Talk about a shake-up! Let's get to the bottom of this, Veeky Forums. What are your thoughts on this issue?

This.

Besides the fact that you're all getting upset over a non issue, retarded /pol/ users like OP go to twitter to find retarded people saying retarded shit to post on Veeky Forums where people without a social circle will believe.

That's like going on /b/, and screencap a greentext from some loli poster and post it on Facebook or whatever.

Do you ever think about what life in a communist society would feel like? Regardless of whether or not the system works, you'd be living a life with very little room to climb ladders or accomplish more than your day-to-day tasks

No promotions, no real goals to work towards. Just the same labor every day for the Greater Good

I hope you really really like the job you choose, champ

OP here, not /pol/ in the slightest. Very liberal guy (although not leftist)

This is a coworker's post and all of the likes and love reacts are from other coworkers. I didn't have to dig at all

"We're a Culture Not a Costume".

Trying to argue with commies is like trying to argue with christians.

pointless

funny how the beaner/nigger on the top has glasses on in her profile picture
like omg stop appropriating white inventions and stuff you rayciss

/thread

not the poster you're replying to, but my vision of the utopian socialist society (if, for the sake of argument, you grant that the system works and that humanity as a whole has gained a higher state of mind and blah blah blah) involves a lot of automation. most of the basic economy becomes automated. people earn a universal basic income regardless of if they work. but this is just a subsistence-level income. it is enough for food and shelter and medical and transportation.

if you want nice things, if you want to live beyond subsistence, then you have to find a way to contribute. you have to get a job. since most of the economy is automated, the remaining jobs are things like scientific research, technology r&d, maintenance, programming, designing, and lots of creative fields. things that are difficult to automate, for whatever reason.

You can't just "automate" it and let it keep going on its own though. You need very skilled, very particular, very powerful people to keep that massive distribution of wealth running smoothly

What if no one wants to live beyond subsistence? Why are you then only giving power to those who desire material things and use their employment within the system to obtain it? I don't think there's anything wrong with materialism at all, but I hope you realize that's what you're doing

This sounds like an extreme version of what has already happened with women.

>man builds mud hut and goes boar hunting
>woman stays at home with kids

>man builds stone house and fights off other tribe
>woman stays at home with kids

>man builds brick house and fights off barbarians
>woman stays at home with kids

>man builds skyscraper and creates a safe society where most people don't have to do do physical labor and dangerous shit anymore
>woman demands affirmative action for comfy white collar jobs

Your vision is like
>a group of working caucasians create societies where the production of goods is automated
>caucasians who didn't do shit, and non-whites who never invented the wheel get the same benefits

fuck I modified that last sentence too many times and didn't read it before posting.
what I mean to say is that people who didn't help create the circumstances where they don't have to work for subsistence anymore get to reap the benefits of that system which is stupid

>North American schools getting out
>/pol/ posts start popping up

I wonder if it's a coincidence

>posting things that someone else said is somehow /pol/ because you don't like it

mind blwon
Does that mean all of us an hero, and the engineers and scientists get to live? Pajeet, Chang, and Johnny will be the only ones left on this Earth.

You help create the circumstances by paying into the tax system. The scientists and engineers can't really do shit if no one's refining their metals, taking them to work or cooking them food etc. etc.
But the people on welfare and the people who immigrate after the system has already been created didn't do shit.

>political thread providing nothing relevant to the board with the sole purpose of getting reactions from people
>not /pol/

Shouldn't you be doing homework?

I'm not OP but this is

>You need very skilled, very particular, very powerful people to keep that massive distribution of wealth running smoothly

i addressed this when i said that there are still jobs, and they are whatever is too difficult to automate. any example of a remaining job that cannot be automated that you can think of is subsumed within this statement.

>What if no one wants to live beyond subsistence?

what if a meteor crashed into the earth tomorrow?

if history shows us anything, it's that people, in general, yearn to contribute and achieve. evidence: people achieved, and continue to do so. if it were universal human nature to do the bare minimum, we'd still be living in the cave.

the fact is that people vary. and, yes, i'm sure there would be a segment of the population who had no desire to live beyond subsistence--just like there is right now in our current society. but just like in our current society, most people will desire to do more and learn more and contribute.

>what I mean to say is that people who didn't help create the circumstances where they don't have to work for subsistence anymore get to reap the benefits of that system which is stupid

did you create the circumstances that allowed us to move from hunter-gatherers to agrarian society and therefore build cities?

no? but you reap from the benefits anyway, don't you? by your argument, that's fucking stupid. you never invented agriculture, why should you benefit?

many people have the need to rebel against society, no matter how good that society is for them
people will always find new reasons to be unhappy, even if it's that thata they have nothing to be unhappy about

O ya I'm going to take his word for it

>i'm a marxist-leninist
how old are you

>>What if no one wants to live beyond subsistence?
>what if a meteor crashed into the earth tomorrow?
Jesus christ lad

> it's that people, in general, yearn to contribute and achieve. evidence: people achieved, and continue to do so.
You're ignoring WHY people have yearned to achieve. It is all in self-interest. How many people in this world are creating new vaccines and medicines and then making them completely open-source and letting all competing companies create the same thing? Fucking none. And it has always been that way. People invent and then patent. People design and then sell. Whether these notions have been enforced by copyright law or not, throughout history they have always existed. No painter wants more forgeries.

It is in self-interest. Leftist politics place way to much faith on some conceived goodness at the heart of all people. It doesn't exist.

>did you create the circumstances that allowed us to move from hunter-gatherers to agrarian society and therefore build cities?
I was anticipating that retarded answer and hoped you wouldn't post it, but oh well I'm arguing with a fucking communist so not sure what I was expecting

>implying not being alive at key breakthroughs in technological advancements is the same thing as willingly not participating them
>implying ancestry is not a thing and you don't build things for your children and their children's children, and when europeans created modern civilization they didn't pass it down to their descendants but for everyone on earth

*perceived goodness
apologies

This is basically what we're gonna get, as long as the world doesn't burn.
Automation can't be stopped, nor should it be. Humans are wasted on menial jobs.

Why isn't this thread deleted yet

I fucking LOVE our autist mod and janitors

If it comes it will end in flames quickly.

i said that the economy gets automated, not that happiness gets automated.

sure, there will always be somebody who doesn't like how things are, no matter how things are. how is that a good argument against a proposed organization of society?

what i mean is: if it's compelling enough that someone will inevitably be unhappy about a proposed society to discount pursuing that type of society, then we must therefore conclude that no type of society is worth pursuing. because we have established it as good reason not to pursue a society, and as you say, no matter what type of society you have somebody will be unhappy about it. we are left with two options: an hero, or acknowledge that no matter what there's gonna be a sourpuss and pursue a better form of society anyway.

It's blatantly fashion related

Guys can we please just answer the question?

Should white women wear hoop earrings or not?

It's a thinly veiled /pol/ bait thread you autist

/pol/ is cancer but topics relating to social justice or questions about culture's place in fashion are not automatically /pol/ or detrimental

stop asking stupid questions

but it's not a better form if people aren't more happy, so why pursue it?
history teaches us that actively trying to enforce big changes in society generally ends catastrophically
just let society evolve naturally and we'll see what we end up with

It brings about non Veeky Forums related topics, so yes it is detrimental because you people fuel the /pol/ kiddos with your pointless arguing

okay, well, you're also arguing against a premise that in this discussion we originally agreed to grant:

>if for the sake of argument you grant that the system works and that humanity as a whole has gained a higher state of mind...

>Regardless of whether the system works or not

in essence, you want to discuss whether it's possible to do x. and we started this discussion by saying "assuming x is possible, what could things look like"

do you catch my drift?

>implying not being alive at key breakthroughs in technological advancements is the same thing as willingly not participating them

but that is, in fact, exactly what your original argument is. you just contradicted yourself.

Yeah they should. Cause if that's what they fucking like then they can wear it. How is this a question? Why are we still trying to shill 'cultural appropriation' into shit like this when it's not even blatantly of any cultural background?

I understand the Indian costumes and headdress, but come on. PoC gotta whine about whatever the fuck of white people.

who said people aren't more happy?

all we've said is that in any society, a small segment will be unhappy. that's essentially a constant, and that says nothing about whether or not people are happier or less happy in general.

I NEVER AGREED TO THAT, WHAT THE FUCK
THAT IS AN ESSENTIAL ISSUE TO ADDRESS IN THE DEBATE

All I was trying to do was MOMENTARILY take a step back from the "will it work or won't it" question so I could show you the emotional pitfall that communism creates. You tried to resolve the issue by mentioning a tactic that does not work and I explained why

Don't get wrapped up in the format of the argument, respond to my post genuinely

>is *demographic* permitted to wear clothing typically associated with *another demographic*?
yes. they may look like clueless retards, but that's their problem. clothes are clothes, nothing more
as a slav I don't give a fuck if some yankee wears a ushanka. he might look stupid in it and I might ridicule him for it but getting offended over that kind of shit is fucking ridiculous

imagine two people were having a discussion about what they would do if time travel was possible. and then you ran up to them and started screaming BUT TIME TRAVEL IS NOT POSSIBLE AND YOU HAVE TO RESPOND TO ME ABOUT WHY I THINK IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!!!!! WTF I NEVER AGREED THAT TIME TRAVEL WAS POSSIBLE

that is essentially what is happening right now.

>still no response to my post

I was making a point about the emotional consequences of a communist society (I only set aside the question of whether it works or not because that question cuts the argument's head off at the start and no communist ever keeps replying) and you answered my point with a proposed social system you believed would resolve it. I pointed out that your system does not work. I refuse to continue to pretend that what you're saying is feasible just to keep you happy and engaged

Now respond to my fucking reply.

>I pointed out that your system does not work.

maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. either way, it's not germaine to the discussion.

did you know that it's okay to construct and agree upon a specific premise in order to explore an idea?

i'm not interested in your theory of mankind's inherent selfishness. that line of discussion has been explored ad nauseam for centuries by people much smarter than you or i. if that is what you are interested in learning about, google will be a better resource for you.

>i'm not interested in your theory of mankind's inherent selfishness.
That's a real fucking shame because it is directly related to the topic at hand and may be one of the greatest points to be made out communism. I'm sorry that you're sick of hearing something that puts a chink in your perfect idea of a communist society but you need to suck it up and either respond or rage quit.

>that line of discussion has been explored ad nauseam for centuries by people much smarter than you or i.
There's so much wrong with this sentence I am having a hard time breaking into it. This entire fucking debate has been explored by dozens of thousands before us, so don't give me this cop-out shit. You helped build this pile of shit, now sit in it with me.

>we are but lowly sheep and shouldn't talk about this. let the big guys upstairs sort this out, it's not our place
el em ay oh

>You helped build this pile of shit, now sit in it with me.
fucking kek
I'm rooting for you user

greeks and egyptians both had hoop earrings

it's not directly related. it's something that we already assumed for the sake of argument.

dude you're literally doing the "TIME TRAVEL IS NOT POSSIBLE THING" like i don't even understand how you don't understand that. your personal doubts about whether the assumption of a premise soundly relates to how things actually are is not remotely related to the exploration of ideas beyond that premise.

>we are but lowly sheep and shouldn't talk about this. let the big guys upstairs sort this out, it's not our place

this is an extreme mischaracterization of what i'm saying. i'm not saying it's not your or anyone's "place" or "right" to discuss something. i'm saying that you want to have a lengthy discussion about something that in the original inquiry we were happy to presume in order to focus on a different topic. you would be better served by a discussion or by a text that focuses on the specific portion of the debate that you are interested in.

who said people are more happy? everything I see in the modern world leads me to the conclusion that you can't increase happiness through technology or societal changes, or anything really.
we have technology our ancestors never even dreamed about, everything seems readily available and easy to achieve, yet people are still miserable as ever, just for different reasons than before
there is no perfect society because we are imperfect

here let me phrase it another way:

john and tammy are debating what they should do if they had seven apples. jim interjects to say "but how did you get seven apples?" jim's interjection is not topical to john and tammy's discussion, because john and tammy are talking about what they would do IF they had seven apples. having seven apples is a premise that they have agreed upon to discuss something else entirely.

>it's not directly related.
Yes it is. Communism as communists envision it only works if people are willing to devote themselves to the greater good of the society, which requires a level of selflessness. Directly, inseparably related.
>it's something that we already assumed for the sake of argument.
No. Where. No.

>dude you're literally doing the "TIME TRAVEL IS NOT POSSIBLE THING" like i don't even understand how you don't understand that.
Yeah that analogy you made made no sense at all. For starters, I'm the same guy you started this whole conversation with, I didn't "burst in" anywhere. It's all been me other than some earlier posts from others.
Second, we are having a debate about the merits and feasibility of communism. Of course whether it works or not is important.

Now you're backed into a corner so you're trying to shift the argument topic onto the argument itself, trying to claim that I've done something wrong while you STILL HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO MY REPLY.

>this is an extreme mischaracterization of what i'm saying. i'm not saying it's not your or anyone's "place" or "right" to discuss something.
Fair enough

>i'm saying that you want to have a lengthy discussion about something that in the original inquiry we were happy to presume in order to focus on a different topic. you would be better served by a discussion or by a text that focuses on the specific portion of the debate that you are interested in.
This is once again you deflecting the topic onto the argument itself because you have nowhere else to go. I don't care if you're tired of hearing about psychological egoism in your debates, it is still a directly related concept that you need to come up with a response to if you want to maintain your worldview

>there is no perfect society

nobody said that there was or could be.

as for people being more happy. think about your life. since you are on Veeky Forums.org/fa i am going to assume that you're relatively young and that if you have a job it's probably a pretty low-paying and menial job. it's probably not the best job, it's probably not the worst job. it's probably just an ordinary pretty boring job that an 18-24 year old might have, that you need in order to pay your rent and buy food.

what if i told you that you didn't have to worry about rent and food? and that you could spend your time developing your passions--whether your passion is making music or whether your passion is creating a useful app. there would be no guarantee that you would ever be socially successful in those passions--that is to say, there's no guarantee that you will become a revered musician or the developer of a much used application. but you get to try, and you don't have to worry about starving to death as a result. would you say that you would be more happy with that situation over your current situation? i know that i would be. and i don't think that i'm SO MUCH different from other humans that i'm odd in saying that. i think most people would be happier with that than with how they currently live.

I swear America is so fucked up no wonder the cuck meme is so strong.

Get your fucking shit together. And I swear everytime I watch the TV it's like black history month every fucking month.

Goddamn niggers.

this isn't about maintaining a worldview. i'm not even a communist. i'm exploring an idea, a line of thought that began with "what if we assumed x?"

okay, maybe you're the same person. then don't ask "what if we assumed x?" if you're not willing to assume x.

I agree.

White people should avoid PoC culture at all costs.

and if you are the same person, you assumed x here: >Do you ever think about what life in a communist society would feel like? Regardless of whether or not the system works, you'd be living a life with very little room to climb ladders or accomplish more than your day-to-day tasks

this is you assuming x (that a communist society exists *regardless* of concerns about whether or not such a system could work), and asking us to think about what life would be like then.

STILL
NO
RESPONSE
TO
MY
R E P L Y
E
P
L
Y

RACE WAR NOW

Every time one of my friends posts something like this I just want to spam them with screenshots of white supremacists saying nearly the same things

>white supremacists

Such as?

nothing new there

>white women should stop appropriating poc's cultures and stick to their own!
>white women should stop associating with other races' cultures and stick to our own!

So is there a place I can check up what clothes are appropiate for me to wear? (not that I really care, I just have a boner for cassifying shit, and seperating clothes by 'race' sounds like the most fun)

Anything designed by white people for white people apparently

PoC don't care. They have to stand up to their own principles and abandone white clothing.

All non-white clothing with the exceptions of maybe Inuits and some Asians is only suited for hot weather closer to the equator

They're freeze to death if they do that

how can you gauge that tho?
And who the fuck invented hoop earring???? if anyone I can bet it didn't happen in Latin America

Of course not, the Greeks were wearing them thousands of years ago

As long as they don't dress in my cultures clothing I really don't care. I'm really offended by PoC dressing up as whites. It's no costume, it's my culture.

REVERSE RACISM DOESN'T EXIST, user!!

I visited that facebook page, what a bunch of smug, arrogant, hateful bunch of people.

BBBBUT MY FEELINGS ;_;

>[T]he art was created by myself and a few other WOC [women of color] after being tired and annoyed with the reoccuring [sic] theme of white women appropriating styles … that belong to the black and brown folks who created the culture. The culture actually comes from a historical background of oppression and exclusion. The black and brown bodies who typically wear hooped earrings, (and other accessories like winged eyeliner, gold name plate necklaces, etc) are typically viewed as ghetto, and are not taken seriously by others in their daily lives. Because of this, I see our winged eyeliner, lined lips, and big hoop earrings serving as symbols [and] as an everyday act of resistance, especially here at the Claremont Colleges. Meanwhile we wonder, why should white girls be able to take part in this culture (wearing hoop earrings just being one case of it) and be seen as cute/aesthetic/ethnic? White people have actually exploited the culture and made it into fashion.

Who was in the wrong here?

They should stop wearing their oppressors clothing then.

>winged eyeliner
come on that's a step too far

The only way I can read this is as them girls being all shook over some white skinny bitches looking good with their shit

I get cultural appropiation and why it's harmful, but this feels a bit too petty

This is what happens when a movement is carried by vapid people who don't really know where they stand or why. More emphasis and effort is put into symbols and "issues" regarding symbols instead of the real things those symbols represent or are influenced by.

It's hard to solve racism so why not "solve" symbols and the treatment of symbols instead? What do you know, that's much easier.

>What are your thoughts on this issue?
I think it's fucking stupid.

The whole cultural appropriation thing has gone way way too far.
I understood why people were upset about it when the whole hipster warbonnet thing was going down. It's something sacred in Native American cultures only worn by those who earn it etc., so people wearing it as a fashion accessory is upsetting. At least that makes sense to be upset about.

Now I see cultural appropriation as a way to stop the natural mixing of cultures. I saw some shit a few days ago that said if you're a white DJ you shouldn't play music by POC because "it's not yours to profit from". Bullshit like that is dangerous IMO.

>I get cultural appropiation and why it's harmful
oh fuck you, you faggot idiot.

The one thing I don't get is why is it not cultural appropriation/theft when they take white culture?
From now on only Germans are allowed to use cars

>I hope you really really like the job you choose, champ

>communism
>choosing a job

hahahaha

because poc can't be racist towards whites
apparently that means that all preconceived notions of what you should and shouldn't do melt away when a poc is interacting with a white person too

Basically you can do anything you want to a white person. Until it gets violent. Then "that is not what our movement stands for, there will always be violent people, please don't dismiss our entire movement because of this incident"

Because POC have less power than whites. Same reasoning they use when saying you can't be racist towards white people.

I'm pretty socially progressive and I agree on a lot of things regarding white privilege, but I don't really understand cultural appropriation being applied to modern, superficial culture.

As far as I know, Latinas wear hoop earrings because they think they look cool. White girls wear hoop earrings because they think they look cool. If there's nothing deeper than that, where is the insult coming from?

>black celebrity wears cornrows on tv
>blakc girl wear cornrows to school and is sent back home becuas it's an "inappropiate hairstyle" for school
>white celebrity wears cornrows on tv
>white girls at school wear cornrows and nothing happens

You have to admit that only sends a negative message to the black girl, that she was inherently inappropiate for being black.

This is the thing with cultural appropiation, it stems off racism, without racism there shouldn't be anything wrong with it

But the black girl shouldn't have been sent home. That's what's wrong with your scenario, not the white girl wearing cornrows.

this cultural appropriation shite is ridiculous. I remember somehow stumbling upon a kpop instagram account that had one post whining about a white model doing 'geisha face' whatever that means, then the next post was them praising a mural of Rihanna in a traditional korean robe

I know I shouldn't be expecting anything other than degeneracy from a kpop fan but it perfectly described the social justice movement with one pitiful display of hypocrisy: a way for insecure mongs to whinge about white people

Exactly, this is the problem
Addressing symbols instead of the issues that relate to them

Ofcourse, but that's like saying that firemen are guilty of your house burning down, and not the faulty oven that begun everything, or the lack of equipment the firemen had because it's a non profit, volunteer driven, institution, or the traffic jam that delayed them, caused by terrible infrastructure in the inner city.

No, it's actually the opposite. That analogy applies to someone trying to get the white girl to stop wearing dreads instead of defending the black girl getting sent home

Can't wait until we get our mandatory Racial ID cards so that we can make sure people are only partaking in culture (this would include all products of that culture, such as technology) that can be traced directly to their genetic ancestors.

White people can finally be the boogieman that the left thinks they are.