Since we see so many anti-leftism threads claiming this board is full of /leftypol/. Why don't we actually have a leftism thread for once?
So lets have a humanities debate, how has left-wing ideologies failed and what can be done to improve them?
What is 'left' and 'right' in politics anyways?
And is Marx still relevant. What about non-marxist forms of communism? Like Christian communism? Anarcho-communism, the Paris communards, etc.
Is horseshoe theory correct?
Veeky Forums transcends the political spectrum
>Since we see so many anti-leftism threads claiming this board is full of /leftypol/.
It's literally just one shitposter
Probably, so this thread is because of him.
Thanks to Marxism we have to live in ethnically homogeneous nations as a defense.
The image on the right is the most disgusting thing I've ever seen
Funnily enough it's only thanks to Marxism that some nations are ethnically homogenous, more or less.
Like Poland and Germany thanks to WWII border changes.
Or Tajikistan and Uzbekistan thanks to 1920s resettlements.
1.That picture is so wrong.
2. I only see one so far, and you got triggered this hard. Damn, those shitposters really are "right" sometimes.
To the topic:
If you "leftists" keep propagating lgbt degeneracy, drug abuse and forced diversity in the disguise of socialism or equality...etc, no one are able to save you, even Marx himself wouldn't able to save you. But the worst part is you're gonna drag us all down with your madness.
Left and right is just a political tool to go for the US vs THEM propaganda. It dates from French Revolution and it never stopped being used ever since. Cold War separated "capitalist things" and "communist things" in that agenda as well. The result is a dated and confusing system that says nothing but "U NAZI" or "NO U COMMIE"
Marx still relevant as a capital critic. In my opinion, however, he is overrated, since he only stated the obvious about the capital crisis as his manifesto is highly romantic, reason enough to be used countless times for political rubbish. Basically Marx went full retarded on Idealism vs Pragmatism, and his battle against Stirner got way too personal, saying little to no relevant things about the outside world.
>like Germany
>Anti-leftism threads
Never seen one.
We remove tankies from threads because their revisionist bs gets on everyone's nerves as much as you-know-who.
Victim complexes only get you laid through sophomore year.
>you-know-who
Voldemort?
Classical liberal here. Here's my take. I think it's pretty obvious that most left-wing movements have failed during the 20th century, and I believe that failure is mostly due to the irrational attachment to Marxism, which is an insane theology developed by a literal retarded kike 150 years ago.
I feel like most people who lean towards the left do not because they believe in "dialectical materialism", but because they basically want to reduce social inequalities. Unfortunately, they then get infected by the marxist virus which rots their brains.
Socialism needs to reinvent itself. Firstly, drop anything which is even remotely close to Marxism. Secondly, read a fucking economics textbook. Thirdly, do not castigate freedom of speech and civilized debate as "bourgeois tools of oppression", but on the contrary build your socialist program within the context of western (classical) liberal values of free speech and free exchange of ideas (which shouldn't be hard if you rid yourself of marxism).
And when I say "drop marxism" I also include all of marxism's offshoots (critical theory, postmodernism, etc.)
I thought we adopted an officially anti-G*rman political stance?
In all seriousness though we're an angry collection of men shouting from soapboxes in the park and we hate anyone who tries to monopolize our trade.
Das ist sie Joken.
>I'm a classical Liberal
>Secondly, read a fucking economics textbook
The irony is palpable.
Explain yourself
I don't think most socialist/communist can objectively be said to be failures any more than capitalist countries can be said to be a success.
Often times it is simply the case that rich countries adopted capitalism and poor countries adopted socialism. When you actually see the relative improve it is not so clear cut that one is superior. The USSR was a massive step forward for Russia. Just because they didn't become as wealthy as the US, doesn't mean that they failed.
There are a lot of capitalist shithole countries in central America and Africa and Asia that everyone miraculously forgets about. The fact that they are capitalist isn't really helping them all that much.
Some people like to pretend that you can settle a desert island devoid of even vegetation and declare yourself to be capitalist and suddenly you achieve a first world country HDI.
>Some people like to pretend that you can settle a desert island devoid of even vegetation and declare yourself to be capitalist and suddenly you achieve a first world country HDI.
That pretty much describes Hong Kong.
...
...
...
The problems with left wing ideaologies that were really heavily effected by the writings of Marx and Engels are mainly opression theory, historical materialsim, and the class hypothesis along with class struggle.
Opression theory basically states that almost all of human interaction is the act of one class opressing another and that societies are built on the opression of the many by the few. It's a very narrow view of society and sociology that basically ignores everything that doesn't prove its point. There are more ways to organize society than those that are most popular today. A difference in performance is not necessarily caused by opression. Any historical wrongdoings by distant ancestors will extend into the past unto infinity and trying to take into consideration anything that isn't extremely recent is beyond retarded.
Historical materialsim basically paints human actions as an inevitable process rather than actual humans will free will doing human things. The idea of historical cycles or inevitable sociological processes is basically an argument against free will or even intelligence.
(cont)
Not him, but if you declare yourself to be any kind of ideology you are clearly not actually economically literate. You are just following a very simplistic ideology that tells you that you are economically literate when in fact you aren't.
Being fanatical about economics is clearly antithetical to being economically literate. You are convinced that you are economically literate but that's just an extension of your ideology that you are so fanatical about.
I'd tell you the same thing if you declared yourself to be a socialist or a communist.
...
Actual Liberalism doesn't fucking work. Production being based entirely for profit and not based on need will lead to a grossly inefficient society and pseudo-feudalism once monopolies take power, and any totally capitalist state, even with a small central government will inevitably allow business to hold a role in state affairs, leading to corporatism.
This isn't even complicated shit.
The idea of class and thinking along the lines of class is also intellectually offensive. It's the idea that a person's entire world view, attitudes, wants, and what have you are determined in advance. This is an idea that basically hypothsizes, once again that human beings are actually just automata without any reasoning skills or free will. Never mind the fact that you can't clearly define classes as the individual situation and experiences of a specific person will be very different from another regardless of income or source of income. The fact that some people can belong to voting blocks or demographics doesn't mean that you can start expanding that idea into greater abstractions that trat every member of that demographic as though they're the same person.
These three ideas are cancer to the left and indeed the entire world and need to be understood better so that nobody ever falls into the logical rut that is believing in them.
>marxists exterminate all enemies on the planet
>push a button that implements "true communism"
>society collapses instantly
>"FUCK WE MISSED A CAPITALIST HIDING IN TASMANIA THUS PREVENTING TRUE COMMUNISM FROM HAPPENING"
This the dumbest god damn ideology that people actually believe.
>, but if you declare yourself to be any kind of ideology you are clearly not actually economically literate
What? Why?
>Being fanatical about economics
How am I fanatical about economics.
You seem to be very confused, I suggest you kill yourself to avoid spawning low IQ broodlings.
...
>This isn't even complicated shit.
This is textbook Marxist babble which has been debunked as hokum by economists and which failed to happen anywhere in the industrial West.
Go kill yourself.
And Honduras. Oh wait.
>retarded can't stop making multiple threads about how Veeky Forums is /lefypol/
>People disagree with long, compelling arguments
>Start spamming idiotic communist memes/charts
Not fooling anybody, pal.
...
>Opression theory basically states that almost all of human interaction is the act of one class opressing another and that societies are built on the opression of the many by the few. It's a very narrow view of society and sociology that basically ignores everything that doesn't prove its point. There are more ways to organize society than those that are most popular today
Reductionist trash. Marx 2wasn't saying that all of human history had been built on the oppression of one class over another, but rather that all states had existed to maintain the dominance of one particular class, not necessarily in an oppressive sense, but rather in the sense of it being designed for a specific purpose. Marx admired capitalism for its ability to automatically industrialize and improve countries, but simply observed that capitalism produces a system in which the working class are the force of production and do not control, meaning they're in a position of dominance they're not even aware of.
Slaves gonna slave.
Yes, your point being? Are you one of those simpletons who believes that "if you enact law X then we will all be rich"?
Damn, this argument showed me.
I might as well try to convince a flat earther that the earth is spherical, I'd have more luck than to teach economics to a Marxist.
...
That's obviously why you're avoiding actually responding to the point.
If only a capitalist would let me into the hidden genius of their brain... one of these days.
...
Despite what you like to pretend, economics is not something completely figured out. There isn't "this one simple trick to economic health" that your ideology keeps proselytizing.
>How am I fanatical about economics.
>oh you said something that contradicts my very rigid and completely figured out theory of how all of reality works
>you must be stupid
>Yes, your point being? Are you one of those simpletons who believes that "if you enact law X then we will all be rich"?
>>Some people like to pretend that you can settle a desert island devoid of even vegetation and declare yourself to be capitalist and suddenly you achieve a first world country HDI.
...
>That's obviously why you're avoiding actually responding to the point.
What point? You're just copy pasting your marxist babble you saw on reddit.
> Production being based entirely for profit and not based on need will lead to a grossly inefficient society
Except capitalist societies are way way more efficient than planned economies, because profit gives incentives to make processes more efficient.
> pseudo-feudalism once monopolies take power,
Monopolies exist only in the delusional minds of low IQ niggerloving communists.
>, even with a small central government will inevitably allow business to hold a role in state affairs,
Except that in real life all the lobbying and encroaching of corporations in influencing legislation has been the result of policies enacted by those left of the political spectrum in favor of more intervention in the economy. Corporations have no political power if the government cannot interfere in the economy, they only gain that power when the government is allowed to enact in favor of a certain corporation, which is usually justified on grounds of "fairness", see: the totally fucked up healthcare industry in America.
Have you ever read the writings of Saint Basil II?
>Despite what you like to pretend, economics is not something completely figured out.
Where did I claim it was figured out? All I said is that there is an established discipline with a body of theory, and that the inane rambling of the kike-in-chief are so far removed from economics that they should only be used as comic fodder.
...
Not a commie or a leftist, just a normal person who actually doesn't really have a stake in this game cause I will never have family.
But some of the ideas they champion, that capitalist oppose, are correct. Things like high wealth/income inequality being harmful. That's obviously correct. Increasing minimum wage might be beneficial. Government issues health care insurance is superior. Markets are not a good solution for everything. I mean this is basic stuff that most people agree with.
Ha, I hadn't paid attention to your initial strawman, my bad.
I guess my point is that capitalism can, in some instances, give prosperity to desert islands, whereas planned economies always result in misery, even in incredibly resource rich countries like Russia.
Pure ideology
*Sniff*
You called yourself a "classical liberal". In doing so you outed yourself to be one of those buffoons. We already know your kind. Don't try to backtrack now.
Imbecile.
Hey so umm where does profit come from?
Veeky Forums is pol with dates.
>horse theory
A meme for the normies to keep them placated..
"""Female""" dates ;).
...
>Except capitalist societies are way way more efficient than planned economies, because profit gives incentives to make processes more efficient.
>Le all marxist economies have central planning
Marxist production systems, i.e. co-ops are actually more efficient.
thenation.com
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu
>Monopolies exist only in the delusional minds of low IQ niggerloving communists.
What an argument. It's not like there are hundreds of monopolies already.
Take the UK rail system for instance, because there's no competition, they are able to charge ridiculous prices for tiny journeys. I paid £25 for a 40 minute journey. Monopolies do fucking exist.
>Except that in real life all the lobbying and encroaching of corporations in influencing legislation has been the result of policies enacted by those left of the political spectrum in favor of more intervention in the economy. Corporations have no political power if the government cannot interfere in the economy
You realise the state has responsibilities outside the economy it works with, that corporations can intefere with? take union labour laws. They were fucked for decades because parliament was in the hands of dominant corporations.
they don't even need the state. There are coca-Cola deathsquads in south america.
Not for long my friend, you need to open up your tolerance more.
Lol triggered much? Go choke on a nigger dick faggot, if you can't respond to my post without sperging out like an autist don't bother.
2,3, and 4 are pretty cute. Are you gay?
>>r/latestagecapitism
You're not even fit to exile to your wretched mother land.
God they all fucking look the same.
See that beauty on the far right
They all end up like that eventually. On the far-right I mean.
Totally false. Look at europe.
The entire continent basically started over. One side Capitalism the other Socialism. Guess which one failed?
> whereas planned economies always result in misery,
The Egyptian empire was the most planned and totalitarian country, yet one of the richest for millennia.
The Roman empire was similarly all a planned economy. Lasted two millenia.
China was always a planned economy. Probably the oldest continuous civilization.
Anything big the US accomplished was all through government initiative.
This is the retarded fanaticism that the world could really do without.
The one in the middle even failed the mostest.
>The entire continent basically started over. One side Capitalism the other Socialism. Guess which one failed?
>American Education
I am European. Fucking retard.
>Le all marxist economies have central planning
Name a single marxist country which historically didn't have a centrally planned economy. Meme countries which lasted 2 months or less don't count.
>Marxist production systems, i.e. co-ops are actually more efficient.
Funny, those coops exist under a capitalist system. I don't deny that coops can be a good method of organization for some small scale activities, but good luck running an oil corporation on the coop model. Anyways, coops can exist under a capitalist system, so why would you want to destroy all non-coop forms of economic organization?
>Take the UK rail system for instance, because there's no competition, they are able to charge ridiculous prices for tiny journeys. I paid £25 for a 40 minute journey. Monopolies do fucking exist.
I'm not a Bong so I'll admit I don't know the specifics but a quick google search told me that the UK rail system was public until the late 90s when it got privatized. It wasn't formed naturally. I think this looks more like a bungled privatization than a naturally formed monopoly. Likewise, the horrendous state of the Russian economy during the 90s wasn't due to "unrestricted capitalism" but the bungled transition from government owned property to private owned property.
>You realise the state has responsibilities outside the economy it works with, that corporations can intefere with? take union labour laws.
More nonsense, deregulate everything. Unions are welfare queens.
>There are coca-Cola deathsquads in south america.
Lmao, link?
There honestly is no time to talk about Marxism or Socialism, anyone who still argues for them and against capitalism can't be taken seriously.
Its just neet edge-lords who think they "get it" when they read a few things on Wikipedia about how great socialism is, reminds me of the white version of the we wuz kangz niggers.
I love how you totally dropped the pretense of being smart and educated once you couldn't find a suitable reply for my post.
Enjoy the rest of your life, my man. I have nothing more to prove.
I don't browse plebbit, don't know what that is. Go back to your cuckshed.
Ancient Egypt, Rome and China were dirt poor compared to modern industrial economies.
>Anything big the US accomplished was all through government initiative.
If you mean big individual projects like the Apollo program, then yes, but the general prosperity of Americans was achieved through private enterprise, not government intervention.
>This is the retarded fanaticism that the world could really do without.
The only fanatic is you, it seems. You're so ideological you see fanaticism where it doesn't exist.
Kek what? What 'suitable response' should I say to your post where you basically just say 'reeee ur dumb!!!!'
>Enjoy the rest of your life, my man. I have nothing more to prove.
Dunning Kruger out in full force.
>Except capitalist societies are way way more efficient than planned economies
Markets are good at incremental improvements because those are synonymous with short term investments. They just plain fail at long term improvement. You're not going to get a paradigm changing technology from markets. You have to put in the massive billions of research as a state first. Then the private sector comes in once you have demonstrated the new science and takes over (well not really, they do the last incremental step of development).
Just look at Apple, 100s of billions in capital for almost half a decade and absolutely nothing done with it. They aren't going to risk losing that money, funding science research. That's a role for national labs and universities funded by tax payers.
>but the general prosperity of Americans was achieved through private enterprise, not government intervention
Yeah, except for the part where the government stepped in and enforced all those regulations that made it possible for union workers in a factor to make a living and become middle class citizens. Without that, there wouldn't be any American prosperity.
Merkel is a capitalist and a conservative.
wrong and wrong
Using the tech sector as an example is probably the worst you could've done.
Apple was started by two 20 somethings in a garage. Microsoft was started in an Albuquerque motel room by an 18 year old. These two companies completely changed the paradigm of the entire fucking world by creating the PC revolution.
As for your assertion that research can only occur in universities and national labs it's completely retarded. Ever heard of Bell Labs? Ever heard of Xerox PARC? Probably not, you seem really ignorant about the world. You think that before tax payer funded universities scientific research didn't exist?
>commie revisionist history 101
Oh boy. What's next, the New Deal enriched Americans?
Her party is the 'Christian Democratic Union of Germany', it's a center-right party.
People online call her a leftist because its become a thing to call 'everything I don't like is leftism', the right-wing version of lefties who call everything they don't like fascism.
but unlike you leftist subhumans, we are right
she is a leftist
You calling the German people subhumans? Because Merkel is still very popular in Germany, even more so when she stood up to Trump.
>You calling the German people subhumans
why are you defending refugees?
I didn't say refugees, I said Germans. Germans like Merkel.
and why is she a leftist
So if Merkel is a leftist (even though she is center-right), and most Germans like Merkel, that means most Germans are leftists, no?
So if leftists are subhumans, you just called the majority of ethnic Germans sub-humans.
>all of this ideology
THE NAME OF THIS TRASHCAN IS Veeky Forums
>[deleted]
I don't know what anyone was expecting
Nothing says conservative in Germany like getting raped, the national past time.
why do you want a safespace?
>the national past time.
Yeah it is.
Postmodernism is pretty much the basis of all Western culture these days. Seems that people criticize it without even knowing what it is, just because it's "scary leftist philosophy" or whatever. Same deal with critical theory, you never even hear about it except when the "cultural marxism" goofballs claim it's infecting academia.
>Monopolies exist only in the delusional minds of low IQ niggerloving communists.
Do you have any actual argument that doesn't depend on /pol/babby insults? There is a finite number of natural resources out there, so what exactly prevents one entity from claiming them all?
It's the amount by which revenue exceeds expenses. What point are you trying to make exactly?
...
>That pretty much describes Hong Kong.
This swamp did sure well without west-style relocated shipping industry and actually lives off its own primary sector production ...Oh wait !
The problem is that many people today generally treat economic systems with almost a religious zeal. Economics is fucking improvisation according to the given conditions and not much more. Capitalist system has in fact incorporated many "left-wing" features, 8 hour work time, minimum wage, days off, vacations, benefits, etc. Did it do any harm to the system? No, the profit rolls in like crazy and workers don't have to toil 14 hours per day in miserable conditions for a meagre wage. Win-win for everyone.
>What is 'left' and 'right' in politics anyways?
Buzzwords and phrases.
>And is Marx still relevant
He is. Das Kapital is an extremely important manual for both socialists and capitalists, as both sides draw their own conclusions from it. To ignore Marx's work is to be economically illiterate.
>non-marxist forms of communism, like Christian communism
irrelevant on a larger political/economic spectrum.
>anarcho
meme
>Is horseshoe theory correct?
Yes. The extremists in general have a mind of their own that goes against the rest of society. Though they are useful in a weird way since their bickerings can divert the public opinion in a way that is useful for establishment, and to let angry dissilusioned people blow off some steam. They are pleasant as toys but real problems arise when they become powerful enough to challenge and change the system.
Both politics and economics are one big labyrinth of compromises, promises and negotiations.
Leftists only bring down themselves.
Literally the only left-wing theory with any intellectual or practical heft was Syndicalism and that was destroyed in the 1920s by being discredited by the failures of socialism and communism and in the fires of reactionism in western Europe after the First World War.