[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta / roulette ] [ GET / ref / booru]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

New Announcement: IRC<=>Matrix bridge #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new every Monday : /meta/

File: 1631702784132.jpg (18.47 KB, 600x323, Individualism-Graphic.jpg)


I was talking to someone about investing into stocks (I am a noob and have no clue where to start) just to earn some extra money to be able to sustain myself. I don't expect to turn into billionaire bourgeoise overnight, I just want my debt cleared and never to worry about falling behind on rent.
I pointed out that even if every average joe pulled out of the stock market and only lived entirely off labor or welfare, it wouldn't change anything because 99% of the financial system is corporate billionaire parasatism, and it was like accusing average people of causing climate change when 99% of emissions are caused by big corporations anyway.

He accused me of falling into their satanic economy, and falling for the wallstreet being meme'd on, and bitcoin shit, and that the more I enable the system the longer it takes to collapse. He claims that I have adapted a collectivist mindset that everyone falls into, and that eventually I will have a huge pile of money will accumulate from many pennies, "if I take a few pennies from everyone every week I can make billions".
Apparently, when everyone wants to invest a little bit here and there for themselves, it amounts to trillions over time and years of extending the life of the financial system.
So is this individualist idea of "be the change you want to see in the world" legit?


No, you were right to give the good example of climate change. Maybe try shitting on recycling some more next time.


Sorry, tldr I'm drive-by shitposting.
100 companies do 75% of pollution or some shit.
Your home is part of the 25%, of which it is .0000001% of that. Good luck 👍


>>495027 (me)
This logic makes no sense, but whatever lol


>So is this individualist idea of "be the change you want to see in the world" legit?
No. It's either a naive trust that the system works as advertised (as free, democratic, participatory institutions instead of a plutocratic class dictatorship) or a denial that a system exists at all. Both betray a sort of liberal mindset. It's the "vote with your dollars" fallacy. If that recent shit with Gamestop should have told you anything, it's that if there's individual action that can actually disrupt the system, that action is quickly banned. If the stock market was really dependent on the activity of small investors, the state or capitalist apparatus would find some way to push people into investing.

Point blank: collective action is the only thing that has ever worked. Individual lifestylism does not have even a single victory to its name.

It's basically a meme fueled by the ever greater tendency for people to self-identify and relate to the rest of the world by their consumption choices.


File: 1631706630231.png (997.24 KB, 866x864, stonks.png)

I think he has a point to a certain extent, we can make a (small) difference by our individual choices, but at the same time, it doesn't serve anything for all communists to be poor and disenfranchised. If you have cash to invest then by all means do so - if you invest $20,000 and use the dividends to give $100 to local socialist organisations that are doing good work, you still helped the left way more than someone who sat on their $20,000 in the bank and gave nothing.

Also - if you leave your money in the bank, they are investing it themselves, so it really makes no difference. You might as well get the profit instead of the bank. Unless your friend is hiding his cash under the mattress, he's full of shit.




File: 1631710248953.jpg (92.61 KB, 1811x900, stonkerinos.jpg)

>I was talking to someone about investing into stocks (I am a noob and have no clue where to start) just to earn some extra money
So you don't know how it works, but you expect to get money out of it ?
I would tell you to avoid investing in stocks so you don't get screwed over.
Just to warn you that most information about investing is bad or outright malicious (manipulation to get you to invest in somebodies scam)
Most rich people use expensive financial services to make money on the stock market.
I think the stock market is massively overvalued because of all the "free" money that states have poomped into it.
It's going to crash or deflate at some point.

If you want to play finance capitalism, your best strategy is to have insider information.
One other strategy that is likely going to work is to wait for a crash and buy stocks when they are undervalued. (pic)

The stock-market is a zero sum game pyramid scheme, you can only make money if somebody else loses money, so keep that in mind.


You don't because it's true, you help yourself first so you can help others.


As if the 25% isnt just the next 100 companies


You gather a bunch of people together in organized groups and seize control of the state. The state enacts the policies. There is no individual great man theory of history. It's literally the prols seizing the state to change society.


Also investing accelerates the downfall of capitalism instead of prolonging it.

t. >>495307


>Individualism is correct and unchallenged
it has never worked, not once.
Social orders change when the masses move.


no ethical consumption under capitalism


"We need to change the structure of the social system. Your home separated and atomized from that. The basic constitutive unit of society is not the individual person, but rather the relationship between individuals. Change doesn't start at home on an individual level, because the thing you want to change does not properly exist there. You need to go where it exists, at the social level, which may be small scale or local but it certainly not individual."


I'll answer your specific about stocks first or rather investment in general. If you're not investing your wealth in an appreciating asset, you're losing money ever single day. The fed says that the inflation rate is 5.1% in America but that is all based on their arbitrary "basket of goods" it's actually much higher. So unless you are investing in an appreciating asset like stocks, commodities, or property all that money you've worked hard for is only losing value every single day. That's just how it works.

>So is this individualist idea of "be the change you want to see in the world" legit?

>How do you disprove the notion that "change starts at home on an individual level"?
As for your broader question, I dunno, kind of mystical. I guess I kind of believe in that golden rule, treat others how you want to be treated. I guess you can be totally pure to your selfless ideal and self-sacrifice until you self-immolate. If that's what makes you happy do it.


You need to invest a large amount of money in stocks before you can live off of dividends, in the millions of $. You probably won't earn all that much. Most people already invest in stocks through a 401(k) or a state retirement system, and it hasn't done anything to stabilize the financial system or to reduce financial inequality. Go ahead and invest the money you have.



Doesn't that clip argue for the opposite, that ethical consumption is being monetized in modern society?


>ethical consumption is being monetized in modern society
yes, it is, its even the "ultimate form of consumerism" as he says.
But should you really trust marketing teams selling you an ethical consumption ? Do they speak the truth usually ?
"Consumerism" is not simply the filling of real, vital needs. It is also an ideology where the only way we have to act on the world is through buying shit. Where we create 'needs', like the ethic consumption ones, with somehow the belief it will steer all of society behind it rather than create yet another niche market without much systemic repercussions.
Where the only way to get to a better world, is to hope the companies will do it for us if we buy the right products.
Do you buy coca cola because you're thirsty, or because you feel the need to specifically drink coca cola ? The ideology inherent to capitalism commodities make them more than a way to fulfill a need.
Needs that can only be filled by the commodities that spawned them.
the "ethical consumption" is actually even worse, because then you don't even fight the system causing awful things to happen, as the system already have the solution apparently, you just gotta pay it !
the reason poor countries coffee farmers are exploited by big corps is not that they use their power positions to maximize profit, but because not enough people buy their "ethical coffee" !

the zizek clip is extracted from "The Pervert's Guide to Ideology", available for free on the web archive if you're interested.


it's both, but in opposite directions
no, you can't change things by taking a negative approach (i.e. NOT investing in stocks) towards dominant society, but also if you ARE to change anything the change has to start with your personal actions


File: 1631756602493.png (978.89 KB, 640x640, ClipboardImage.png)

You befriend them and drop laxatives/diuretics on their cofee/food in the office fridge until you feel better about them being full of shit.

Clearly, if their ideology worked, their health would not be so easily subverted by an outside power, they need to try harder to not shit themselves. They ought to Master their own vowels/bladder before they look for outside sources for their own problem. Start with small dosages so it looks like a health/diet problem and take random weeks off to throw off the pattern.


You're a fucking idiot, OP.


File: 1631764525436.png (653.17 KB, 2208x1236, 2030-obesity-prediction.png)

Off topic question. What exactly is gonna happen to mutts in the coming years?


A collapse in the availability of food. The super markets here are already failing to provide food and shit, as people hoard food that they won't really need and that will caused a spike in chaos.


File: 1631765165870.jpg (19.59 KB, 450x372, batman.jpg)

>loads of people fat, so they can't run
>desperate for food, going to start mobbing places that have it
>when food delivery stops, major population centers will have nothing to eat
>loads of people infected with corona, highly contagious due to the new variants
>if you survive corona it docks your IQ, making you more likely to be a rightoid
>the way the rightoids are acting they will probably start trying to normalize cannibalism when the food disappears
Were zombie movies right?


>How do you disprove the notion that "change starts at home on an individual level"?
>"if I take a few pennies from everyone every week I can make billions".
Your answer is there. This person had to use "everyone" as hyperbole, since pennies from an individual mean nothing, and they know it. These actions only mean anything when coordinated with a supermajority. As communists, we cannot "Be the change we want to see in the world" in a vacuum. The change we want to see in the world is an alternate system of economic organization, and there's no such thing as an economy of one.


liberals will tell you thats because of demand and people need to stop driving cars

you have to explain how demand is manufactured through advertising, how advertising is psychological manipulation and literal propaganda, how power actually works and not just idealism, and then explain how we need to democratically enforce/regulate production

you can get libs really hard on saying we need to tax fossil fuels and subsidize electric solar trains and mass public transport but your friend sounds like a libertarian so you would have to explain that freedom requires society and that no man is an island and true freedom comes from accepting responsibility for others


Change starts at home when you are responsibilized and placed in a controlled environment engineered by others. In this way, you don't really have a choice but to do what is compelled by the dominant institutions.

No, change starts at the site where power is exerted and the control of society is reproduced. That is the only place it ever actually changes. Pulling money out of stonks is not changing your home situation, it's a capital strike against the fraud of their system. If everyone did pull their money out of the stonks, it would cease to be a useful fiction. You're also entering a scam where the rich rig the roulette wheel flagrantly.

Also climate change don't real. Stop saying it's real.


always was


best answer.


For that to work there has to be synchronized coordination among the masses, which is virtually impossible under the present conditions of social atomization. There are certain problems which simply cannot be addressed on the individual level reliably. Take for example, environmental issues. The changes need to happen at the highest system level, "downstream" at the production level rather than "upstream" at the consumer endpoints. The solution to reducing the amount of plastic in the ocean, for example, is not to promote individuals recycling or opting for biodegradable options, but to stop producing nonbiodegradable plastics. The consumer here is really beholden to production, which is the source of both the problem and the solution.


Oops, I mixed up the use of "upstream" and "downstream" here.

Unique IPs: 22

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music ] [ meta / roulette ] [ GET / ref / booru]