[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ 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."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /AK-47/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war. - New board: /draw/


File: 1637507267539.png (15.55 KB, 216x233, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.609969[View All]

If we say "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" where does that leave ethics? Does this not free us to do anything with the excuse "there are no ethical choices". Consume the fruits of slave labor, or fair labor, it's all unethical so who cares. Buy from Amazon instead of your local exploiter, because they're both exploiters.
108 posts and 24 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.616591

File: 1637841880153.jpg (13.5 KB, 471x388, 1636576974939.jpg)

>>616121
>Make one (1) penis joke
<Responds with schizo rant about penis insecurity

 No.616858

>>616591
>schizo rant
It's not something that requires a near-delusional amount of intuition and interpretation to realize that there's a massive crisis where a lot of guys think they sexually can't perform despite the fact that they can.
When women say they want a guy with a dick length, keep in mind they usually fail the water-level test or whatever; as in, women are more likely to fail by a considerable margin on a basic spatial reasoning test.
So whenever a woman says she wants a dick that's at least __ inches long, subtract 1 - 2'' from the calculation. She says 6 inches is the minimum? Then it's safe to believe she wants 4 inches minimum.
Now anyways, the fact of the matter is that irregardless, I've seen that copypasta the several times I've come to these parts just to debate after I say that calling something a "conspiracy" doesn't take away it's plausibility. Never once, have I seen anyone try to vary it. I've seen the "You will never be a woman" copypasta changed and edited several times, but never that copypasta. Maybe it's because you leftysharts need copypastas to explain things to people, because if you were asked to make it up on the spot, you'd end up being retardedly verbose and sound like a pseudo-intellectual jackass to anyone but you. So I can't really compare two copypastas meant for actual intellectual use on both the left and right, because the right doesn't have those.
Now I've never seen the "it's a conspiracy, you have small dick" copypasta ever be changed into the many different variations I've given you guys. Which begs the question, why?

 No.616864

File: 1637860804851.png (632.5 KB, 600x740, 1635214620190.png)

>>616858
>He’s still going

 No.616889

File: 1637861819723.png (171.68 KB, 392x411, 1608457294331.png)

>>616864
>He's shocked I want to have a genuine intellectual discussion
You people do nothing but - as per usual - jerk yourself off on the basis of being "smarter than /pol/". But this shit is more retarded than half of the Bunkerchan-Discord BBC shills or whatever. I've never reached a point before where I'd see leftists break down into this complete bonobo cope-and-seethe tactic. As time goes on, I clearly get smarter. I'm not in my 70s about to be hit by dementia.
Considering the fact that the other two threads I've shat up have gotten no actual replies at a certain point, I guess this is option B for winning an argument with communists: them turning into the "retarded /pol/tards" they hate.

 No.616901

>Buy from Amazon instead of your local exploiter, because they're both exploiters.
Yes. Accelerate the dialectic until Amazon fucks up capitalism.

 No.616910

>>616858
mucho texto

 No.616919

>>616858
that is one long post about dicks

 No.616979

>>616858
Is the small penis in the room with you right now?

 No.617282


 No.617469

>>616889
>jerk yourself off on the basis of being "smarter than /pol/".
Yes, and? Being smarter than /pol/ isn't hard.

 No.617478

File: 1637895690018.jpg (28 KB, 350x335, 1615330078524.jpg)

>>616858
>It's not something that requires a near-delusional amount of intuition and interpretation to realize that there's a massive crisis where a lot of guys think they sexually can't perform despite the fact that they can.

So you can't sexually perform? Is this what you making this thread is all about?

>When women say they want a guy with a dick length, keep in mind they usually fail the water-level test or whatever; as in, women are more likely to fail by a considerable margin on a basic spatial reasoning test.


A man with a tiny penis typed this.

>So whenever a woman says she wants a dick that's at least __ inches long, subtract 1 - 2'' from the calculation. She says 6 inches is the minimum? Then it's safe to believe she wants 4 inches minimum.


You know how I said you have a small penis earlier ITT. I meant as a joke, I didn't actually think you'd indirectly state you have a tiny penis.


>Now anyways, the fact of the matter is that irregardless, I've seen that copypasta the several times I've come to these parts just to debate after I say that calling something a "conspiracy" doesn't take away it's plausibility. Never once, have I seen anyone try to vary it. I've seen the "You will never be a woman" copypasta changed and edited several times, but never that copypasta. Maybe it's because you leftysharts need copypastas to explain things to people, because if you were asked to make it up on the spot, you'd end up being retardedly verbose and sound like a pseudo-intellectual jackass to anyone but you. So I can't really compare two copypastas meant for actual intellectual use on both the left and right, because the right doesn't have those.

>Now I've never seen the "it's a conspiracy, you have small dick" copypasta ever be changed into the many different variations I've given you guys. Which begs the question, why?

Because it isn't a copypasta. I wrote it out and you started accusing me of writing a copypasta, which ok, thanks for the idea. In summation, you have a tiny penis.

 No.617485

File: 1637897456766.png (43.25 KB, 851x246, ClipboardImage.png)

>>617478
>So you can't sexually perform? Is this what you making this thread is all about?
When the fuck did I say that? I said that 99% of people can perform properly during sex.
>A man with a tiny penis typed this.
Picrel
>You know how I said you have a small penis earlier ITT. I meant as a joke, I didn't actually think you'd indirectly state you have a tiny penis.
What specific line states """indirectly""" that I have a small dick? Let me guess, you'll say all of them, and when asked further, you'll just pull out another shitty insult out of your nasty, gaping shithole, like the faggot you are.
>Because it isn't a copypasta. I wrote it out and you started accusing me of writing a copypasta, which ok, thanks for the idea. In summation, you have a tiny penis.
I've seen that copypasta a million times, I swear.

 No.617510

>>616889
>Considering the fact that the other two threads I've shat up have gotten no actual replies at a certain point
Why would people keep replying if you're just shitposting after a certain point? There's no good faith discussion to be had anymore, even in this thread you began just coping with the Tianaman square copypasta and a giant rant about dicks when you ran out of arguments.
>>617485
>Types out measurements into a site as if it's proof due to nothing but an anon making one single joke
<"Believe me bro!"
Holy fucking shit, this just keeps getting better. You aren't helping your case dude, this just comes off as some desperate terminally online faggot with some middle schooler grade compulsion to prove over the internet that his dick ain't small. Who the hell are you trying to prove yourself to on this far out corner of the internet, other then yourself?
>I've seen that copypasta a million times, I swear.
Link it then.

 No.617563

>socialism
>morality

pick one

 No.618195

File: 1637944275259.gif (3.42 MB, 406x202, 1617854883786.gif)

>>616858
>She says 6 inches is the minimum? Then it's safe to believe she wants 4 inches minimum.

You're 4 inches??!

 No.618512

>>617510
I think the idea of "good faith" was lost the moment the thread devolved into "NOOOOOOOO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SMALL DICK" when all I was doing was commenting on the obsession with dick size and how it's negatively impacted the mental health of men in the developed world, A.K.A., the proletariat.
The working class feels even further inadequate by the rich's usage of pornography to instill a feeling of inferiority in the common working man; it makes him believe his entirely average, entirely functional 5 incher is a tiny shrimp-dick that should be within 10 feet of a woman.
That should be a message you get behind, but because you want to act like a fuckin retard who I could climb the chromosomes of and jump down to the autism score to kill myself, you need to focus on saying I have small dick: carrying out the will of the bourgeoisie by degrading the proletariat on such a fundamental level. Kill yourself.
>You aren't helping your case dude
I don't know why you didn't pay attention to the fact my dick is 2 FUCKING INCHES FLACCID. It looks like a goddamn tictac. Focus on that, that's funny and it's true. Not my working dick size.
>Link it then
Well after further research, I guess I'm wrong. It was an original creation and I was wrong to say it was a copypasta. But why did he focus on the size of my penis first? I don't give a shit about that. I'm just making you guys seethe by saying "nah my dick's good", and it's fucking funny.

 No.619055

>>618512
>Still ranting about one joke about your dick
Dude, nobody is seething but you. You're literally still spazzing out about it, when you could have just addressed the arguments that had nothing to do with it. But instead of actually arguing against the points anons brought up regarding your initial assertions, you hyperfocused about fucking dick size and how somehow, some insult made on an imageboard at you specifically is an attack on proles everywhere. You have no one to blame but yourself for appearing desperate and coping lol.

 No.619067

>>619055
Just saying, the "one joke" thing fell apart when 20 people made the same joke.
And also, it wasn't even focused on the penis bit until you focused on the penis bit. I was saying that going "dick small" is unoriginal and may be because you have a problem with how you see your dick.
So please, stop lying, and while you're at it, stop being a fuckin communist.

 No.619069

>>619067
>Implying that 20 people didn’t see your first reaction to “peepee small” and decided to milk the lolcow for all it’s got

 No.619073

What's wrong with being moral? And having just values as well? Anyone who's immoral and injustice should be purged and executed. This is why I include justice with morality and use them as two sides of the same coin. Capitalism is immoral and Justice means rooting it out and destroying it's supporters with extreme prejudice. If it were the 1800s in Russia I'd hold the same opinion against absolutist Tsarism; comparatively speaking, the liberal order is a million times more preferable and just and would purge all royalist supporters. I'm a moral absolutist in that way. Anything that stands against progress is immoral and unjust. Socialism is the just way in capitalist society and so capitalism must be destroyed to set things right.

 No.619076

>>619073
Someone didn’t mentally age beyond the saturday morning cartoons they watched.

 No.619314

>>619067
>Just saying, the "one joke" thing fell apart when 20 people made the same joke.
Again dude, you reacted to a single joke with a four paragraph response about how your dick is actually fine. Everyone just responded after that because it was hysterical.
>And also, it wasn't even focused on the penis bit until you focused on the penis bit.
You literally responded primarily to only the penis but.
>I was saying that going "dick small" is unoriginal and may be because you have a problem with how you see your dick.
Wasn't even my post you responded to, I was just laughing at how you hysterically acted over one single joke. You literally began some kind of serious rant over one anon mocking you. It's no different then some random faggot in a comment section giving some long winded argument he thinks to be deep over someone calling him a retard. There's really no other way to say this, but it's cringe.
>So please, stop lying, and while you're at it, stop being a fuckin communist.
Never lied, and I'll never stop being a communist. I was already on the far right, and I have no intent on ever coming back to you faggots. I know too much now, about what Marxism actually is, about how you lied to me about everything, and how you faggots actually are when no one is looking.

So to Tl;Dr:
Kys

 No.619547

File: 1638006474065.png (481.9 KB, 888x2070, china copypasta.png)


 No.620517

>>619314
Why are we still talking about dicks, all I said was that everyone's dick works just fine and we should stop making fun of dick size

 No.620524

>>620517
Don’t blame us for your fixation on it in the first place, dick noticer

 No.620564

>>620524
>he responded in less than 10 minutes
fucking obsessed

 No.620641

>>620524
Not me
>>620517
>Why are we still talking about dicks, all I said was that everyone's dick works just fine and we should stop making fun of dick size
Nobody initially made any discussion about dicks but you. It's not about "everyone's dick works fine", it's that you went on a sporadic cringe inducing rant about how a smaller dick size is fine in response to someone making a singular joke about you. You have no capacity to be really calling anyone insecure or say what should or shouldn't be made fun of. Nobody on an imageboard is giving some kind of lecture about how we should stop calling each other faggots when someone calls someone else a "fag" when mocking another anon. It's Twitter-esc hysteria about "propagating a damaging view" in response to one joke you idiot.

 No.620673

>>609969
if you don't already know the answer to that retarded question of yours you aren't worth wasting time on.

 No.620688

>>609969
if you can't answer that yourself you should kill yourself.

 No.620697

>>620673
>>620688
for fucks sake at least sage the damn post, I don't want to see this shit.

 No.620707

>>609969
I try to buy things second hand from other people. Especially technology. it is cheaper and it doesn't fuel consumerism and child labor

 No.620714

>>614809
I prefer I get my own bait, this one sucked.

 No.621350

>>620641
>It's Twitter-esc hysteria about "propagating a damaging view" in response to one joke you idiot.
Twitter would complain because it starts with them being offended.
I complained because it started with me noticing your unoriginality.
Since this has devolved into a kangaroo-court of me explaining why my post on why I hate small dick jokes, let me lay out my original post ( >>616121 )
Note how I labeled 6 different methods to insult me, in relation to the Jewish. The post I was replying to, ( >>614775 ), implied I hated Jews because I had a small dick with the phrase "Owing to the fact that you do not care for morality that much and resort to blaming the jews, I shall therefore conclude that you were circumcised as a child, and you can't get it up." I took the unoriginal insult as a way to shit on leftyfags, stating it was evidence towards a personal issue with self-image that leftyfags have towards their penis, and how in spite of that, I still believe that all of you have functioning penises that can work.
You then, being the slimy opportunist you are, tried to bend that around to say I have a small dick. I'm saying you have a normal dick, that you see as small.

 No.621358

File: 1638081958671.gif (164.04 KB, 650x400, joe-rogan-gif-5.gif)


 No.621368


 No.622666

>>621350
>why I hate small dick jokes,
Because you have a small penis?
>took the unoriginal insult as a way to shit on leftyfags
Hit a little too close to home? :^)
>stating it was evidence towards a personal issue with self-image that leftyfags have towards their penis, and how in spite of that, I still believe that all of you have functioning penises that can work.
Thanks anon, but I'm already dating someone.
>You then, being the slimy opportunist you are, tried to bend that around to say I have a small dick.

But you do anon.

It's not my fault that you're some /pol/yp drongo who can't handle the bantz and is trying to compensate for a tiny dick and a small chin.

 No.622705

>>621350
I didn't even make that post you faggot, I just mocked your response to it.
>The post I was replying to, ( >>614775 ), implied I hated Jews because I had a small dick with the phrase
No you dense retard, it was in a mocking way showing how your own logic was flawed, because your argument lacked actual physical evidence. The anon was stating that using your logic, one could simply say that your dick was small, and that any argument against that fact (save for you literally showing your dick on the internet) could be construed as you just coping and compensating for it. As that anon literally states:
<Conspiracy theories without physical evidence is not an argument.
<For example: using your logic, I can come up with the conspiracy that you have a very small penis.
<Owing to the fact that you do not care for morality that much and resort to blaming the jews, I shall therefore conclude that you were circumcised as a child, and you can't get it up. You have tried pornography only for you to be discouraged owing to the prominence of BLACKED taking hold. I can prove this owing to you viewing black people as inferior and incapable of organising. Owing to constantly prove that you're "right" requires you to make grand statements, compensating for your dimunitive size.
<Therefore, in conclusion, you have a small penis
He's mocking you, but also showing the absurdity of your argument first and foremost. Your argument had literally zero evidence to it, but you insisted on it any way and handwaved any argument on the contrary just like the anon did in the example.

I shouldn't have had to explain that shit to you, put apparently the skin covering your brain is 30 layers thick.

 No.622785

>>616858
How did a thread about morality became about dick sizes?

 No.623110

>>622785
Nazis who may apparently be on the spectrum.

 No.623127

>>622785
Nazi anon used faulty logic to justify his reasoning. Some anon used an example that included saying his dick was small to show how absurd his reasoning was. Rather then realize that there was an actual argument under the mockery, the Nazi anon hyper focused on the dick size part and started making a multiple paragraph hysterical rant about how smaller dick sizes are fine. Multiple anons mocked him for his hysteria, and in response he went on another multiple paragraph rant about dick sizes, continuing to ignore that dick sizes were never the initial point of the example given, because he's a dense idiot. Then some anon noticed the free (You)'s, mentioned dicks again to get a another hysterical rant, and got another rant. Because that's what's going to happen when you give that kind of reaction.

 No.623160

>>609969
Marx in his analyses made a point of ignoring moralistic debates. His analyses are material analyses. Materialist analysis is important because it helps to dispel the hyperindividualist notions that are especially prevalent in bourgeois society. Here are some important points regarding consumption:

- "ethical consumption" implies "voting with your wallet," an entirely bourgeois notion that suggests that it is through "market forces" that are influenced by consumers that determine what is produced. This could not be further from the truth in the overwhelming majority of situations in market economy.

- The existence of products and services has very little to do with what "consumers" want. For example, with consumer technology, the "need" to have a given things is constructed socially and technically. Certain products and services are deemed necessary for the consumers through various forms of manipulations, such as planned obsolescence. Apple created a "desire" for people to want the latest iPhone through the use of planned obsolescence. Many people find themselves desiring the newest iPhone because their current iPhone was rendered slow and ineffective by iOS updates.

- The current state of the housing market is not the product of what consumers wanted or what they deemed to be ethical. The lack of affordability in housing has nothing to do with the "supply of housing." Not only does the notion of supply and demand have no influence here, it is outright contradicted. In general, there are over twice the number of vacant homes to the number of homeless persons in America. In cities like NYC, there are many perfectly liveable units that are not on the market because the landlord, or the realtor, intends for these living spaces to go unoccupied so that housing prices may increase across the board. "Scarcity" is invented.

- Some radlibs have tried to frame the issue of gentrification as a moral issue. They say "How dare these mostly white yuppies move into traditionally mostly non-white low income neighborhoods, pushing out the original inhabitants?" This framing is not only non-materialist but it obscures the fundamental material forces at play. What actually happens is that landlords and realtors decide that they want to push out the so-called "lowlives" and increase the rents or sell the properties at a higher threshold than the current inhabitants/tenants can afford. Landlords have a material interest to do the things they do. Morality has nothing to do with it. Realtors have a material interest to do the things they do. It has nothing to do with morality. Landlords can realtors can have their actions be judged as moral or immoral but such judgements could just as easily be judged with bourgeois morality, letting them off the hook for being good little Capitalists. Morality is generally constructed. There is no objective morality. Only relative, contextual morality.

- Ethics with purchasing decisions are often the phantasm of marketing. Starbucks claims its beanwater is "ethically sourced." Many grocery stores hype up their "organic" wares as not only healthy but imply that it is more ethical to purchase organic food.

- If your concern about ethical consumption is whether it is unethical if you purchase an item on Amazon on the same day that Amazon workers are striking, your concern isn't about ethical consumption but whether or not your behavior is conducive in bringing about socialism. But your consumption alone can never bring about socialism. Lack of consumption in this situation, abstaining from buying from Amazon when Amazon workers are on strike, is not also bringing about socialism, but it does show solidarity. Your actions as a lone individual consumer do not matter terribly much, but if you construct your abstention as in solidarity with striking workers, , if you tell others to not purchase anything from Amazon on that day and tell others to join you in not buying from Amazon for the duration of the strike, you are doing far more than "voting with your wallet." You are raising the contradictions. You are radicalizing others by creating a revolutionary context.

- If your concern stems from buying an AirBnB lease - see the point about housing.

 No.623334

File: 1638224028176.png (253.17 KB, 474x266, ClipboardImage.png)

>>622666
cope
profile pic infers you need to dilate as well
>>622705
all this cope and all this seethe
also
>muh no evidence
i can't prove that the "People's" "Republic" of "China" isn't lying about it's numbers. You need to show that they're being honest with how they report shit.
>>622785
said that leftyfags have self-image issues, wrote a paragraph on why i don't like that type of thinking, everyone gets pissy because I'm right and they're wrong lole

 No.623504

File: 1638233072709.png (256.38 KB, 498x486, 1618132493997.png)

>>623334
>c-cope
>s-seethe
>d-dilate
>using a reaction pic is the same as a profile pic.

But sure, we're the one with self-image issues, not you, who posted TOTALLY real dick-measurements.

>i can't prove that the "People's" "Republic" of "China" isn't lying about it's numbers.

And you can't prove that they're not lying either. By your logic, you can't prove that you don't have a small penis.

 No.623520

>>623334
I've noticed rightards love that picture of crying PLA soldiers, while in fact they were singing a song wishing farewell to their families while heading out on a deployment. The song was "Green Flowers in the Army" btw.

 No.623609

>>623504
A rare kuzco? I approve

 No.623632

>>623520
lmao they were crying because they had to fight pajeet, a true aryan warrior

 No.623641

>>623632
>india consistently gets its ass kicked by china in every single skirmish
what did he mean by this?

 No.623661

File: 1638241668920.png (227.79 KB, 500x465, 1631557336151.png)

To think of things in a sense of morality is stupid; We must, as the great Friedrich Nietzsche said, move beyond good and evil.
Everything that happens politically and my actions I take as an individual I ask "How can I use this to further the cause of revolution."

Thus by making ethical market choices I can use that as a wedge to drive my political views on the economy and politics home. Such as a planned and rational, democratically controlled, economic system based on labor note in exchange for intensity of labor.

 No.623694

>>623334
>i can't prove that the "People's" "Republic" of "China" isn't lying about it's numbers. You need to show that they're being honest with how they report shit.
See, this is what anons are talking about. You have no evidence in the slightest that they are lying, but then immediately put the burden of proof on other to show that they aren't. Your lack of proof is used as proof in of itself to make your point. The anons mocking example from before was entirely apt: X is true for all of these reasons that don't actually prove X is true, because your inability to prove differently is used as proof in of itself. That anon makes a bunch of indirect unfounded assertions to make his point without actually showing proof. All he does is just make a blind narrative without any proper argumentation given to support it, just like you did in your argument. He's mocking how faulty your "logic" is. How are you this dense?

 No.624219

>>623641
we need to kill the rest of the shudra before actual war happens
>>623694
I'm not going to trust a fucking country that has laws where you need to pay medical bills if you injure someone, but if you kill someone, you need to pay fees that end up being lower than the bills racked up by most injury.


Unique IPs: 34

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