Veeky Forums what do you think about Socialism, socialists, and this wide-eyed, semi-factual fucker?

I just love having a significant portion of my income going to lazy people I despise.

>Veeky Forums/pol is retarded
Totaly agreed.

>Marx was an idiot though
Agreed.

The world needs a certain amount of socialism tough. A too big gap in between the richest and the poorest does fuck up the social structure of a population. If there is no or only a restricted movement possible in between the social layers, you end up like brazil

>no or only a restricted movement possible in between the social layers
>not understanding the biological basis for inequality
It's hardwired user, and nature will rewrite you before you rewrite it. The only thing that's going to be redistributed anytime soon in this country is communist brains on the concrete.

Socialism won't work in America because of our massive Latino and Black population. These demographics are, on average, a net drain on the economy in terms of tax input and entitlement output. The sheer amount of these demographics makes even a socialized healthcare system nearly impossible. Look up California's attempt to implement even the most basic system for this. California being, of course, the state with the largest illegal alien / Latino population.

Inb4 /pol/tard fuck off. There are plenty of resources for you to look up the economic burdens of all American demographics online. Calling me racist is not an argument.

If the USA wasn't the world cop Canada and Europe's welfare state wouldn't be sustainable because they would have to actually defend themselves from the wolves at the door. But the wolves have been invited in anyway and the left still blame the US for everything so fuck it let them burn fuck the left and fuck the center I'm going to the moon.

I live in a socialist country (France) and it's like that:

>"Please Daddy State, regulate every single thing because I don't know responsibility"
>"Please Daddy State tax succesful people (even if the tax cost more to collect than it provides) because it makes me feel inadequate"
>"Please Daddy State, hammer the fuck out of successful people, rich people are crooks, noone deserve to be rich anyway.
>"Wtf Daddy State ? Why don't I have a job !? Give me one"
>"Please Daddy State, give me free money because I don't want to work"
>"Please Daddy State create a fuckton of useless jobs in the public services with people who are highly inefficient and can't be fired"
>"Please Daddy State, welcome and give free money/healthcare/shelter/citizenship these hordes of low IQ and uneducated brown people who provide no added value and will never pay for it because it's the nice thing to do and they will enrich us ! I don't know how but my leftist rag told it"
>"What did you say Daddy State ? Smart, hard working and ambitious people are leaving to other countries with less buraucracy and taxes where they can enjoy their success without being robbed or guil tripped ? Well fuck them, it's good news !"
>"Please Daddy State, give me a special status with privileges because I'm a lazy pothead working in an """"artistic"""" field every once a year."
>"Please Daddy State give me a grant for my assocation which does the exact same thing as ten others"
>"What ? The money ? Well just take a loan duh !"
>"Wtf Daddy State ! Why is the debt so high ? No way I will pay it back ! The future generations ? Who cares ?"

that guy looks like he has too much estrogen from soy overconsumption

this guy was a former ancap

You're kidding.

?

>A too big gap in between the richest and the poorest does fuck up the social structure of a population. If there is no or only a restricted movement possible in between the social layers, you end up like brazil

A reset always happen once in a while.
The first example are the greek tyrannies where the oligarchy/aristocracy was often expropriated by a ruler who was backed by the people and their goods were redistributed, see:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peisistratos

But wealth will always progressively aggregate itself in the hands of the smartest/boldest over a certain amount of time.
If we were really serious with reducing inequalities we would stop playing this sisyphus game and attack the problem at the source by practicing eugenics and it's apparently nazism (despite being a far older discipline than Hitler). It goes against the leftists feefees so we won't, in fact socialist policies will have the opposite effect and will just give rise to more dysgenics which will result in even more inequal societies.

yep, i think in his video on Ancaps he says this

>But wealth will always progressively aggregate itself in the hands of the smartest/boldest over a certain amount of time.
Bold statement.
Why do you think that it will stay like this in the modern world?

A fundamental change in social structure like Peisistratos did is way harder to pull off nowadays, as the effect of populism today starts to wear off (and is also used by the side which is not in favor of redistribution of wealth but status quo at best). At least in europe, as we have the brexiteers as a good (or bad in this case) example.

>eugenics
Do you mean at a medical level (to prevent genetic diseases) or on a population control level?
And what does this have to do with "leftists"?

Also living in France. Wtf are we going to do ?

>Wtf are we going to do?
Stop going on strikes all the time would be a good start.

>Why do you think that it will stay like this in the modern world?
Because being smart has never been so important than in modern societies.

In ancient agriculural societies your performance and social ranking depended mostly of the land you owned, sure you could enhance it by smart administration and decision but if you were born a peasant you had little chance to rise in the upper class despite being intelectually in the top 5%, wealth were built over the course of generations, there was a lot of inertia because the world was slower, the process was the same.

Today if you are smart you can build wealth fast, but this growth is made out of the ressources that stupid people mismanage but that you won't and your children probably won't either by social reproduction, aggregation is done faster and faster.

>A fundamental change in social structure like Peisistratos did is way harder to pull off nowadays, as the effect of populism today starts to wear off
If you think populism start to wear off you are in a for a hard wake-up, populism is just the prequel of what will happen in Europe and USA in the coming decades.
If you know how to read the situation right now then you would realize we are moving toward tribalism, events like Charlottesvilles, the islamic attacks, the increasing hatred between parties, the distrust in medias and the overall polarization in society aren't accidents.
More and more whites are abadonning the universalist/humanist nonsense when they realize that they are becoming a minority in their own lands at a rapid rate and that the foreign groups have a furious or even a revengeful appetite for what they built.

>Do you mean at a medical level (to prevent genetic diseases) or on a population control level?
At population level, raising the fertility of smart people and reducing fertility of the dumbs.

I think it's a good idea but it's really idealistic and capitalism works better because of the inherent selfishness of humans.
But i also think you should fuck off back to and take these alt right retards with you.

People are just leftists by deafult because they are raised and educated by catladies in school and literal commies in universities. If they knew the first thing about economics they wouldn't be. I have yet to talk to a single socialist who had actually read Marx, beyond a few quotes. It's become the ideology of the intellectually lazy, the dilletants who want to save the world without lifting a finger to make it happen.

Yeah Finland is doing exactly the same. We also have the best welfare system in the world, you get more from wellfare then of the some lowclass works so who would want to do anything when you get money to buy drugs/alcohol for FREE every month. Its fucking ridiculous, we also had our first enrichtment jihadist stabbing in the center of Turku last friday. The stabber was shot in the balls by police and beat up by finns. Now we had those protest - No nazis in turku, no nazis anywhere '':D''

who is this guy? He looks so familiar

Read 3 of his books and took sociology course in high school
He is more autistic then hitler

I dont see significant events. In fact, populism suffered heavy blows in the past year.
Brits start to regret the brexitards and become the laughing stock of the rest of europe (making the rest of the members not wanting to leave).
FPÖ lost in austria.
Wilders lost in the netherlands.
AfD in germany is losing ground.
All in all, europe is smoothening out the problems of populism quite well in the past year.

I agree with the fact that the media is in kind of a crisis. But this crisis is now more prevalent within the US and their liberal medias being the echo chambers of fast infuriated SJWs. It is the same with their right wing counterparts.

But in europe, we dont have this large gap in between left and right, dems and reps. We laugh about SJWs that get excited over minor issues as much as we laugh about the tiki-torch-protestors with a polish name in Charlottesville. The whole discussion about the monuments of the civil war is met with a total lack of understanding in europe why people get so riled up over something that is just standing there for hundred years.

Also, you overestimate the influence of terrorism.

>At population level, raising the fertility of smart people and reducing fertility of the dumbs.
How do you prevent the rich to not influence the decision if someone is smart or dumb?
Which factors would you implement?
How do you deal with "illegal" children?
How would you prevent the problems china had with their one-child-policy and how would you deal with the aftermath?

>I dont see significant events. In fact, populism suffered heavy blows in the past year.

Then you are blind.
All the parties you listed were dwarves 15 years ago had low scores and no sieges, elections are just a culminating point every 4-5 years in a long term trend and this trend is nowhere near dead.

All of these "blows" were at huge cost btw:
In France the victory of Macron was at the cost of destroying the Parti Socialiste (basically the entire left), the alliance between the center and the conservative is now weak, a LARGE part of the political class, even among the conservatives have been kicked out.
Same thing happened in Netherlands and Austria.

Macron is the last stand of the neoliberal/globalist politics that began in the 80s, if he fails to extinguish the fire in the house (which he will) then what will happen ? They threw everyone under the bus to make him win and used all the power of the medias to push him against a very mediocre Le Pen who had a shit strategy.
What will they do with a solid far-right candidate will appear ? Because I tell you, the new generation there is much smarter than the old one.

Even the conservatives are realizing their electorate is growing more and more reactionnary and that the french youth is the most far right in western Europe.

Right now it's the boomers who keep the statu quo but for how long ? The social system will not be able to pay for them by importing legions of third worlders who are themselves on welfare, it's a lie, when politics say immigration is good for economy they speak about short term household consumption but on the long term they cost a fortune to integrate (best example is the ones who arrived here in the 60s still are not integrated after 3 generations), with the automatization of low skilled jobs it will be even worse.
It's a time bomb and everyone know it, people speak of civil war at the family dinner, something that would have been science fiction in the 90s.

they should die

The fire rises brother

once the leftist fad transitions to conservatism all the normies will be on cryptos and us early adopters will have won

America stopped giving a fuck about it's people in the late 1960's early 70's. Since then, public education has been allowed to become so horrible on purpose because the elites want everyone to be stupid. Then, they have the balls to import pajeets to work in tech because not enough Americans know how to program. Yet if they actually taught us these things in school we wouldn't need to import workers. And then they tell us it's our fault. This country is so fucked. It wasn't good enough for them to be most prosperous generation in history.

>you are in a for a hard wake-up
>Then you are blind
>people speak of civil war at the family dinner

Why is it that so many people tell me to "wake up" or to "open my eyes" or "war is coming" but dont argue with actual facts?

Also the parti socialiste was not the "entire left".
As far as I can see (I am not french), "the left" in the french national addembly is still represented by parties like GDR, FI and NG. A part of REM can be considered left too. MoDem and UDI also share some liberal positions.
Just because the PS had a bad result does not mean that these parties will lose their voters for good. In germany, the liberal party FDP has good chances to get into government after not being in the parliament for 4 years.

>All the parties you listed were dwarves 15 years ago had low scores and no sieges, elections are just a culminating point every 4-5 years in a long term trend and this trend is nowhere near dead.

Sigh...
The austrian FPÖ actually >was< the government in austria 15 years ago.
In the netherlands, Wilders "Partij voor de Vrijheid" had a better result in 2010 than 2017.
The german AfD is yet another right wing party - the REP had similar results (~10%) in 1989, in state legislature elections, small amounts of right wing parties get into local parliaments almost every these parliaments get elected.

Anyone that is for socialism i only have two questions.

Do you want the government to have more power and control?
>no
Then why do you support a system that literally does that?

I meet a lot of vacationing Europeans where I live in the US and it literally baffles me how they all live in their own little bubbles. And the fact that a lot of Europeans countries now would rather let their people get raped by sand people than to be politically incorrect is just psychotic.

>How do you prevent the rich to not influence the decision if someone is smart or dumb?
What have the rich to do with that ?

>Which factors would you implement?
There are a lot tools to predict the performance of someone in society and what people consider smart: series of IQ tests, school results, level of education, profession, income, police records, etc.... Combine them and you will have a fairly accurate picture of individuals.

>How do you deal with "illegal" children?
Who is talking about forbidding people to have children ?
The goal is to incite the smartest fraction of the population to have more children and the dumbest to have less, it's to use the carrot not the stick.

Subsidize poor women who want to be sterilized after 1 or 2 children, give progresive tax breaks in % to the upper and upper middle class af the 3rd kid, make agressive prevention campaign against teenage pregnancy, restore the image of motherhood among the women in the upper class, facilitate education at home,etc... You can do a lot on multiple angles.

>How would you prevent the problems china had with their one-child-policy and how would you deal with the aftermath?
China situation had nothing in common with the one of the west right now, also they don't have problems

>The german AfD is yet another right wing party - the REP had similar results (~10%) in 1989, in state legislature elections, small amounts of right wing parties get into local parliaments almost every these parliaments get elected.

Addition: right wing parties in germany tend to attract people that want to profit from the payment they get after they get elected. The german republicans as well as the NPD are full of these people.
Inside the AfD, 3 out of the 10 people of their list of people who are voted to get into the national parliament this year filed for bankruptcy right before they started their political careers.

>no

We elect the government, cucko.
They aren't the bad guys

>As far as I can see (I am not french), "the left" in the french national addembly is still represented by parties like GDR, FI and NG. A part of REM can be considered left too.
>MoDem and UDI also share some liberal positions.

This just shows you don't understand french politics at all, stop trying to analyze it, liberal does not mean what you think it means.
Also the assembly is not proportionnal to representation, it's done by circonscription and despite the heaviest local presence in the country, the left didn't even manage to have 100 MP, it's an historic defeat, they aren't relevant anymore.

>Just because the PS had a bad result does not mean that these parties will lose their voters for good.
The PS is braindead, all the leadership retired or defected, they are even speaking about selling their historic siege right now, yes their voters are lost for good, they will just vote for FI who are just a bunch of funny commies wanting to join the Bolivarian countries or for the center but the left as a potential governing force is dead for at least 20 years thanks to Hollande.

>The austrian FPÖ actually >was< the government in austria 15 years ago.
It was in a coalition and Haider wasn't a part of it, really different from the current situation.

>In the netherlands, Wilders "Partij voor de Vrijheid" had a better result in 2010 than 2017.
And it had better result than in 2012, also Wilders finished 2nd for the first time despite being a clown, tell me about the socialists now.

>The german AfD is yet another right wing party - the REP had similar results (~10%) in 1989, in state legislature elections, small amounts of right wing parties get into local parliaments almost every these parliaments get elected.

Germans are a special case, the economical climate is too comfortable for them to kick out Merkel and they are extremely guilt tripped but their immigration choices will have enormous consequences in the two coming decades.

>What have the rich to do with that ?
Lobbyism.

>Combine them and you will have a fairly accurate picture of individuals.
Some of these standards are not compliant with constitutional rights, meaning it would ment to rewrite the constitution. A political process which is also hard to protect from being influenced by lobbyism.
Also, some of these factors are inherited or influenced by income (hence why I send my children to an expensive private school).

What I want to say: there are so many factors, it is nearly impossible to have an objective view on who is smart and who is not. I have a measured IQ of about 133 - if you look at my achievements in school, you would question my ability to walk straight, because I did not care for anything and was one hell of a bully up until we moved away to another city, away from some people that had quite some bad influence on me.

>it's to use the carrot not the stick.
Fair point, misunderstood you in this aspect.

>they aren't relevant anymore.
A loss in voters is not permanent from my point of view. But well, we might have a fundamental disagreement here.

>It was in a coalition and Haider wasn't a part of it, really different from the current situation.
We were talking about parties - not the heads of them. If in doubt, reread yourseld again: >tell me about the socialists now
I disproved your point of "All the parties you listed were dwarves 15 years ago had low scores and no sieges".
But okay.

Winner in the election in the netherlands 2017 in contrast to 2012:
GL - green/left (+6.8%)
D66 - left (+4.2%)
CDA - christian democrats (+3.87%)
PVV - wilders clown party (+2.98%)
PvdD - left/green (+1.10%)
Others (+5.78%)

Loser in the election in the netherlands 2017 in contrast to 2012:
VVD - liberal/conservative (-5.29%)
PvdA - social democrats (-19.14%)

So the PvdA as a left wing party lost 19.14% but GL, D66 and PvdD as left wing parties gained 11%.
VVD lost 5.29% but wilders only got 2.98% of this.
The ones who profited from this election were mostly the small parties.

>Germans are a special case, the economical climate is too comfortable for them to kick out Merkel and they are extremely guilt tripped but their immigration choices will have enormous consequences in the two coming decades.

My wife is german and I live in germany for 6 years now - the story you read so often that germans are somewhat "guilt tripped" is a fairy tale. They just get angry when you push the guilt of the holocaust onto them personally, others than that just dont sing their anthem at every occasion or salute to their flag like the muritards.
And the immigration choices did show in 2015 (trains overcrowded with refugees). But well... most people in germany dont care anymore, as they get shit done. They complain a bit but as time goes on, they turn typical german and get shit done - they just dont gas the people anymore but try to get them into work.