Why is this whole website so obsessed with right-wing ideology...

Why is this whole website so obsessed with right-wing ideology? The traditionalism and moral conservatism of the right is directly against the type of place like Veeky Forums, and the kinds of people that come here. Anime, weird porn, anti-social behavior and lack of anything sacred, I see nothing that would attract a person to be a regular conservative, let alone full-on traditionalist. I don't get it senpai.

Other urls found in this thread:

docdro.id/wHGPxeQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

It's because the people that come here are alienated middle class young men who want to find the most out-there stuff. Much like how liberals are constantly one-upping each other with a newer, more radical 'critique,' the loners and weirdo's who fall through the cracks and end up here are constantly one-upping each other with edgy, obscure meme-philosophies. Then, even dumber people come on here and see all these memes and think it's genuine. And then they end up being Dylan Roof.

Take the redpill, cuck. We're proud to be white. We take pride in masculinity.

This place is for REAL men.

>>>/leftypol/

>loners and weirdo's who fall through the cracks
>implying Veeky Forums isn't a normie cesspool nowadays

The fringe right is no longer contrarian and thus will not survive on Veeky Forums much longer.

>This is the basis of Marx’s prediction of an apocalyptic end to capitalism: either the rate of return on capital would steadily diminish (thereby killing the engine of accumulation and leading to violent conflict among capitalists), or capital’s share of national income would increase indefinitely (which sooner or later would unite the workers in revolt). In either case, no stable socioeconomic or political equilibrium was possible.
>Marx’s dark prophecy came no closer to being realized than Ricardo’s. In the last third of the nineteenth century, wages finally began to increase: the improvement in the purchasing power of workers spread everywhere, and this changed the situation radically, even if extreme inequalities persisted and in some respects continued to increase until World War I. The communist revolution did indeed take place, but in the most backward country in Europe, Russia, where the Industrial Revolution had scarcely begun, whereas the most advanced European countries explored other, social democratic avenues—fortunately for their citizens. Like his predecessors, Marx totally neglected the possibility of durable technological progress and steadily increasing productivity, which is a force that can to some extent serve as a counterweight to the process of accumulation and concentration of private capital. He no doubt lacked the statistical data needed to refine his predictions. He probably suffered as well from having decided on his conclusions in 1848, before embarking on the research needed to justify them. Marx evidently wrote in great political fervor, which at times led him to issue hasty pronouncements from which it was difficult to escape. That is why economic theory needs to be rooted in historical sources that are as complete as possible, and in this respect Marx did not exploit all the possibilities available to him.8 What is more, he devoted little thought to the question of how a society in which private capital had been totally abolished would be organized politically and economically—a complex issue if ever there was one, as shown by the tragic totalitarian experiments undertaken in states where private capital was abolished.

-piketty

Because the left is fundamentally incorrect.

...

Veeky Forums is a christian website

>REAL men

This may apply to Veeky Forums to an extent, but unfortunately not to Veeky Forums in general. I once believed that the people of Veeky Forums were generally intelligent and only pretended to be retarded for laughs, but experience has cruelly disabused me of that perspective. Veeky Forums is just unfortunately mostly populated by bitter, entitled, mediocre young men who resent societal change and the erosion of their traditional status.

What exactly was Ricardo's apocalyptic situation?

Malthus had a transparent one, but Ricardo is one classical economist who I just do not believe had a dystopian future set out for humanity, just a situation that necessarily derived productivity from unequal division of labor territory-wise.

>implying marxists even make 50% of the left

I don't get it either, the word "degenerate" they so love applies better to this place than any other.

Also on the level that it's just ironic joking it's at least as cringeworthy as reddit's autistic meme philosophies.

/pol/ is not degenerate.

Nowhere else do you find such Puritans. Believers in God, against tattoos, piercings, drinking, smoking, hedonism, casual sex, etc. etc.

le contrarian meme

piketty's such an idiot
>either the rate of return on capital would steadily diminish
The rate of return on industrial fixed-capital has been declining since WWII, this is empirically provable
>capital’s share of national income would increase indefinitely
I don't know where he gets this idea
>Like his predecessors, Marx totally neglected the possibility of durable technological progress and steadily increasing productivity, which is a force that can to some extent serve as a counterweight to the process of accumulation and concentration of private capital
is he saying Marx never foresaw a rising organic composition of capital? lol. That is central to the crises tendencies of capitalism since a greater proportion, and mass, of fixed capital to total capital results in a greater proportion, and mass, of depreciation expense, especially if wear-and-tear, physical depreciation costs are combined with obsolescence write-offs against gross profits

pdf goes into more details:
docdro.id/wHGPxeQ

For Ricardo, who published his Principles of Political Economy and Taxation in 1817, the chief concern was the long-term evolution of land prices and land rents. Like Malthus, he had virtually no genuine statistics at his disposal. He nevertheless had intimate knowledge of the capitalism of his time. Born into a family of Jewish financiers with Portuguese roots, he also seems to have had fewer political prejudices than Malthus, Young, or Smith. He was influenced by the Malthusian model but pushed the argument farther. He was above all interested in the following logical paradox. Once both population and output begin to grow steadily, land tends to become increasingly scarce relative to other goods. The law of supply and demand then implies that the price of land will rise continuously, as will the rents paid to landlords. The landlords will therefore claim a growing share of national income, as the share available to the rest of the population decreases, thus upsetting the social equilibrium. For Ricardo, the only logically and politically acceptable answer was to impose a steadily increasing tax on land rents.

I see, quite simple. The idea of his work was obviously much more than just that. How long ago did you read The Principles? Have you read J.S. Mill's Principles as well?

...

Haha, sorry, bro, this board isn't intelligent either :)

Have you ever properly engaged in discussion on leftypol? The people there are, on average, much more well-read and articulated than anything on /pol/, and actually know some economics beyond regurgitating pop neoclassical books. The entirety of /pol/ is based on identity politics, and their meme philosophy of alt-right is literally identitarianism, according to Spencer. They are the mirror image of their arch-nemesis, the tumblr liberal.
The only real way out today is to reject liberal and reactionary identity politics, reject spooks like nationality and race, and embrace socialism based on material self-interest and economic egalitarianism.

>We're proud to be white.
Why?

This is a literature board you piece of shit