI/IRS glowies.
uniformed armed police should only really be there to deal with violent crime, like the way America uses SWAT. stuff like traffic cops have no fucking reason to have weapons or be harassing citizens when you can just tag someone's license plate and have a ticket sent to their home.
>>2817777>they ignore the actual hurdles of implementation that exist in the real world.you mean the hurdles of nationalist deviations
>>2817773>murdersmurders are crimes, crimes presupose law, law presuposes the state, in socialism the state withers away, therefore there are no murders to solve
>>2817780>So the vouchers are a measure of a monetary return on investment in the store, after all. The more vouchers spent, the more the enterprise can expand, right?No, the vouchers aren't a measure of anything except how much people are consuming. The enterprise can only expand if the planners deems it necessary to facilitate distribution, and allocate it the resources and mandate to do so.
>And you exchange vouchers for goods, correct?Yes, but those vouchers cannot then be exchanged again. This makes it impossible for there to be an M-C-M cycle. To take my earlier example, if I wanted to use my labour vouchers to buy gold, I could do that. But when I went to resell that gold at a higher price, it would be pointless because the vouchers that my customer used to buy it wouldn't transfer to me, but would be destroyed in the exchange. I would essentially be giving it away doe free. This makes it impossible to turn money into money. If you want something you have to work for it.
>Yes, which we would call "saving money", and this money can then be invested.No it can't. First off, there is no private enterprise to invest in. Second, as I mentioned above, it would be impossible to accumulate wealth through sales because the medium of exchange is destroyed in the exchange. Thus it cannot be used to buy more capital or inventory. If it helps, you can imagine every exchange under this system as concluding with the seller burning the labour vouchers they just recieved for the goods they gave out. Under such a system private enterprise would be impossible, even without a ban on it.
>So it would be state capitalism?No, state capitalism is a system like modern China, where the state plays a major role in the economy by controlling strategic sectors (the "commanding heights of the economy" as Lenin said) and taking steps to shape the direction of the private sector. E.g. the Chinese government may want expansion in the auto sector, and so they'll order a state owned steel company to sell to a privately owned auto company at a loss to promote growth in that area. However circulating money, private industry, market distribution, and wage labour all continue to play a decisive role. Under socialism these are all either severely marginalized (as most of them were in the USSR) or completely absent.
>What if the state wanted to extract more and more from consumers?In theory they might, and there could be all kinds of reasons for this, such as big infrastructure projects, increases in pensions, expansion of the military, greater investment into scientific research, etc. Basically a surplus is necessary every time the state needs to invest resources in something that won't produce a greater output of goods than it consumes (as expressed in SNLT). However it would make more sense to simply decrease renumeration for workers at the point of production rather than raise prices. Prices would be fixed to the SNLT embodied in a given good, and as such wouldn't be subject to change unless changes in the production process changed the SNLT necessary to produce it. This also means there would be a consistent downward trend in prices for most goods as production becomes more efficient. However, renumeration would be variable according to how much surplus is needed for whatever society is trying to accomplish. It's also worth noting that this would (ideally) be subject to democratic oversight. This is all consistent with Marx's description of lower stage socialism in Critique of the Gotha Program.
>>2817757>>2817770he's not saying that gold can be labor vouchers. in fact, the complete quote:
>What appears to happen is, not that gold becomes money, in consequence of all other commodities expressing their values in it, but, on the contrary, that all other commodities universally express their values in gold, because it is money. The intermediate steps of the process vanish in the result and leave no trace behind. Commodities find their own value already completely represented, without any initiative on their part, in another commodity existing in company with them. These objects, gold and silver, just as they come out of the bowels of the earth, are forthwith the direct incarnation of all human labour. Hence the magic of money. In the form of society now under consideration, the behaviour of men in the social process of production is purely atomic. Hence their relations to each other in production assume a material character independent of their control and conscious individual action>>2817758>So what determines the value of money, then?capitalist and bourgeoisie liberal economists in this day and age will tell you that money is backed by the productive force of a state.
realists economists will tell you that money is backed by armies.
until the 80s economists will tell you money 'is backed by gold!'
>By who?by other workers that grabbed the voucher.
>So you can't buy computers?does the computer produce labor?
nay.
does the computer solely works for to entertain (play videogames)
yea.
>>2817812>cant explain what determines the value of moneySo how can communist monry differ from capitalist money, then?
>by other workers that grabbed the voucher.What if the workers wanted to keep the voucher?
>does the computer produce labor?A computer is a means of production. We are producing right now.
>>2817809>the vouchers aren't a measure of anything except how much people are consuming.Right, so like money, it measures what may be consumed for it.
>Yes, but those vouchers cannot then be exchanged again. Why not?
>No it can't. First off, there is no private enterprise to invest in.Then what is the point of saving?
>Second, as I mentioned above, it would be impossible to accumulate wealth through sales because the medium of exchange is destroyed in the exchange.How is it destroyed? By whom?
>Thus it cannot be used to buy more capital or inventory.So, is it illegal to buy wood, nails and a hammer, in case you build something unapproved by the state?
>Under socialism these are all either severely marginalized (as most of them were in the USSR) or completely absent. Yet, you work for a boss, are paid a wage in vouchers, and purchase goods in stores. But if not, what would happen if someone didn't want to work?
>In theory they mightHow, if the workers own the state?
The interests of the party then appear contradictory to the interests of society.
>However it would make more sense to simply decrease renumeration for workers at the point of production rather than raise pricesAnd why would workers volunteer to be paid less?
>>2817818>Right, so like money, it measures what may be consumed for it.Except that it can't be circulated or transferred.
>Why not?Because that's what a labour voucher is.
>Then what is the point of saving?There isn't one.
>How is it destroyed? By whom?With modern technology the whole thing would likely be digitized. So when you use a card to pay for something, instead of transferring from your account to that of the shop, it would simply disappear.
>So, is it illegal to buy wood, nails and a hammer, in case you build something unapproved by the state?No, because just having those things isn't the same as using them for commercial purposes. Just like it's not illegal to have a chemistry set but it is illegal to make meth with it. It's a moot point however, since under a labour voucher system private enterprise would be practically impossible.
>Yet, you work for a bossNo, there would be democratic workplace management.
>are paid a wage in vouchersIf you aren't paid in money or at least by a capitalist then it's not a wage.
>purchase goods in storesBuying articles of consumption isn't capitalism.
>But if not, what would happen if someone didn't want to work?Then they wouldn't be paid.
>And why would workers volunteer to be paid less?That's simply a question of people understanding the social benefits that come from spending on things like education, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. If those deductions lead to improved schools and hospitals, better roads and bridges, cheaper goods, secure retirement, and a strong national defence, then there is no contradiction between their interests and those of society. There's ample precedent for this with people in social democratic countries electing governments that increase taxes and spend them on these very same things. What you're essentially asking is "what if people are antisocial goblins who care for nothing but immediate short term individual gain?" which is something you can ask of any society. Yeah, if people behaved that way then the system would fall apart, and so would any other system because antisocial behaviour and society are by definition incompatible.
Hope everyone is having a good morning and a great work week!
>>2817828>Except that it can't be circulated or transferred.Why not? You give me a voucher, I give it to someone else. Simple.
>There isn't one.So if there's no point in saving, how do different value goods get distributed?
>So when you use a card to pay for something, instead of transferring from your account to that of the shop, it would simply disappear. You mean that it is transferred into the government account?
>No, because just having those things isn't the same as using them for commercial purposesWhat if me and someone else bartered our goods?
>under a labour voucher system private enterprise would be practically impossibleSo basically yes, it would be illegal to build things by yourself?
>If you aren't paid in money or at least by a capitalist then it's not a wage.So, you are paid a wage, but you just change the definition of money?
>Buying articles of consumption isn't capitalism.It is commerce. It is exchange.
>Former Cuban President Raul Castro is indicted in US as Trump pushes for regime change in Cuba.
94 year old man btw
>>2817840??????? indicting raul ??????
but miguel diaz canel is the current leader. are they going for some kind of symbolic victory here?
>>2817848>are they going for some kind of symbolic victory here?that's the only thing Trump ever does
>>2817871hmm yes… what is to be done
>>2817836>You give me a voucher, I give it to someone else. Vouchers are assigned to individuals. If it was a physical object it would have your name and signature, or similar measures to prevent it being used by somebody other than yourself. In an electronic form it simply wouldn't be transferable.
>So if there's no point in saving, how do different value goods get distributed?I don't understand what you mean by that. You could save up some vouchers to buy something more expensive, but in that case the point of saving is to buy that thing.
>You mean that it is transferred into the government account?No, it would leave your account and then cease to exist.
>What if me and someone else bartered our goods?You could, but the inherent inefficiency of that would prevent it from overshadowing the socialist economy so it could be tolerated.
>So basically yes, it would be illegal to build things by yourself?No, it would simply be impossible to run a private commercial enterprise because there would be no way you could get paid for a private sale apart from barter. None of your customers would be able to transfer their labour vouchers to you because they don't circulate.
>So, you are paid a wage, but you just change the definition of money?No, you get rid of money and replace them with labour vouchers, which aren't money because they don't circulate. You also aren't paid a wage because there is no capitalist relationship with remuneration. In Marxist parlance a wage is money paid by a capitalist to the worker after deducting their surplus value. Without money or the capitalist relation, there is no wage.
>It is commerce. It is exchange.It's not commerce because the distributors aren't making a profit or pocketing the vouchers. Even if it were commerce, that isn't the same as capitalism. Capitalism is a system dominated by private property, wage labour, anarchy of production, and generalized commodity production. These would all be absent. The means if production would all be in the hands of society, so there is no private property. Remuneration isn't in the form of money, and isn't determined according to the needs of a private capitalist, so there is no wage labour. Goods are produced and distributed according to a central plan, so there is no anarchy of production. They are also produced for use and not as articles of exchange, so there is no generalized commodity production. Without any of these there can be no capitalism.
>>2817818>So how can communist monry differ from capitalist money, then?LTV.
W=C+V+S
W (Value/Worth): The total value of the commodity.
C (Constant Capital): The value transferred from the means of production (e.g., machinery, tools, raw materials).
V (Variable Capital): The value paid to the worker (wages) to purchase their labor-power.
S (Surplus Value): The unpaid labor time extracted from the worker by the capitalist, which is the source of profit, interest, and rent
>What if the workers wanted to keep the voucher?the voucher is issued with your name. obviously, there'll be and enforcement agency of some sort, depending on the reticence present in the society once communism is achieved, where their only objective is to capture any people trying to falsify, abuse or damage the system. and those people will be sent to gulags.
>A computer is a means of production. We are producing right now.those type of computers will be only on the hands of writers, researches, etc. students in universities may have access, but under public schools and public libraries, for studies purposes. again
each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
if someone wants to read, workers can produce them a kindle that its only purpose is to read. or directly produce books.
>>2817887the shift from actual disgruntled incel shooters that wanted to end the world to chud shooters just wanting their 5 minutes of fame is so distinct but difficult to explain to normies.
>>2817890>disgruntled incel shooters that wanted to end the world to chud shooters just wanting their 5 minutes of famecolumbine way back in 1999 was hitlerite chuds
i love the wishcasting for how a non existent hypothetical future system will work. make it happen chuds.
>>2817812>he's not saying that gold can be labor vouchers.not what they were saying either. they were responding to the idea that money has never been backed by labor value. gold was money, and gold was backed by the socially necessary labor time required to mine, refine, and mint it into coin. what makes labor vouchers different from money is not that it is backed by labor. money has been backed by labor before. what makes it different is its distribution, not its production. it only gets distributed to the people who actually did the work, unlike labor-backed gold coinage, which was mined by labor but distributed to mine owners and state treasuries.
>>2817836>So if there's no point in saving, how do different value goods get distributed?you could save the vouchers. but what's the point, if a communist state will provide you according to your needs, according to your capabilities. if you work, you get vouchers.
the possibilities are endless.
>>2817893columbine and its consequences have been a disaster for mass shooter culture. every 15 year old femcel/incel think they can get famous by just copying some misanthropic proto-chuds. They could be doing cool shit like going after politicians but instead they target children. So lame.
>>2817848>>2817851Probably wants to kidnap someone named “Castro” to get some kind of win; “we finally got you!”
>>2817900>you could save the vouchers. but what's the pointTo invest in higher value goods.
>>2817888>those people will be sent to gulags. The famous "people's prison".
>each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.Who determines needs?
>>2817878>Vouchers are assigned to individuals.>In an electronic form it simply wouldn't be transferable.They are transferred into the store's account as credit.
>No, it would leave your account and then cease to exist. When you pay with a debot card, the credit is transferred into another account, not deleted.
>No, you get rid of money and replace them with labour vouchers, which aren't money because they don't circulate.It looks like money, it acts like money, but it isnt money.
>Without money or the capitalist relation, there is no wage. It looks like a wage, it acts like a wage, but it isnt a wage.
>It's not commerce because the distributors aren't making a profit or pocketing the vouchers. Even if it were commerce, that isn't the same as capitalism.You lowered your standards very quickly.
>The means if production would all be in the hands of society, so there is no private property. You mean "in the hands of the state"? The state cannot be "society".
>They are also produced for use and not as articles of exchangeYou literally exchange vouchers for good, just like money for commodities. You are just changing words. You are just painting things red.
>>2817661Bro what the hell he looks fucking ghoulish Jesus christ
>>2817914
The ticket is still transferred to the theatre
>>2817911>Who determines needs?the formula.
>To invest in higher value goods.I guarantee you that there won't be too much difference between scrubbing a toilet that needs to be scrubbed and some stem guy behind a console that controls a nuclear reactor powering a NPP that needs to power a 10 million people city.
specialized workers pretend to be special. they aren't.
>>2817920>specialized workers pretend to be special. they aren't.Yes they are…
>>2817924The returned ticket is destroyed because it is worthless.
Yet the ticket was paid for by money.
When the ticket in effect becomes money, it now has worth.
>>2817930>Except with labor vouchers money isn’t a thing, you get the ticket upon clocking out of your job and then you go anywhere and use it on whateverThe same as money, correct.
>>2817932
No, I am just telling you that vouchers are money.
Why bend over backwards to deny it?
>>2817911>They are transferred into the store's account as credit.>When you pay with a debot card, the credit is transferred into another account, not deletedExcept that's now how labour vouchers work. These would be deleted upon being spent. That's the whole point and what distinguishes them from money. At this point I'm starting to think you just don't grasp the concept.
>It looks like money, it acts like moneyIt neither looks nor acts like money because it doesn't circulate.
>It looks like a wage, it acts like a wageAgain, it doesn't look or act like a wage. Wages are determined autocratically by a capitalist and paid in money. This would be determined democratically by workers and paid in labour vouchers.
>You lowered your standards very quicklyNo I didn't. I never altered my definition of capitalism, and my statement is based on those of Marx and Engels. They make it clear that the mere presence of commerce is not the same thing as capitalism.
>You mean "in the hands of the state"? The state cannot be "society".It can if its a genuine democracy and republic that's actually attentive and responsive to the needs of the population.
>You literally exchange vouchers for goodYes, but the object of production under capitalism is exchange, whereas the object of production under socialism is to satisfy needs. In a capitalist society, if I were to buy 10,000 pairs of shoes and set them all on fire, this would be a good thing according to capitalist logic because I spent a bunch of money would then need to spend even more. A capitalist producer doesn't care if their product is satisfying a social need, if it's an efficient use of resources, or what happens to it after it's sold. In fact, they deliberately design things to break so that people need to buy a new one. From their perspective, a customer that buys goods only to destroy them and buy more is actually the best thing that can happen to them. Under socialism, this would be a huge disaster and tremendous waste. This is because the point of producing shoes under socialism is so that people can wear them. Under capitalism the goal of producing shoes is to sell them, and they don't care whether or not they actually satisfy anybody's needs. Picrel.
>>2817933can someone other than the value creator spend the value? no? then its not money since inheritance has been destroyed. read engels
>>2817936You can't hoard vouchers and then buy up goods wholesale?
>>2817942>value creatorSo communism is a society which produces value, then?
>>2817937I think that if money is a better system than rationing, then people should just admit it.
>>2817938>These would be deleted upon being spent. Deleted by what? You are not explaining the physical mechanism.
>It neither looks nor acts like moneyYou are buying things at a store with your debit card, yet it looks nothing like money, sure.
>Again, it doesn't look or act like a wage.You get paid a sum of money by the hour, yet it isnt a wage because… reasons.
>They make it clear that the mere presence of commerce is not the same thing as capitalism. So communism can be a commercial society, then?
>Yes [You literally exchange vouchers for goods]Okay, so the articles of use are also articles of exchange. Commodities.
>>2817948
>You can't hoard vouchers
Okay, so you can't save up to spend on things, then?
Everyone will just get the same stuff?
>they’ll have an expiration date
Based on what? Why have vouchers if they are designed to coerce you to buy certain things within a certain time? Why not just ration?
>>2817957
But in what you're saying, vouchers are indistinguishable from ration cards.
transitory stage was a flawed theory proven counter-revolutionary by the outcomes of the revolutions of last century, stop coping about muh vouchers, abolish everything, simple as
>>2817967
Who is "you" and "me"?
The state and the public?
In that case, you just have another class society.
>>2817954>Okay, so you can't save up to spend on things, then?the point is to put the value to work so to speak, so your options would be to spend it within a certain timeframe or to pool it together with other peoples savings to maximize efficiency and returns. in other words community trusts good, stuffing value in your mattress bad
>>2817974If you work and save and then are punished for it, is that fair? Hoarding is not stealing; it is accumulating what you yourself have worked for, in this context.
>>2817975>As long as the gun in the back of my head is sustainable, its goodSlave mindset.
>>2817977>of course there is a divide between the state and publicIn class society. Admitting that communism is a class society then makes it unattractive to people who care about freedom.
>>2817980>If you work and save and then are punished for it, is that fair?is it any less fair than me being able to rob you for all your value at gunpoint and riding around in the lambo you worked for?
>>2817980All societies mandate slavery in some form or another. “Freedom” is reserved for the party and by extension the nation to act as a collective, not freedom for the individual. For if we are not enslaved to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the immortal science of Marxism Leninism then we will inevitably be enslaved by something else
>>2817982>>2817985>slavery is eternal>class society is eternalHow revolutionary of you.
>>2817984>is it any less fair than me being able to rob you for all your value at gunpoint and riding around in the lambo you worked for?If you work for something, you deserve it. Being robbed is unfair.
>>2817986
no im saying i as a random person off the street could rob someone else of their life savings and spend it all because there's no name attached to the value unlike a voucher system. how is that more unfair than you as an individual being unable to hoard value at societies expense
>>2817987Scientific socialism looks at reality how it is, not how we’d wish it to be. If you can’t handle that then you’re just a leftist, not a communist
>>2817448Wrong. You serve bourgeoisie by understating the rigging. Massie's bumfuck seat was most expensive and rigged gerrymandered election in amerika EVER, not most expensive republican election. No democrat house election, any democrat election, or any election at all has been more expensive than that election that remoe massie. Idealist like you to fail to acklowledge just how fucked up this midterm is by FAILING TO differentiatE between maga and non maga, zionist and anti-zionist, money and non money.
Also. Every "progressive" ziodemocrat are in all ways and manners hand fed by democrat party and bourgeoisie the democrat candidacy. They never spend as much as they did against massie as they do against "progressive" democrats did on fetterman, platner, etc., because aipac support them.
100 thousand people voted in massie primary, but they spend more this primary than they did on millions who vote in ziohran election, or any other.
How much did aipac spend against chris rabbi? 2.8M$. Thats fucking nothing. AIPAC SPENT 10X LESS AGAINST RABBI THAN THEY DID AGAINST MASSIE. Because aipac KNOWS massie was greater threat than any democrat.
>>2817989>at society's expenseif you work for your vouchers, how is society suffering from your saving?
>>2817990>>2817991>communism is when slavery is justifiedmost reasonable ML…
>>2817982
finally some honesty
>>2817992
Do it. The more weepy cluster B drama addicted radlibs like yourself off yourselves the fewer bullets communists have to waste on you
>>2818003
Anon, I regret to inform you, but you are a fascist, not a communist.
>>2817840Just imagine if the US invasion ends up being Bay of Pigs 2.0 and they lost to a Castro yet again
>>2818007Tell it to someone who gives a fuck
>>2817992
>you know what guys? maybe true liberation is just fucking killing ourselfs. yeah,if life is so oppressive and existing subjects us to horrors lets just all mass suicide huh?
Sorry Jim Jones. Suicide is no escape.
Reincarnation is real; just not in the way Buddhists or Hindus put forward. It is real on a secular, materialist level. If an arbitrary subset of the universe’s matter can fall into a configuration allowing for a self-aware feedback loop known as consciousness (this configuration is usually a brain, in our experience), and this self-aware feedback loop continues until death, then that means the very same arbitrary subset of matter can fall into that configuration again. However it is difficult to keep track of that arbitrary subset of matter once it disperses and recycles through the environment after its conscious configuration decays (“dies”). Furthermore, each “atom” is not indivisible, but is made of subatomic particles, which themselves have differentiated components, some discovered, some still undiscovered.
The specifics of our universe are not so important. Leave that to the physicists. What’s important for the purposes of this discussion is that matter has a dual nature. Any given material can be described both as distinct (specific, particular) entities which are the sum of their constituent parts and non-distinct (vague, non-particular) entities which are mere fluctuations in a field. This shows that everything which can be described according to its observable physical characteristics and constituent components is subject to the “Ship of Theseus” paradox. I will not describe that paradox because most are familiar with it. It is widely discussed. Moving on: If a brain decays and dies, its component material disperses into the environment. But eventually, on a long-enough time line, a brain made of the same material could re-emerge as a new conscious configuration. However, none of the “memories” of the “past life” would be in-tact. Moreover, there is no metaphysical “karma” system in place. It is entirely random and chance-based. This is quite frightening, because it means that “you” could “come back” as someone with a much more miserable and painful life than you, and there would be nothing “you” could do in this life to prevent this from happening to “you.” This is all very dissatisfying, but there you have it. Secular reincarnation.
The possibility of becoming conscious again in the future, as a different creature, in a different life, puts forward a strong individualist argument in favor of instituting some kind of collective social change to make the average or median life much less miserable. An argument in favor of socialism. No longer are you merely fighting to save future generations, who you will never live to see, from the pain and misery of capitalism. You are fighting to save “you,” in a future life, when “you” “come back.” A doctrine of secular materialist reincarnation, based on the self-aware feedback loop (consciousness) generated in arbitrary, self-aware, configurations of physical matter, therefore can inform scientific socialism by providing an incentive that goes beyond our current lives, and beyond even our own class interests, since, after all, an individual who is bourgeois now may reincarnate as a prole in the future. It also provides an alternative to afterlife doctrines put forward by the organized Abrahamic religions, which hold that the world is merely an illusion, and our real life begins after we die, and our entire life should be dedicated not towards improving the world, but to serving God, and accepting the world for the cruel simulation that it is. A doctrine of secular reincarnation can wed itself to Marxism, and overcome the incentives provided both by Western and Eastern religions, while not at all contradicting historical materialism. After all, if you are conscious now, you can become conscious again, even if you have no memory of your past life, you still suffered through it, and could potentially live future lives as well. This is all the incentive one needs to improve the world, since the world is what gives rise to consciousness. Rather than an immortal “soul” that goes beyond matter, you have simply your material self, which is a subset of the physical universe, and a strong incentive to improve the physical universe towards making life less miserable for your self and your peers, who are stuck in the same situation as you.
This all might sound spooky, anti-materialist, religious, or idealist, but I assure you it is none of those things. It does not in any way contradict what we already know. After all, if a brain becomes damaged, there are observable changes in behavior and personality. Therefore the material basis of consciousness is established. If consciousness comes and goes with self-aware configurations of matter, and such configurations of matter arise from “dead” configurations, then rebirth is demonstrable. It is based not upon the “soul” which is unfalsifiable, and non-material, but upon the characteristics of matter itself, which are not yet fully understood, but nevertheless observable. Having reservations about all this is understandable, but I think there’s a strong incentive to move towards a doctrine of secular reincarnation, both as an incentive towards socialism, and as an incentive away from short-term avarice. Capital’s strangehold over our global economy is largely based on the perverse incentive structures it has built upon the foundational assumption that we only live once, and that in our lives we should accumulate, accumulate, accumulate, without any sort of care for what comes after we die. Indeed, the only reason the ancient religions have stayed relevant for so long is because only they are providing an answer against this incentive, it is simply that their answers are anti-materialist. We must provide a materialist alternative. The doctrine of secular reincarnation achieves precisely that.
Marx said that religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the opium of the masses. The doctrine of secular reincarnation is the opposite. It is a rallying cry to fight with all your might against capitalism in this life, so that when you are born again in the future, without any choice in the matter, you will perhaps not have to fight against it again. It is a rallying cry to overcome the selfish incentives of the competing doctrines of “You Only Live Once,” “Afterlife,” and “Karma-Based/Soul-Based Reincarnation.”
We know matter is field excitations. The idea of quantum fields emerged gradually from a chain of experimental discoveries in early modern physics. First, experiments on blackbody radiation and the photoelectric effect showed that light behaves as discrete quanta, later called photons, rather than as a purely continuous wave. Then atomic spectroscopy revealed that matter itself has quantized energy levels, while electron diffraction experiments confirmed that particles also behave like waves. As relativity and quantum mechanics were combined, physicists found that particles could be created and destroyed in high-energy collisions, something ordinary quantum mechanics could not naturally describe. Quantum field theory solved this by treating particles as excitations of underlying fields spread throughout space. Its validity was then confirmed with extraordinary precision: quantum electrodynamics correctly predicted phenomena such as the electron’s magnetic moment and the Lamb shift, particle accelerators discovered the many particles predicted by quantum fields, and later experiments at colliders, culminating in the discovery of the Higgs field through the detection of the Higgs, provided direct evidence that fundamental fields are physically real. Go to school for physics and you will learn this.
We also know mind is matter. In the 19th century, doctors observed that specific injuries to the brain could selectively destroy language, memory, or personality, implying that mental abilities were physically localized rather than spiritual abstractions. Later, scientists discovered that neurons communicate through electrical signals and chemical neurotransmitters, and that changing brain chemistry with drugs could reliably alter perception, mood, and consciousness. In the 20th century, brain stimulation experiments showed that touching tiny regions of cortex could evoke memories, movements, or emotions, while modern neuroimaging revealed patterns of neural activity corresponding to perception, decision-making, and even imagined experiences. Cases such as split-brain surgery demonstrated that altering physical connections in the brain could divide aspects of conscious awareness itself. Today, artificial neural networks inspired by brain architecture can perform tasks once thought uniquely mental, reinforcing the idea that cognition may emerge from organized matter rather than exist independently of it. Taken together, these discoveries build a cumulative empirical case that mind is not separate from matter, but an activity arising from extraordinarily complex physical systems.
What we call “mind” is a higher-order phenomenon emerging from the dynamics of quantum fields organized into living matter. Physics progressively replaced solid, independent objects with underlying fields whose interactions generate particles and structure, while neuroscience progressively replaced the idea of an immaterial soul with evidence that consciousness tracks the organization and activity of the brain. Put together, the realization that the universe is having about itself through our minds which it generated by itself is that thought, memory, emotion, and selfhood are not exceptions to the physical universe but among its most complex field-based processes. In this view, a human mind is what certain arrangements of excitations of the universal substrate do when they become sufficiently self-organizing, recursive, and information-rich. Consciousness would therefore not float outside physics. It is a rare but natural mode of behavior that the universe can produce under the right conditions, much as stars produce fusion or crystals produce order.
>>2818010At least own it.
Say "I am a fascist" and your conscience is clean.
>>2818014Much like sexuality, strict labeling is stupid for politics
>>2818017>don't label me, mom!but honey, you said it's not a phase
>>2818021I fuck who I want, men, women, anyone inbetween or neither. None of it is of any consequence.
>>2818022>don't label me pansexual even though i'm pansexualok?
>>2818025I thought you were against commodities, if which labeling is the first step
>>2817945>Deleted by what? You are not explaining the physical mechanism.You're being retarded on purpose at this point. They leave your account and simply don't go anywhere, but cease to exist. These are digitized representations, they don't need a physical mechanism.
>You are buying things at a store with your debit card, yet it looks nothing like money, sure.Retarded semantic argument. Call it whatever you want, but it doesn't circulate and this is what distinguishes it from money. Money circulates, that's one of its core features. If you want to insist that it's money then okay, call a horse a dog if you want. I don't care. But it facilitates a socialist economy because it can't be used in an M-C-M cycle.
>You get paid a sum of money by the hour, yet it isnt a wage because… reasons.Again, more semantic nonsense. The difference is that it's not transferable and determined via democratic means. These features are not present in capitalism and this is why it's not simply a reproduction of capitalist relations.
>Okay, so the articles of use are also articles of exchangeThey aren't commodities unless they are actually being used as articles of exchange, which is not the case under socialist production. There is no exchange taking place at the point of retail because the store doesn't actually get anything from the consumer. The labour vouchers are destroyed and so the store doesnt actually recieve anything. Likewise there is no exchange between the producer and the distributor. Rather the producer meets their quota set by the planners and sends the finished goods to distributors as ordered. The goal of the producers isn't to move as much product as possible, but simply to meet the demands of the economic plan. Therefore goods produced in a socialist context are not objects of exchange, but simply articles of consumption.
At this point it's pretty clear that you aren't engaging in good faith though, or you're too dumb to understand basic concepts like non-circulation.
>>2818013>If a brain decays and dies, its component material disperses into the environment. But eventually, on a long-enough time line, a brain made of the same material could re-emerge as a new conscious configuration. However, none of the “memories” of the “past life” would be in-tact. Moreover, there is no metaphysical “karma” system in placethen it's not reincarnation, if there is no memory of the past life, no soul, just matter in motion experiencing itself in different configurations, it's not reincarnation.
>>2818030>commodities, if which labeling is the first stepwhat
>>2818031>They leave your account and simply don't go anywhere, but cease to existWhy not just say that the credits are transferred and manually deleted in the new account? Why keep insisting on impossibilities?
>Retarded semantic argument.You said it looks nothing like money, but it does. More dishonesty.
>The difference is that it's not transferableYou have admitted that vouchers are a medium of exchange.
>They aren't commodities unless they are actually being used as articles of exchangeIf you exchange (x) amount of credits for (y) amount of goods, you are purchasing an article of exchange with a set exchange value.
>There is no exchangeThere is exchange, there's no exchange… Contradiction.
>The labour vouchers are destroyed and so the store doesnt actually recieve anything. Why can't you just say that the vouchers are transferred to the government and then manually deleted? Why keep lying like this?
>At this point it's pretty clear that you aren't engaging in good faith I'm not the one playing mental gymnastics.
>>2818033For anything to be a commodity it needs brands and marketing
>>2818039Because they’d be deleted automatically, with modern computing there is no need for someone’s job at Communism Incorporated to delete the labour vouchers from your debit card
>>2818039>Why keep insisting on impossibilities?What is impossible about deleting a digital representation?
>You said it looks nothing like money, but it does. Because it doesn't circulate.
>If you exchange (x) amount of credits for (y) amount of goods, you are purchasing an article of exchange with a set exchange value.Okay, and what does the retailer get out of this exchange? What do they have at the end of it if the vouchers are destroyed? They give away a loaf of bread, what do they get in return? Nothing. Therefore there is no exchange.
>Why can't you just say that the vouchers are transferred to the government and then manually deleted? Because there's no reason for them to be transfered at all.
>>2818042>deleted automaticallyWhere? In the transferred account.
But what if someone wants a refund but theres now no credits to swap over? So, why not just tax the stores at the end of a tax season instead, to avoid all this nonsense? Taxation is the removal of currency from the economy, so its the same difference, just more rational.
>>2818046>What is impossible about deleting a digital representation? Nothing, as long as you locate the account in which it is deleted.
>Therefore there is no exchange. You do know that you are contradicting prior comments, right?
I give (x), you give (y), but there is no exchange? Contradiction.
>there's no reason for them to be transfered at all.Purchasing a good with credit is a transference. An exchange.
>>2818049>I give (x), you give (y), but there is no exchange? Contradiction.Except the customer in this case doesn't actually "give" the store anything. Rather the labour voucher is simply a certificate entitling them to withdraw goods from the common stock, and it is destroyed once this withdrawal is made. It's more like a ration card than money. In order for there to be an exchange, both parties need to have something at the end of it. However because labour vouchers are destroyed and not circulated, the store doesn't actually recieve anything.
>>2818053>Except the customer in this case doesn't actually "give" the store anything. Yes they do; they give their voucher in exchange for a good.
>It's more like a ration card than moneyIf it's rationing, then why are you talking about stores instead of breadlines? You get the same as everyone else; saving up rations gets you sent to the gulag; there's always a gun to the back of your head - why be shy now?
>>2818013I've thought Buddhism to be partially compatible with socialism and dialectical materialism for this reason
>>2818056>Yes they do; they give their voucher in exchange for a good.The voucher goes into the metaphorical trash. The store doesn't actually receive anything.
>If it's rationing, then why are you talking about stores instead of breadlines?It's not rationing, I just said it has more in common with rationing than money. The main difference is that a ration cared spells out exactly what goods and in what quantities you're allowed to expropriate from the common stock for your own consumption. Labour vouchers abstract this and allow you to choose what you want to take home rather than it being predetermined.
What do you guys think of Andrew Callaghan Channel 5?
>>2818036
you responded to the wrong post
>>2818090he got cancelled or some shit because he was a sex pest but nobody really cares because he makes documentaries about burger shart citizens being funny and crazy
>>2818057the very first sentence is about how it's not the same as buddhism or hinduism
>>2818057buddhist theocrats in tibet kneel to the pedophile dalai lama who wants to bring back feudalism
>>2818090good journalist imo
>>2818079Where does the democratic part come in? Prices are determined by everyone at a zoom meeting at the beginning of the year?
>>2818098Buddy there’s no agency involved here, the universe just happened to place the Lama’s tongue inside the mouth of that boy
>>2817994hmm could it maybe be because they know republican voters are dumbfuck cattle and that they can win voters by just saturating them with ads that say daddy trump will be mad at them if they don't vote for israel. While pushing a ton of money up against socialist candidates is more likely to backfire against and increasingly aware and angry democratic base
>>2818097I know, I wasn't saying they're the same thing
>>2818098Yeah, that's why I only said partially compatible
>>2818079>The store doesn't actually receive anything. When you give ticket to someone, they still receive it.
I don't know why this is so difficult for you.
>It's not rationing>Labour vouchers abstract this and allow you to choose what you want to take home rather than it being predetermined.Okay, so then its not a planned economy, and production is competitive for consumers. This is commodity exchange, anon.
>>2818124But it’s for immediate use, not for profit
>>2818124You still haven’t provided a superior alternative to either vouchers or a Kropotkinite stockpile
>>2818124you are an idiot
>>2818140>profitWill a surplus be generated?
>>2818142We have to first agree on the terms used; is a voucher system based in markets?
>>2818143>Production will be based in markets<Right, which is commodity production>You're an idiotWhat is idiot, exactly?
>>2818160US and Israel are the biggest backers of reactionary ideology in the Middle East.
All this talk about Muslims being inherently reactionary is bullshit, it's imperialism all the way down.
>>2818169
100%, Saudi Arabia exists to export Wahhabist ideology on behalf of the United States in order to prevent secular and socialist movements from forming.
>>2818165yeah that's been obvious since operation cyclone, it's just really weird to choose ahmadinejad of all people, who in the very text of the article is called "hard-line anti-israel anti-american"
hence my "what?"
>>2818090kinda fell off after he stopped doing street stuff. I don't really watch his recent content that's all in the studio
>>28181861 more thing. i forgot to mention the fact that taraki requested soviet intervention in afghanistan 3 separate times before they finally said "yes" by which point taraki had been assassinated.
>>2818124>When you give ticket to someone, they still receive itOnly in the extremely superficial sense that they briefly had an abstract representation of SNLT in their hand and then immediately destroyed it. You can't possibly sit there and tell me this an exchange in the monetary sense. At the end of the interaction the retailer has in effect given away the goods and left with nothing.
>Okay, so then its not a planned economy, and production is competitive for consumersThat doesn't even remotely follow from anything I said. There is no competition involved here, nor is there any commodity production since goods are not produced for the purpose of being sold. If a store in this system had zero customers and moved no merchandise it wouldn't be considered a negative for the economy. Rather it would indicate a surplus of goods which is actually a positive in a socialist context, but a crisis in a capitalist one.
>>2818158>Production will be based in marketsWhat markets? Where do you see a market anywhere in this scheme? State owned producers produce according to a national plan. State owned distributors distribute according to a national plan. Consumers consume in proportion to their contributions. This is a planned economy.
>>2818208>they briefly had an abstract representation of SNLT in their hand and then immediately destroyed itRight, so it is an exchange.
>exchange in the monetary senseThe voucher is taxed into the government account.
>goods are not produced for the purpose of being soldYes they are… You literally buy goods with your voucher, and you said that you can buy whatever you want, which means that there will be necessary overproduction and competition.
>If a store in this system had zero customers and moved no merchandise it wouldn't be considered a negative for the economy. Rather it would indicate a surplus of goods which is actually a positive in a socialist context, but a crisis in a capitalist one. So waste is good in communism? You also told me that burning crops was also good for capitalism, but now its bad for profits again. Please make up your mind.
>What markets?Consumer markets. If you have consumer choice, some products will receive more or less revenue than others, and some stores will thus also suffer or gain as a result. This is market competition driven by supply and demand.
>State owned producers produce according to a national plan.Now its a plan? So what happened to being able to buy what yiu want? What happened to saving?
>Consumers consume in proportion to their contributions. So do those who dont contribute not get a payment, then?
>>2818214>Right, so it is an exchangeIf it's an exchange then you should be able to tell me what the store is getting at the end of the interaction. Don't say they're getting the labour voucher because they aren't, it's immediately destroyed. Therefore at the end of the interaction, they have given away a good and gained nothing.
>which means that there will be necessary overproduction and competitionThat doesn't follow from anything I said.
>So waste is good in communism? You also told me that burning crops was also good for capitalism, but now its bad for profits again. Please make up your mind.I haven't contradicted myself here. Surplus =/= waste. Surplus is a good thing in this context because it means social needs are being satisfied, and then some. If goods aren't moving under socialism then it's not an issue, it just means they can sit in storage until they're needed. Under capitalism, such overproduction is a crisis because as commodities, they need to be sold or there will be a crash in profitability. Such crisis have the potential to crash a capitalist economy, not a socialist one.
>If you have consumer choice, some products will receive more or less revenue than others, and some stores will thus also suffer or gain as a result. Stores neither suffer nor gain in this system. There is no revenue. Whether they sell a lot of goods or few goods makes no difference because they don't actually get to keep or accumulate anything from the interaction, since the vouchers are immediately destroyed. The stores don't succeed or fail based on how much merchandise they move.
>Now its a plan? So what happened to being able to buy what yiu want? What happened to saving?Saving and consumer choice aren't incompatible with a planned economy. The production of goods is still predetermined according to a national plan. Saving up your vouchers because you still wouldn't be able to appropriate more than your contributions.
>>2818222>If it's an exchange then you should be able to tell me what the store is getting at the end of the interaction.They are receiving the credit in its account.
>Don't say they're getting the labour voucher because they aren't, it's immediately destroyed.You simply misunderstand causation.
>they have given away a good and gained nothing.Which means that every time there is consumption, society loses something, or is the difference made up by the payment? What you are implying is that the consumer steals the product, but their consumption is limited by exchange, and you know that. So tell me, what limits the consumption of individuals and what stops society from going bankrupt?
>If goods aren't moving under socialism then it's not an issue, it just means they can sit in storage until they're needed.What goods? If its long-term goods, capitalism abides by the same principle.
>as commodities, they need to be sold or there will be a crash in profitabilityIts the same scenario. They are held in storage until they are sold.
>Stores neither suffer nor gain in this system. There is no revenueSo how is profuction and consumption measured?
>The stores don't succeed or fail based on how much merchandise they move.So again, waste = good.
>Saving and consumer choice aren't incompatible with a planned economyYes it is - if production is planned, then consumption is planned.
>Saving up your vouchers because you still wouldn't be able to appropriate more than your contributions.If I save up enough, can I buy out a whole store? If not, these "vouchers" are rations. Also, you never stated whether the "useless eaters" will receive payment. Well? Would you let disabled people die?
>>2818250>Saving and consumer choice aren't incompatible with a planned economy<Yes it is - if production is planned, then consumption is planned.production is already semi-planned under capitalism, and so is consumption. why do you think porky is trying so hard to increase birth rates? Because they're planning for future production and consumption according to a planned population growth, which goes from being a mere statistical projection, to an actual production target, in terms of the production of labor power itself as a commodity.
>>2818258And you would agree that consumption is planned to the extent that production is planned, right? A market may be simply defined by a minimal competition for consumers based in a competition of producers. So, if we have consumer choice, we then have markets. This necessitates logistical waste.
anti israel sentiment among USA leftists has been neutered by scapegoating AIPAC
>>2818250>They are receiving the credit in its account.No they aren't. They don't have an account. The labour voucher is destroyed and they give away a good.
>Which means that every time there is consumption, society loses somethingNo they aren't. You can't have a labour voucher unless you have contributed SNLT. You can therefore only consume in proportion to what you contribute. If you work for 8 hours, then you are entitled to consume the equivalent quantity of goods it takes to produce in that time, minus necessary deductions for expansion of capital, support for those who cannot work, etc. For the sake of argument we can say that minus those deductions, you're left with 6h of vouchers. This means that your consumption is always pegged to your contributions so that there can be a social surplus.
>If its long-term goods, capitalism abides by the same principle.No it doesn't. Capitalism will actively destroy commodities in order to raise the price. Moreover the definition of a surplus is entirely different. Under capitalism there is a surplus when more goods are produced than are sold, even if there are people who need them desperately but can't buy them. Under socialism, there is only a surplus when production exceeds society's actual needs. This is why capitalist societies will destroy food even when people are starving, and what distinguishes commodity production from production for use.
>So how is profuction and consumption measured?In socially necessary labour time.
>Yes it is - if production is planned, then consumption is planned.In the sense that the planners need to anticipate how much of a given article will be consumed. Not in the sense that people are only permitted to consume fixed quantities of specific goods.
>If I save up enough, can I buy out a whole store?In theory yes, but that would be practically impossible since your vouchers are directly tied to your contributions. Even if you bought out the whole store, what you would have contributed with your own work would be equal to or greater than what you're consuming.
>If not, these "vouchers" are rations.Call them whatever you want. The point is that they wouldn't restrict you from buying whatever you likes. They wouldn't entitle you to fixed quantities of bread, sugar, meat, etc. They would entitle you to extract any quantity of goods from society so long as they were equal to or less than your own contribution. If you wanted you could spend them all on meat, or golf clubs, or shoes, or anything else.
>Also, you never stated whether the "useless eaters" will receive payment. Well? Would you let disabled people die?No, I already covered this in several posts. There would be deductions for various things such as maintenance/expansion of the means of production, supporting those who cannot work, those engaged in fields other than direct production, etc. Marx addresses all this in Critique of the Gotha Program, so please go read that.
The problem with labor vouchers is that unproductive labor is also a form of circulation. Exchanging currency is not necessary for circulation, you can just have the managers without the money.
why aren't there massive marches everywhere demanding that trump resign? he is the most unpopular president in history
It's starting to dawn on me that the AI backlash is immensely reactionary. People have accepted open tyranny for ages, and the only thing to make them mad is the threat of AI taking away their already bullshit, underpaid job; they aren't furious about the fact that they have to work 40 hours a week to live a impoverished, miserable life. They WANT to go back to it. They cannot imagine a better world. The moment any of this AI shit is scaled back, it will be back to "normal" and anyone who complains is le ungrateful swine. This will beat down any futurist and pro-worker movement for decades.
People unironically yearn for the mines. Meanwhile, China is actually thinking about how they can automate tedious jobs and give the returns back to their people.
The USA is so cooked. Absolvtely blackpilling realization.
Like, fuck man. Americans hate AI because it's technology. They're absolutely fine with living month to month and outsourcing all their high paying work so long as they get to slave away at walmart in doing so. The puritan work ethic has irreparably mindfucked the west.
>>2818289>They don't have an account. So if you pay digitally, where do the credits go?
How is a person's consumption measured so that there is no counterfeit or fraud?
>You can't have a labour voucher unless you have contributed SNLT. You can therefore only consume in proportion to what you contribute. Right, so you think disabled people should die.
>If you work for 8 hours, then you are entitled to consume the equivalent quantity of goods it takes to produce in that time, minus necessary deductions for expansion of capital, support for those who cannot work, etc.But thats giving those who dont contribute a contribution, causing a contradiction.
>This means that your consumption is always pegged to your contributionsHow can it be measured except by transference into the government account by sale? You are not showing how a purchase differs from theft.
>In socially necessary labour time.And how is this spent, and balanced between production and consumption?
>In the sense that the planners need to anticipate how much of a given article will be consumed. Not in the sense that people are only permitted to consume fixed quantities of specific goods. Right, so overproduction, or waste, is in-built to your market socialism, since everything is guesswork, and not really planned.
>Call them whatever you want. The point is that they wouldn't restrict you from buying whatever you likesWhich means overproduction of goods.
>If you wanted you could spend them all on meat, or golf clubs, or shoes, or anything else. And so you create chaos by allowing all the meat to be bought up.
>There would be deductions for various things such as maintenance/expansion of the means of production, supporting those who cannot work, those engaged in fields other than direct productionBut they dont contribute SNLT, so what is their portion measured by?
>>2818306What the fuck are you on about? You think people should be happy if AI takes their job away and leaves them destitute? Of course they hate having to work but at least they can survive off it.
>>2818306>It's starting to dawn on me that the AI backlash is immensely reactionaryhonestly this
>>2818324You can make the same argument against immigration
>>2818324it would be preferable if AI automated away every single job so the state becomes unstable and people get pissed. maybe we'd actually get somewhere for once
>>2818326I mean kinda but at least those jobs are going to human beings
>>2818327>bad thing happens<this is good because accelerationismShould we also support the government to just go around and kill innocent people because "maybe it will be destabilising"? Obviously no you dipshit
>>2818331>Should we also support the government to just go around and kill innocent people because "maybe it will be destabilising"?it would be preferable if america had a Russian bloody sunday event every single day. the state is already exterminating us, they should reveal to the people their true intentions. are you actually stupid or what
>>2818334Even if that did happen it might just make things even worse, but say you're right and it would help, perhaps it's justifiable to hope deep down for the killings to continue so that the system might collapse but are you really gonna go around telling everyone about it? And are you really gonna say everyone that opposes clearly bad things happening is 'reactionary'? It's fucking stupid
>>2818339Dont care. I would hope other marxist would be sober enough to confront these facts as opposed to the masses under a false consciousness. the Tsarist state massacring innocent protestors directly led to the revolution of 1905 and ended with 1917, I could only hope trump is retarded enough to do the same
>>2818342Yeah and do you think it would have been good strategy for Marxists to be like 'holy fuck it's so fucking based that the Tsar is killing people, anyone who is opposing this is a retard, we should hope he kills more people", that really would have won them friends among the workers right?
>>2818345>that really would have won them friends among the workers right?the workers in question:
>strategy for Marxists the strategy should be to capitalize on the gains provided by these retarded maneuvers. you don't think the revolutionary movement stands to gain in america if trump decided to mow down some MAGA loyalists peacefully petitioning him like the Tsar did?
>>2818275Engels talks along similar lines here:
<Only through the undervaluation or overvaluation of products is it forcibly brought home to the individual commodity producers what society requires or does not require and in what amounts. But it is precisely this sole regulator that the utopia advocated by Rodbertus among others wishes to abolish. And if we then ask what guarantee we have that necessary quantity and not more of each product will be produced, that we shall not go hungry in regard to corn and meat while we are choked in beet sugar and drowned in potato spirit, that we shall not lack trousers to cover our nakedness while trouser buttons flood us by the million – Rodbertus triumphantly shows us his splendid calculation, according to which the correct certificate has been handed out for every superfluous pound of sugar, for every unsold barrel of spirit, for every unusable trouser button, a calculation which “works out” exactly, and according to which “all claims will be satisfied and the liquidation correctly brought about. […] And now consider the naiveté with which Rodbertus would abolish industrial and commercial crises by means of his utopia. As soon as the production of commodities has assumed world market dimensions, the evening-out between the individual producers who produce for private account and the market for which they produce, which in respect of quantity and quality of demand is more or less unknown to them, is established by means of a storm on the world market, by a commercial crisis. If now competition is to be forbidden to make the individual producers aware, by a rise or fall in prices, how the world market stands, then they are completely blindfolded. To institute the production of commodities in such a fashion that the producers can no longer learn anything about the state of the market for which they are producing – that indeed is a cure for the crisis disease which could make Dr. Eisenbart envious of Rodbertus. - Friedrich Engels, Preface to Poverty of Philosophy, First German Edition, 1885
In this passage, Friedrich Engels is defending the informational and coordinative function of markets under commodity production. He is not defending capitalism normatively in the liberal sense (“markets are good because freedom”), nor abandoning communism. Rather, he is arguing that if production is decentralized and based on commodity exchange, then market signals likeprice fluctuations, competition, and crises are the mechanism through which society discovers what should be produced and in what quantities.
His target here is Rodbertus, a bourgeois socialist who accused Marx of plagiarizing the theory of surplus value from him (Marx said it was already embryonic in Smith) and thought commodity production could be retained while abolishing competition and crises through rational accounting and labor certificates.
>>2818311>>2818306>>2818325there are different criticisms of AI. some of it is pure spookery, but the valid criticism is what it's doing to the environment.
>>281836780-90% of all water consumption in this nation goes to farming. the agricultural industry is way more parasitic on the environment especially when considering how much subsidized corn ethanol gets put into gasoline. for capitalism to advance agriculture will be scaled down to meet tech capitals needs
>>2818306This is so out of touch with why people have an unpopular view of AI. Try actually organizing and talking to people
>>2818381>capitalist does X>better blame what he's using to do it withYour "butlerian jihad" will just make the capitalists pivot to using indians to do your job at 1/100th the salary
>>2818371we eat food and drink water. we can live without AI
>>2818373nobody cares that he jacked off in 2005 except fox news
he volunteered for 4 imperialists wars and worked for blackwater in 2018. i feel like i'm taking crazy pills when i talk to you people.
>but he had a change of hearteveryone does before they seek political power. how convenient.
>>2818390>we can live without AIthe exigencies of global competition makes adoption of new technologies not an option. China adopting AI at mass scale means their prices outcompete everyone on the market because of the extra productivity, so yeah you might be alive but broke as fuck cuz all the industry in whatever country you live in is gonna die without using new tech
>>2818386Indians are smarter and probably cheaper than "Frontier" AI models.
>>2818118America's first openly bisexual president.
>>2818398Chinese having low prices is not due to the adoption of AI
>>2818411sure it does. AI is a productivity tool, more output per worker, the difference is they don't minimize their workforce for maximum profits like americans do. there are certainly many things contributing to low chinese prices but seeing as how Chinese labor is the most expensive in the region now new technology like AI is most responsible for it
>>2818398>A.I. will outpace the U.S.Good?
They probably at least try to make some effort not to poison their people with it too
Unironically why isn't there a cringe compilation of shitty chud games and media products?
>>2818461Chud cultural hegemony
>>2818478At this point it's just basic common sense to get rid of these psychos if you're a Zionist. Any idiot can see that coexistence with their neighbours is the only possible long term survival strategy for Israel. The path they're on is pretty clearly one of a self-destructive death cult, much like the Nazis. The way things are going, the Arab world will come crashing down on Israel the moment it loses American protection. They'll be able to do anything they want to Israeli Jews and nobody will give a shit, like the Volksdeutche after WW2.
>>2818484Yeah but they have both boomer americans and zoomer male americans (Thanks to asmongold, the zoomer male pope) on their side. So they are feeling very cocky.
>>2818474Honestly most rightoids in power are on heavy drugs so they have zero impulse control. They take the most reckless path because they're not thinking clearly, and all their worst decisions have been rewarded over and over again. They won't realize how badly they fucked up until it's too late - and even then the big players will just flee and go live in luxury for the rest of their lives.
>>2818487Zoomers are overwhelmingly anti-Israel, even right wing ones.
>>2818487even the brainrot algorithms haven't been able to make zoomers zionists, israel is too evil
>>2818492Nah it's 50/50 with them according to polling
>>2818494Asmongold will depict them as a soyjak if they don't die for zion and they will kneel because losing aura is literal death to them.
>>2818484>At this point it's just basic common sense to get rid of these psychos if you're a Zionist. Any idiot can see that coexistence with their neighbours is the only possible long term survival strategy for Israel.Yeah but the solution is to delete Israel not to voot harder for the Israeli equivalent of the Democrats(whom nominated a war criminal for their own party leader last time they were close to ousting Netanyahu).
Israel is completely irredeemable unless you want another situation like North America where the native population is systematically exterminated and the rest of the world just treats it as an accepted atrocity because it happened in the past and the natives can't possibly come back from it. That's inevitably what's happening with Palestine and any solution that involves Israel continuing to exist as a Jewish State will just slow down the pace of extermination rather than ending it.
>>2818513Anthony Starr deserves far better than that show
>>2818513man American TV really has no subtlety it's like they think the audience are retards.
>>2818521Because we’re either retards or are too tired from working too much to engage with any intellectual challenge. Sometimes blunt satire is good anyway (not that The Boys past Season 1 at most is that but stll)
Whenever you’re watching a streaming show and wondering why it’s so bad and all the dialogue is so expository remember they’re designed to be watched while you’re scrolling and shitposting on your phone
>>2818474>here’s how the 2 state solution is still possible!LOL; LMAO even
>>2818519You read some behind-the-scenes interviews and it basically comes down to Kripke coming up with absurd concepts and Starr actually adding all the complexity to Homelander's character.
>>2817223>>2817227>>2817228Replying to this now, sorry if I'm brief but I've literally been awake for going on 32 hours straight now.
Anyways, I'd argue The Democrats face a more existential issue with Israel because as Sabocat highlights here
>>2818503 its literally an 80/20 issue among them. While the leadership of the democratic party is still broadly pro-Israel, there is so much inertia being put on them from the base that even some "moderates" are increasingly taking a kind of Israel-skeptic stance, granted this is with a lot of wiggle room (they'll say they wont take AIPAC money but they'll take J-Street money, for example)
Republicans are facing a more entrenched struggle and this is in no small part because the most active part of the Republican base, the Evangelicals, are religiously motivated Zionists. Israel is non-negotiable to them.
So I think among Republicans you'll get actual fascists with a dim view of Evangelicalism and a hatred of the Jewish people, and Evangelicals who don't give a fuck about being "goy slaves" because they need Israel for Jesus to come back. Massie's campaign is kind of an inflection point of this struggle. I believe AIPAC already sees the Democrats as a lost cause so the goal is to turn the Republican Party into a stronghold. In that regard they can't allow Massies and other Israel-Skeptics to be safe within the party.
>>2817414This is just fascists in-fighting with each other: a tale as old as fascism. Just because we hate the Junkers and the Triple Entente doesn't mean that Hitler is better than the SPD.
>>2818620Platner is a fascist who murdered a ton of innocent people abroad.
>>2818622you can say that but you don't actually have any proof, was it revealed to 500 people at once, that he murdered civilians in cold blood? or are you just saying it because you think so, and because you think it, it's good enough to be stated as if it was a fact?
>>2818560i think if anything the future for the democratic party is not exactly anti-zionist, but closer more or less to taking a critical and skeptical view of israel while not outright attempting to move beyond it, some may call it liberal zionism (a word which doesn't really mean anything) but they might be able to agitate for something that's while not great, far better than the status quo for the palestinians
>>2818629>they might be able to agitate for something that's while not great, far better than the status quo for the palestiniansHow many iterations of menshevik two-step-ism do we need to go through before we figure out it's not worth it?
>>2818632the main problem is, exactly what's the alternative? i'm not saying this is even good or what i'd imagine, but exactly where are we going when revolution is unlikely, most communists are geriatrics, and we're still clinging onto 100+ year old ideas that only ever seemed to work in developing capitalist states? we can't "make a one state solution" because we'd have to acknowledge the problem of nuclear weapons, but what can almost certainly be done is giving the palestinians enough for now that they are not becoming a victim of genocide, that they aren't impoverished and getting massacred by israeli settlers, and that they are able to live normal lives, in their homes, with minimal fear?
>>2818560> I believe AIPAC already sees the Democrats as a lost cause so the goal is to turn the Republican Party into a stronghold. In that regard they can't allow Massies and other Israel-Skeptics to be safe within the party.I think this is why we are seeing a weirdly large influx of fanservice (Just TnA really) media properties as of late. Gameoverse is just one example of zogslop
>>2817931>Yes they are…no they are not. as someone who mows his lawn, who cleans shinning his toilet, but at the same time goes on building optimization routines in VB11 in Autodesk Inventor for mechanical designs, and get paid for it, I guarantee you, the jobs deserve rewards of about the same amount. they tire you the same.
>>2817933again, vouchers can't be money because they lack of the typical C-M-C property present in money. vouchers don't enter in an ecosystem where the same voucher you left today in the supermarket could return someday back to your hand.
>>2818635>exactly what's the alternative?You know it.
<Two lines were contending within the R.S.D.L.P. during the revolution, the line of the Bolsheviks and the line of the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks took as their course the extension of the revolution, the overthrow of tsardom by armed uprising, the hegemony of the working class, the isolation of the Constitutional-Democratic bourgeoisie, an alliance with the peasantry, the formation of a provisional revolutionary government consisting of representatives of the workers and peasants, the victorious completion of the revolution. The Mensheviks, on the contrary, took as their course the liquidation of the revolution. Instead of overthrowing tsardom by uprising, they proposed to reform and "improve" it; instead of the hegemony of the proletariat, they proposed the hegemony of the liberal bourgeoisie; instead of an alliance with the peasantry, they proposed an alliance with the Constitutional-Democratic bourgeoisie; instead of a provisional government, they proposed a State Duma as the centre of the "revolutionary forces" of the country.https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/x01/index.htm >>2818641this is the problem, you can post this as many times as you want but we're comparing apples to blueberries here, we are in uncharted territory, and all you want to do is just ruminate on the past, again, where do we go from when none of this actually succeeded in industrialized nations'?
>>2818640>vouchers don't enter in an ecosystem where the same voucher you left today in the supermarket could return someday back to your hand.>the same voucherIf the same coin never enters my pocket again, does this obstruct the flow of circulation? No. Money is money, no matter the particular token. If a coin is lost, it can be replaced, and so on. So, if a voucher is erased, and then a voucher of the same value is given later on, this value circulates. Your credit is transferred into the government account, and circulated back to you in wages; this is a circulation between production and consumption by a medium.
>>2818639>everyone get tired, so everyone provides the same usefulness to societylel. i have no issue admitting that i am a useless parasite, because im not a moron.
>>2818513Crazy how this didn't go anywhere at all by the end of the show
With the permission of Mr. Wilimos I introduce this shadow bill:
S. N/A
An act
To end primary trade relations with the genocidal apartheid state of Israel.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled
Section 1. Short title.
This act may be cited as “abolish trade with the Zionist entity act of 2027.”
>>2818674the thing is that i do agree with you, in pretty much every way, although we shouldn't commit to reformism, it should be an immediate solution, more because it forces it to be considered, even if the result is castrated
>>2818663>If the same coin never enters my pocket again, does this obstruct the flow of circulation?>purposely not understanding 'vouchers don't enter in an ecosystem where the same voucher you left today in the supermarket could return someday back to your hand.'>makes silly strawman to his question: no.>mfw he went full retardio.that's not how money is defined.
I am giving you different liberal business economic dictionaries definitions of money:
<money: Econ a medium of exchange that is accepted throughout a country as payment for services and goods and as a means of settling debts (The Ultimate Business Dictionary, ISBN 0–7382–0821–3, p.208)Tacit: can be used by anyone. Vouchers can't be used by anyone; your own, only by you.
<MONEY: coinage, currency, and other commodities recognized by members of an economy as being reliable stores of value and MEDIA OF EXCHANGE[(Barron's Business Dictionaries) Jack P. Friedman; ISBN: 978-0-7641-757-9 p. 453]
Tacit: money circulates around the system, never leaves. again once you exchange a voucher, the voucher expires.
Marx's reasoning is that vouchers can't be used in the expression: Money as Capital (M—C—M'), and interrupts Money as Money (C—M—C).
>>2818678No one's saying that implementing reforms in the short term is bad though
>>2817994total turnout doubled to over 100k. highest in ky history
blatantly rigged
Section 2. The procedures of the embargo.
(A) work in line with the first Arab league boycott of Israel. Targeting goods and services directly made in Israel.
(B) punish those(including corporations) that smuggle such goods under title 18 of the u.s civil code 545 with the maximum sentence plus a fine of $500,000.
>>2818679>a medium of exchange that is accepted throughout a country as payment for services and goodsApplicable to vouchers.
>money circulates around the system, never leavesTaxation is the removal of money from the system.
Does taxation imply the destruction of money as a system?
>Marx's reasoning is that vouchers can't be used in the expression: Money as Capital (M—C—M'), and interrupts Money as Money (C—M—C).But if you trade (x) for (y) at a fixed rate, you are just reproducing the logic of exchange value by commodity exchange. If you are spending something for goods which have prices, this is exchange.
>>2818692>still intentionally misses the part where>Tacit: can be used by anyone. Vouchers can't be used by anyone; your own, only by you.>Tacit: money circulates around the system, never leaves. again once you exchange a voucher, the voucher expires.
>Taxation is the removal of money from the system.No, it's not. governments collect taxes since the beginning of money to re-insert the money they collect through payments of bureaucracy's salaries and governments' goods and services they buy. Graeber's books explains what's money, debt, and its historical-anthropological origins.
why do you come back with strong claims and assertions without even questioning one inch the silly things you claim are true? >Does taxation imply the destruction of money as a system?No. not even interests rates cuts, because that's only cutting borrowers ability to buy things in the present for labor (or work) not yet done, that's all.
>But if you trade (x) for (y) at a fixed rate, you are just reproducing the logic of exchange value by commodity exchangebut that's not alone what money is.
Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek argued that a voucher-based economic system lacked market-determined money prices and that would fail at 'economic calculation', because 'voucher's non-transferability was a fatal flaw'.
>But if you trade (x) for (y) at a fixed ratecan be a barter. and bartering isn't money, for instance.
>>2818712>governments collect taxes since the beginning of money to re-insert the moneyThe money is quite literally destroyed and then replaced:
<There is no such thing as taxpayers’ money […] Commercial bank money is destroyed by the repayment of the bank loan that created it. […] So, the government always creates new money by its spending and tax never funds government spending.https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/08/01/there-is-no-such-thing-as-taxpayers-money-2/<Taxation is, in effect, the means by which the government reverses the money creation process, destroying the money that it previously created when it spent.https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/10/30/where-does-the-money-go-when-the-government-spends-and-when-it-taxes/<Base money is destroyed by the payment of tax and the issue of government debt issued in the fiat currency of the jurisdiction. […] Commercial bank money is destroyed by the repayment of the bank loan that created it.https://taxingwealth.uk/2024/01/27/the-political-economy-of-money-and-tax/Nowhere do economists imply that the dollars you are taxed are then shared back out. That would be a stupid system, especially where over 90% of money is digital. The government cant "run out" of money for the same purposes, obviously.
>can be a barter. and bartering isn't money, for instance.If you have a standard denomination (SNLT) and you have prices for goods measured in SNLT, this is not barter, but a monetary relationship. How do you compute a non-monetary price? Explain.
>>2818719>>2818719again you are purposedly missing key factors here
the morons you are quoting are right-wing grifters trying to explain inflation by the words 'muh government prints money', deflecting to the 'see? governments collect taxes and their taxes they get its destroyed' argument. inflation is caused by hoarding and speculation. nothing else.
either their present balance sheets of governments accounts or they are simply selling you snake oil. they are trying to dismantle keynessian economics with their arguments, fostering the idea to people like you that governments expenditures are artificially created. why? to reduce social programs, but hey, never to stop subsidizing the bourgeoisie.
>Nowhere do economistsalso, one of them isn't an economist. is an 'accountant'. that's different.
>If you have a standard denominationthat wasn't what you siad.
you are not arguing in good faith, gtfo.
>>2818728that's a right-wing moron. ignore and hide. thomas massie never called what has happened in Gaza a genocide. he carefully never said so. AOCIA took months, years, and biden leaving office to say so? at least said so.
I go for the least reactionary path, always.
>>2818730>the morons you are quoting are right-wing grifters trying to explain inflation by the words 'muh government prints money'Anon, theyre literally the opposite… The first guy is a prominent left winger who informed Corbyn and promotes MMT economics. You are astoundingly illiterate and arrogant. Money is destroyed by taxation, so then, does taxation obstruct circulation? No. So you can have circulation while also rescinding particular tokens, like replacing an old coin with a new coin.
>that wasn't what you siad.Vouchers are a standard of currency which account SNLT and so set relative prices for goods, no? You spend the money as a tax, and this value renumerated to you in the wage as payment later on, repeating the balance between production and consumption. This is a system of monetary circulation and commodity exchange.
>good faithYou have clearly run out answers so just resort to sperging out.
If you want to be sensible, you're free to return to the topic at hand, if you like.
>>2818752<implying liberal economists are left-winguh-huh.
>>2818753You know nothing but pretend to know everything
Please resolve your personality disorder
>>2818755You are the one who brough in
>an accountant>presented as an economist>without presenting the balance of sheets that back up the claimnow you are projecting.
I already explained endlessly that vouchers aren't money from multiple sources and sides. you wanna go with the idea that taxes destroy money from a moron, ok, go.
keep following an account to understand economics.
>>2818759>I already explained endlessly that vouchers aren't money from multiple sourcesLiterally zero sources. You had to add your own words to make your personal definition fit.
>the idea that taxes destroy moneyGive me a single modern economist who claims that the government keeps tax money in a personal account instead of just creating new money at will? You have a childish mind.
>keep following an account to understand economics.This is the great absurdity anon, that you are claiming to know more than a person who has had an economic education spanning decades - how old are you? 20-something? How much economic literature have you read? You claim Murphy is right wing, and that he is complaining about inflation, when he literally does the opposite in the article. Just admit that you have no more arguments so resort to insults. So, lets get back on track:
Vouchers are a standard of currency which account SNLT and so set relative prices for goods, no? The voucher you spend is accounted for and is tallied as a marker of consumption by the exchange.
Anyways if you want a bill like that to become law vote for me on November 3rd.
>>2818728LMAO yeah the double standards here are insane
>>2818728>>2818772The only difference between the NSDAP and the DSA is the precise group of people who benefit from their Reich’s rape and exploitation of the periphery
>>2818764>Literally zero sources.I fucking told you that Misses and Hayek regarded labor vouchers as something else, but never as a money.
https://www.econlib.org/library/Mises/msT.html?chapter_num=10#book-readerhere, you dunce.
>On the other hand, the certificates or orders that the organized society would distribute to its members cannot be regarded as moneyyou literally have Marx stating that labor vouchers aren't money, and liberals like misses stating that vouchers aren't money.
https://users.wfu.edu/cottrell/OPE/archive/0705/0145.html<The Pierson-Kautsky Exchange (Hayek later on backs Pierson's critique)>Not only is difficult to guarantee the in-transferability of labour tokens, but it would be an unnecessary constraint of personal freedom. That kind of transferability was part of the first Austrian criticism against Marxism corresponding to the Holland Minister Nicolaas Gerard Pierson. He was thinking in Karl Kautsky when declared: 'A person who, in his own estimation, has received too few certificates for any particular article will be able to obtain more of them in exchange for certificates for another articlehttps://users.wfu.edu/cottrell/OPE/archive/0705/0145.htmlnow what?
dunce.
keep diggin in a trench of ignorance claiming that vouchers is money.
for what? to prove wrong Marxists?
pf stupid.
>>2818776jizzing on putin status?
>>2818776so why do you support moderate non MAGA republicans then? why the double standard
>>2818779Thinking every anon who calls out the western left’s uncritical support for neo-nazism is the same person status?
>>2818770Mises:
>If we suppose that a system of exchange might be developed even in a socialist society—not merely the exchange of labor certificates but, say, the exchange of consumption goods between individuals—then we may conceive of a place for the function of money even within the framework of such a society. This money would not be so frequently and variously employed as in an economic order based on private ownership of the means of production, but its use would be governed by the same fundamental principles.https://www.econlib.org/library/Mises/msT.html?chapter_num=10#book-readerSo where there is the exchange of goods by a medium, there is money. If you can save up and exchange vouchers, there is money, according to Mises.
>the in-transferability of labour tokensBut if you spend tokens on products, you are transferring it to the state to account for consumption.
>now what?Now its time for you to stop sperging.
Vouchers are a standard of currency which account SNLT and so set relative prices for goods, no? This is the function of money; to denominate spending by a unit of account, and as medium of exchange and store of value, it also commands market value based on personal investment.
>>2818782>he doubled downFactory status???
>>2818781I don’t, but if you can’t recognize that isolationist national conservatives are objectively better for the world than the rapacious imperialists in the DSA then you might be too retarded to contribute to the real movement
>>2818783>If we suppose that a system of exchange might be developed even in a socialist society—not merely the exchange of labor certificates but, say, the exchange of consumption goods between individuals—then we may conceive of a place for the function of money even within the framework of such a society. This money would not be so frequently and variously employed as in an economic order based on private ownership of the means of production, but its use would be governed by the same fundamental principles.holly moron. he's just telling you that money can still emerge in a socialist society if the exchange of consumption goods is permitted.
he's not contradicting his statement on labor voucher=/=money.
he's conditioning the existence of money with the exchange of consumption goods' presence.
even so, 'good exchanges=money' is a stretch he did. because he confuses barter with money. barter=/=money.
you are moving the goalpost.
>Now its time for you to stop sperging.the one sperging is fucking you, lmao more projection.
I am going to stop paying attention to your replies and do serious strawman for now on, since you moved the goalpost.
>>2818790>if the exchange of consumption goods is permitted.Do you exchange your voucher for consumption goods?
>I am going to stop paying attention to your repliesOkay - I dare you to stop replying, but you already seem to have made your mind up when you starting melting down earlier anyway. Exchangeable tokens are money. This is a controversial fact for some reason.
>>2818797>Do you exchange your voucher for consumption goods?he's referring to thesenuts.
grab your labor voucher and exchange them for thesenuts.
>>2818792How is any of that remotely relevant to the real movement for anti-imperialism? If Trump is ripping off other gringos all the more power to him
>>2818802no american ambassadors in germany, south korea or australia either
>>2818800So posting on leftypol is how you spend your time when you're not fucking children.
>>2818804the US doesn't need them.
those countries jump if trump blinks on camera from washington d.c.
what's the point of paying diplomatic personnel if those examples are subservient to the US interests.
>>2818825>what's the point of paying diplomatic personnel if those examples are subservient to the US interestsso they stay subservient in a world with shifting alliances? retard
>>2818840Why wouldn’t they? They’re united by their genocidal ambitions towards Russians and Han Chinese, which has always been far and away the most important part of the NATO project. A trait they share with the western left…
>>2818845Australia just accepted an emergency donation of jet fuel from china cuz they're getting raped by the crisis in hormuz, so don't be so quick to assume alliances have already been crystalized for the next global war. China has ambassadors in every country except for a few microstates like Vatican and Belize
>>2818840>so they stay subservient in a world with shifting alliances?wow, you are jumpy.
are you german, samsugnian, or aussie?
>>2818859worse, amerikkkan
>>2818850US-Belize-Vatican axis vs China-Rest of the world allies
Midwestern MILF pussyy…….
>>2818845>we are being hecking genocidedresident russian schizo attacks once more
>>2818956The magacom "movement" was never a somethingness. Even the ACP admits it was an attempt at psyoping xitterite edgelords into socialism with Sorelian trickery. That said, yet another democrat means nothing and I encourage you to stop posting democrat coal.
>>2819015>everyone wants to be a winner and a celebrityspeak for yourself weirdo. the last thing I want is attention from people. being a celebrity destroys your brain and sense of self. winner? what does that even mean? under capitalism it means arch-exploiter
>>2818977he didnt run a serious campaign though did he? like, no ads, no rallies, nothing.
>>2819035Exactly, the temporality embarrassed millionaire will be replaced bt the temporality embarrassed Stalin and you have no capacity to deal with it
>>2819037he had a rally but he wore a bulletproof vest and started crying because he's mentally ill and it just made him look kind of lame
>>2819040thats most leftists. they think theyll be stalin after the revolution and kill people they disagree with when the reality is theyll keep the same job they have more likely than not
>>2819044i don't think most people think like that. maybe on this website but not irl. maybe touch grass or something kid
>>2818927you know people make fun of china for not doing socialism until 2050 but i feel like america won't even do basic ass reforms until 2100. unless it's conservative reforms to make stuff worse. like decrepit old bernie will just keep stepping up to the podium and asking to raise the corporate tax rate to what it was under reagan, and normie reactionaries will pretend he's the second coming of stalin for that. Under FDR they were 90%.
If you look at British history, British liberals in the 1830s were burning down the mansions of aristocrats to get reforms. What happened? British liberals 200 years ago were more revolutionary than American socialists today.
>>2818956Lander unfortunately seems to be pretty firmly in the "Bibi is what's wrong with the American relationship with Israel; when his government is gone things will be better" camp. However, he is certainly more of an ally than the disgusting arch-zionist multi-millionaire Goldman.
The DNC autopsy apparently got released by CNN
https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/21/politics/read-full-dnc-2024-autopsy-cnnAbsolutely zero mentions of Israel or Gaza, the DNC annotated most of the report with "There's no evidence of this, no sources for this, contradicts itself", and spends the lion's share of the report talking about where money is going.
Oh, it does try to claim that trans issues fucked the Dems over, but I think that's trying to ignore the elephant in the room (*cough* Gaza *cough*) and it literally has zero conclusion in the autopsy.
So it seems like the real controversy behind it is less that its a secret file that admits the progressives were right, and more that it was basically money laundering for incompetent, overpaid consultants.
>>2819127I've said it before, but I think there's a class of people who read Lenin or Marx and their chief takeaway is to write everything in this kind of self-aggrandizing and biting way. Like their idea of being a Leninist is to just scowl more.
>>2819127is Haz a glowie?
he always starts off with reasonable takes(LGBT movement is a CIA/porky glowop) and then veers in such an insane direction that no one can take him seriously, inevitably undermining his own original point and pushing people away from the Left.
>>2819127The problem with American leftists is they dont understand how to counter IDpol. They have 2 false solutions. First is embracing IDpol like most leftists which alienates the working class. And then they wonder "its a DNC conspiracy why we dont have votes". No honey, its because most people dont want their 90% white town become 70% brown. The second false solution is this ACP style retardation where you try to appeal to chuds. Why would that work when chuds for whom idpol is a priority over econpol can vote for actual chud politicians rather than chud-lites like Haz?
The correct solution is for American leftists to just do what the USSR did and what China keeps doing. Suppress both ethnic grievance politics and ethnic supremacy of ALL ethnicities, no exception. Suppress religion, and dont allow some liberal "freedom of religion" nonsense. Establish a strict meritocracy where your identity does not give you a leg-up because you were oppressed, nor does it punish you because you belong to a dominant identity group. Severely restrict immigration and restrict naturalization even harder. Enforce equality of genders while avoiding the gynocentrism of bourgeois feminism. Promote masculinity as a healthy and natural thing, and promote childbearing and childrearing as positive feminine traits.
So leftists need to stop being Democrat-lite and Republican-lite, and start pushing their Communist IDpol. This will require courage and perseverence because the above policies will be hated by the majority initially, but eventually people will realize we're right and its for their own good.
class conscious proletarians across the globe have expressed their support for Maureen Gallindo, even those who are very skeptical about the real potential of electoralism in advancing working class politics in the US are reexamining their position since this specific candidacy seems different
>>2819156While I agree with the core point that the Left doesn't know how to counter IdPol, I feel like "people don't want their 90% white town to become 70% brown" both fails to be rooted in reality and has some underlying racism. There's no intentional push to "brown" towns, its ridiculous.
Also, while you push back (rightly, in my opinion) on the ACP type appeal to insane right wingers, I believe the promoting natalism part of your post kind of veers into conservatism.
>>2818884owenists in charge
>>2819153homophobic conspiracies are not "reasonable takes"
>>2819156>childbearing as a positive traitWhy does this board also resort to catholic social teaching?
inb4 Malthoooooosian
There's no reason why making more people is good, people treat it like a self-evident truth and throw a fit whenever someone disagrees. Tell me please, why is it good?
>>2819170Revisionist, reactionaries, and idealists lurk everywhere.
its insane how you morons cant figure out that LGBT+ and all that jazz is a cultural item, and as such, acceptance of it is neither contrary to nor necessary for a socialist movement to be properly socialist.
youre only "doing an idpol" when you allow for these things to drive a wedge in the socialist movement. which is what Haz is doing when he claims that LGBT+ acceptance is bourgeois and also what more socially-progressive left-wingers are doing when they claim that non-acceptance is bourgeois.
Cuba is pro-LGBT, the Soviet Union was opposed to it. Both were/are socialist experiments nevertheless.
>>2819179It’s a little bit more than a cultural item to those actual people with actual relationships
>>2819181something being cultural does not mean it doesnt have real-world effects. but it does mean that it is irrelevant when gauging the explicitly-socialist character of a socialist movement.
socialists are socialists whether theyre tolerant of minority groups or not, just as liberals are liberals whether theyre tolerant of minority groups or not.
>>2819181Nah, I'm queer myself and even I'll readily admit that our issues are incidental to class struggle. This isn't true of all idpol of course, since a revolution can't succeed without the participation of women and (if in a diverse country) ethnic minorities. Queer people on the other hand aren't numerous enough to count one way or the other, though obviously I'd prefer their acceptance to be part of a socialist agenda. Haz's statements are retarded not just on principle or because they'll alienate queer people, but because they'll likely drive a wedge between pro and anti-queer workers the same way all culture war bullshit does. The fact is that most cishet people don't have strong feelings one way or the other. In the West the general view is passive acceptance. Making a big issue of it either way is likely to do a lot more damage than just tailing whatever the dominant opinion is in your country, and there's nothing to gain from it.
>>2818638>zogslopHow?
You think everything is zogslop, how are you any different from the spooked retards on /pol/ at this point?
>>2819179Haz is nothing but a LaRouchite/crypto-fascist grifter and you are a idiot for listening to anything he says.
You faggots spend hours discussing Haz, give it a break
>>2818638>I think this is why we are seeing a weirdly large influx of fanservice (Just TnA really) media properties as of lateMost fanservice slop in games comes from China now.
>>2819190you seem to have misunderstood the post or failed to finish reading it
>>2819153>he always starts off with reasonable takes(LGBT movement is a CIA/porky glowop)how is that a reasonable take. the reasonable take is that it has been co-opted, not that it was glowie from the beginning
>>2819207If something can be coopted, it was from the beginning
>>2819156>most people dont want their 90% white town become 70% brownstop bombing, couping, sanctioning, embargoing, loan sharking, assassinating, and union busting the third world and they'll stop showing up in the places where the bombs don't drop. people like to live where bombs don't drop. if bombs don't drop on their homes they'll stay there. make sense? no need for race slop to come to that conclusion.
>>2819208the class struggle was co opted by ᴉuᴉlossnW. that doesn't mean the class struggle was glowie from the beginning. your conclusion is not supported by your premise.
>>2819170>There's no reason why making more people is goodit's not good, but it is necessary for the species to continue. If you want a communist future, that means you want a future, and if you want a future, that means you want humanity to contiue.
>>2819215Why does a communist future need humans? The animal and fungi kingdom already live in classless moneyless societies
>>2819217>playing dumbcommunism means humans achieving a society without classes. why? because it was a word invented by humans to describe humans achieving something on their own behalf.
>>2819222Clearly that’s not possible or even desirable now so we settle for newer, better animal species and AI instead
>ABC is reporting that of first time homebuyers, 35% are Gen Z Women while only 18% are Gen Z Men.Materialist explanation?
https://abcnews.com/Lifestyle/wireStory/single-gen-women-outpace-gen-men-homeownership-despite-133141754 >>2819226>Clearly that’s not possible or even desirableunproven premise
>now so we settleundefined "we", I can only presume you mean humans since you are presumably a human.
> for newer, better animal species and AI insteadAI doesn't have desires so they don't care about the mode of production. but they also don't experience life. at least not yet. i don't believe in souls but i also don't believe AI has the self awareness of biological life quite yet. at least nothing available to the public.
>>2819229women finish college at a higher rate and are generally more socialized in the sense of "integrated into the dominant social structure".
>>2819185>This isn't true of all idpol of course, since a revolution can't succeed without the participation of women and (if in a diverse country) ethnic minorities. Y'know I think one of the clever tricks with liberal IdPol is it leaves as a hanging question whether Revolutions could succeed without the majority. Like it differentiates marginalized groups enough that umbrella terms (like "American") simply cease to apply to them or are considered de facto exclusionary, it elevates them to pre-eminent importance ("We can't succeed without X group supporting us") but kind of handwaves or presumes the rest just "go along with it". One group has to be "won" but the rest is just kind of placid or acted upon.
Not saying you're doing that, it just seems to be how it functions in my view. I think particularly dumb movements take that
implicit assumption and make it explicit, like the idea that "decolonization" is remotely possible in the U.S.
>>2819236that's true. I know a nurse who makes way more money than me but she also is always in way more debt than me. I have always avoided paying interest and always save up until I'm able to buy something, meanwhile this woman got into $100,000 of interest debt on a $50,000 car and had to default on the car payments. Like… what?
>>2819235He probably is thinking that. He must be seething inside.
>>2819231Humans will never be satisfied no matter how much you give them, they’ll just holes that cannot be filled, not with love, food, or material, all they ever do is take and suffer and both them and the natural world would be better without them. Humans know this implicitly too which is why fertility rates everywhere are below replacement .
>>2819156Launch all chuds into the ocean
>>2819239by your own logic they are finally satisfied. you talk out of both sides of your mouth. you say they are not satisfied, yet you say they are finally finished with living, suffering, dying.
>>2819093either the person that claimed that saw the report lied or this is not the report.
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/22/dnc-2024-autopsy-harris-gaza >>2819243They’re recognizing the absurdity and suffering inherent to their existence and choosing not to continue it by having children, especially in this economy
>>2819240DNC autopsy ctrl+f roundup:
>ctrl+f israel>0 results>ctr+f gaza>0 results>ctrl+f genocide>0 results>ctrl+f capitalism>0 results>ctrl+f fascism>0 results>ctrl+f cpusa, dsa, socialism>0 results>ctrl+f trump>127 results>ctrl+f lgbt >1 match>ctrl+f immigration>2 matcheslol, lmao
>>2819245>>2819240>>2819249It unironically comes across like a C-grade uni paper.
This might possibly be the most impotent-centrist thing the DNC has done, they managed to release an autopsy that just pisses
everyone off after hiding it for so long. The head of the DNC embarrassed himself in an interview saying "Well we learned many great lessons from the autopsy" while refusing to reveal what those "lessons" were. It was only natural that people speculated "Oh clearly it has stuff about how they alienated their base!"
But its got fucking
nothing in it. The head of the DNC was saying they got great lessons from a paper that
doesn't even have a conclusion. Its fucking batshit, like he was incapable of just saying "We got the autopsy and it was trash" so he created an even worse conspiracy to defend himself. They chose a middle ground that satisfied no one and pissed everyone off, not even establishment shills can defend this.
I'm truly in awe. Like legitimately. The DNC has turned incompetent compromising into an art form.
>>2819258It makes economic sense to have as many children as possible in a low tech agricultural economy where more children means more labor on the farm, in the early days of industrialization children young as 8 were wageslaves helping pay rent. In an advanced industrial model a child is literally nothing other than a parasite and a headache you have no time for except out of sentiment.
>>2819261>In an advanced industrial model a child is literally nothing other than a parasite and a headache you have no time for except out of sentiment.that's not entirely true, people in the core live longer and rely on their children more to be advocates for them when they start getting old and going senile. if you have no children, or they all hate you, you're basically at the mercy of nurses and lawyers, and have nobody who actually loves you looking out for you.
>>2819261what you said about agrarian society is true however
>>2819251I am still puzzled with what the IMEU said, that the report blamed everything on progressives, Gaza and Palestine.
I bet the DNC lies.
>>2819265You’re still hundreds of thousands of dollars upfront for a retirement plan that ultimately depends on the child’s consent, expecting this of proletarians is absurd, especially combined with debt for cars and housing
>>2819093lol that's gonna help with the fundraising issue. Donors are about to fire the DNC chair; he is on borrowed time at this point.
>>2819271I mean, it's possible that this is a fake report if only because the dude was saying it was anything other than "incomplete and useless" up until he released it.
Even the IMEU is getting in on it:
>Margaret DeReus, the executive director of the IMEU Policy Project, also criticized Martin in a statement. “Ken Martin should release the information that the author of the autopsy told us clearly and unambiguously, which is that DNC officials’ review of their own data found Biden’s support for Israel to be a net-negative for Democrats in 2024.”https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/dnc-releases-2024-autopsy-chair-apologizing-creating-even-bigger-distr-rcna345963 >>2819281I am not the only one puzzled, huh. what a bunch of fraudsters.
I remember someone saying that 'trump would never win in California' after
trump said that 'if Jesus had counted the votes in California I've would win, because latinos love me'I replied her: don't underestimate DNC's incompetence, LMAAOOOOO
>>2819258India and Bangladesh recently fell under birthrate replacement and they're poor as shit. Clearly bourgeois society is to blame for people not wanting children which means only socialist society can solve it
>>2819286replacement rate is highest in many of the red countries on the bottom graph… how do you explain that? I think
>>2819265 and
>>2819261 are correct
>>2819274well the alternative is going senile and being totally at the mercy of strangers. good luck!
>>2819288>replacement rate is highest in many of the red countries on the bottom graph… how do you explain that? because africa is a bunch of underdeveloped bourgeois societies. we see from the birthrate issue that as soon as a country reaches a certain level of development birthrates drop off a cliff. not only that but over time as more countries industrialize that threshold is also dropping, so you will see africas birthrates drop soon as chinas belt and road develops the continent. the birth rate issue is the single biggest problem for capitalisms continued development, the exact opposite problem imperialist nations in the 20th centuries faced
>>2819156Ridiculous. It’s called “workers of the world unite”, not “cishet male workers of the world unite”. The reason why we fail at idpol is because we fight battles on turf that is decided by the fascists - of course you lose if you let your opponent pick the battlefield. Instead of accepting the lie that “races” exist and are equal, we should be countering with the truth that “race” is made up nonsense and is used to brainwash people and pit them against each other. Instead of accepting the lie that “all 19272829474 genders are real”, we stand by the truth that gender is a social construct, people should be left alone, and any attempt to divide the workers on this basis is a tactic to brainwash people and pit them against each other. You will not win by suppressing people’s identities (it didn’t work anywhere in the Soviet sphere - all it did was necessitate totalitarian control and when the new government was no longer willing to exert that, it exploded into an even worse scenario); nor will you win by accepting fascist lies. As soon as you say “Well yes races exist, but…” you’ve already lost, since they will just say “Ah, see, they acknowledge humans are fundamentally different, and since we live in a dog-eat-dog world, therefore it makes sense for us to be identitarian”. Ridiculous.
>>2819293exactly, because the more developed the country is, the more it has access to birth control, abortion, contraception, sex education. so it's not actually economic misery, because economic misery is highest in places where the fertility rate is highest:
>equatorial, extremely hot>historically colonized>exploited by IMF loans and imperialism>regularly couped the CIA>the people are still doing agrarian labor and eat less than 2000 calories per dayso if no longer reproducing were really a matter of humans "admitting they're miserable and hate life" like the schizo "only mushrooms deserve communism" anon said, then reproduction would actually be LOWEST in the least developed and most economically miserable regions, not the highest. so the superstructural explanation, for once, actually makes more sense. In marx's time the industrial proletariat had a lot of kids still because they did not have contraception, birth control, sex education, or legal abortion. they were also crammed in tenements and poor houses that were way more crowded than even the worst 1st world apartment complexes today. women also had not been liberated yet by feminist struggles, and didn't even have bourgeois liberal rights like the right to own property and vote, so they were still basically just beaten and raped by their spouses and forced to give birth over and over again. That is the 19th century proletariat. But the 21st century imperial core proletariat has far fewer children than the peripheral proletariat.
>>2819298reasonable take but you will be eaten alive for using the term totalitarian
>>2819305Cannibal Communism
>>2819303You forgot also that the kids were a source of secondary income
>>2819303>birth control, abortion, contraception, sex education. communism will have these things retard
>so it's not actually economic miserynobody said it was economic misery. the main thing is time. developed society has 1000x more demands on your precious time and parents spend more time and money on raising children in rich nations compared to poor nations where the community itself help takes on rearing children (good luck finding that sort of community in america)
>>2819315>communism will have these things retarddid I say or imply anything to the contrary? you seem to think I was.
>nobody said it was economic misery. the main thing is time. developed society has 1000x more demands on your precious time and parents spend more time and money on raising children in rich nations compared to poor nations where the community itself help takes on rearing children (good luck finding that sort of community in america)thank you for adding this, it was not mutually exclusive with anything I was saying.
>>2819324based zohran as always
>>2819156>most people dont want their 90% white town become 70% brownbut anon, they are the ones that bring in the brownies and the darkies to pay cheaper salaries.
>>2819360Actually seeing centrist Dems insinuating that the fact the autopsy doesn’t mention Gaza is proof Gaza is unimportant and “less than 1% of voters actually care about Gaza!”
>”This is how crazy the online left is. First not releasing the autopsy is proof Gaza cost them the election, now not mentioning Gaza is proof it cost them the election!” Mr. Wilimos(PLA-NC) asks the public:
Ate any barbecue dishes lately? How would you describe its quality from a scale of 1 to 10?
>>2819371texas bbq> sc bbq >nc bbq >kansas bbq
>>2819360this rings hollow when his official policy stance is that the USA military should be expanded and USA military members should be given greater benefits. he's either really stupid or lying. doesn't really matter which. the USA left really needs to find better candidates.
>>2819375>the USA left really needs to find better candidates.the problem is 'better candidates' are doomed to irrelevancy in third parties. running under Dem ticket is easy when the best candidates the establishment can find are 80 year old cancer ridden boomers like Mills or Collins who have never held a single town hall in their 40 year careers
>>2819376it'd be trivially easy for DSA and the broader USA "left" to neutralize this strategy. if they just pushed their own candidates to unapologetically and unambiguously pushed an anti zionist line. instead they've got the likes of AOC
still today stumbling over her words unable to make clear statements on the issue.
honkoid status?
>>2819376>Random middle aged white hoes talking about putting fascist in campsIf she's legit it's moments like this that make me think communism in USA may be inevitable. And I cant fucking wait
>>2819376>GOP is funding ginger karen Stalina declaring that zionists belong in castration campsEven if she was fake it'd still be good because it's making people more comfortable with the kind of politics needed to fix anything in this shithole.
>>2819382remember you can never tell what the true purpose of a psy op is until it manifests. maybe she goes full fetterman once elected. maybe she pairs her based takes with incredibly retarded takes. maybe she says israel is a judeobolshevik land of untermensch mutts that must be exterminated by aryan gigachads. you never know what the true purpose of a glow op is until it manifests.
>>2819185>Nah, I'm queer myself and even I'll readily admit that our issues are incidental to class struggle … though obviously I'd prefer their acceptance to be part of a socialist agenda. >>2819233>Y'know I think one of the clever tricks with liberal IdPol is it leaves as a hanging question whether Revolutions could succeed without the majority. A revolution can't succeed without the majority. A big problem that chuddy communists have though is they can try very hard to "be like the USSR" and pretend that queer issues are not a thing, but that doesn't actually make queer people in the society go away. I think that's kind of the problem with their way of thinking, they think they can replicate an idealized sort of unity within their own group so it looks or feels a certain way, but that has no effect at all on the wider society they're living in and which goes on utterly indifferent to them.
Personally I think gay issues (specifically gays and lesbians) are basically won in the U.S., and I also think gay issues have been incidental to class struggle, like gay men are just very boring and bourgeois. It's also mildly interesting to read about how it developed and changed over time. That was once not popular at all BTW. But like this was just a thing that happened. You can just do things and build support for your cause. You could do it badly or counter-productively, of course.
>>2819375>the USA left really needs to find better candidates.>>2819377>the problem is 'better candidates' are doomed to irrelevancy in third parties.the problem is reformism, tailism, liquidationism, electoralism. build an independent working class party whose goal isn't to tail a popular bourgeois party like the dems, or to tail an interclass populist opportunist "movement" like MAGA, or to simply fly a freak flag like the lolbertarian party. the goal should be intensification of class struggle, and exposing the system for what it is, not being the first socialist to win a seat on your city council or some incredibly lame shit like that.
similarly the goal isn't pacifistic lifestylism of living in a polycule commune with 20-somethings that inevitably breaks up when it turns into an abusive cult or someone gets pregnant and wants a normal environment for their kid to grow up in.
independent working class party whose goal is to intensify class struggle by any means necessarybtw you will never abolish first past the post because the dems and republicans want an eternal monopoly on politics, so don't even think about building some kind of european system where 10+ parties can compete in a race. those devolve into confusing coalition shitshows anyway.
>>2819248no she's on husband number two and both her husbands have been kinda shluppy soyjak house husbands without jobs
>>2819394>taking dem false promises and mainstream media at face valuehow many more years will you fall for it?
>>2819397many states and cities have ranked choice elections already you know like alaska. some don't even have party specific primaries like california. for the record I don't think the DSA strategy will work, not because its wrong, but because the establishment dems will be forced to re-write the law to kick out the growing DSA element in the party, which would directly benefit independent communist parties
>>2819376>is it perhaps cuz she's the most obvious psyop in record history?more obvious than AOCIA and Graham Palantir? nah
>>2819400the bourgeoisie in general are a suicide cult because they are their own gravediggers and yet persist in their behavior.
reactionaries in general are a suicide cult because they antagonize everyone else into eventually killing them in self defense.
>>2819378>>2819381
>own candidates to unapologetically and unambiguously pushed an anti zionist linein texas that doesn't work. texas is zionistland, like florida. the democraps need to bark to immigrants, to pro-Palestinians, to communism or be warmongers or else don't get elected there, lmao.
>>2819410Haz will get republican money and end up a Democrat in Congress by 2032
>>2819394IRV is just FPTP with extra steps
>>2819400Funny thing, The Rapture is considered heretical by the Catholic Church and many orher (Non-American) denomnations.
>>2819419He’ll be White Kamala
>>2819408Zionazis and other fascists in camps is the only thing that works though. Not everyone can be reasoned with. The sooner people figure that out the better.
>>2819258Those countries are having collapsing birthrates at a terrifying rate. Which goes to show it isn't caused by development or other suggestions like that. I believe we are at the end stage of neoliberal globalism and the birthrate is a reflection of it. The WWII world order is about to collapse and a new one(perhaps lead by China) will start developing in its place
Unique IPs: 126