danger/u/
This thread is permanently archived
thoughts on antfia?

|


| nope


| yep


| Ni


| I support em. Fuck fascists. And fuck the alt righters who act like throwing milkshakes is violence and cherry pick/take clips out of context to justify antifa "being the real fascists."


| Bunch of assholes trashing their own streets thinking that it will hurt "the man" instead of their own neighbor


| Violent soyboys who believe to be fighting for justice when they are actually just hurting innocent people
The only reason they didn't kill anyone so far is because they lack muscle, because they sure tried
But I'm estimating that in the next few months we'll see the first dead victim since MSM is encouraging them to use guns and protecting them when they use acid(and the chemical opposite of acid too, don't remember what it's called but it's also harmful and dangerous)


| it's just facists with "anti" on the name


| Anyone who unironically uses the term "soyboy" should be chemically castrated


| >>579027 how are they any less violent than the people they fight?

antifa use milkshakes while their enemies use batons, cars, guns, and bombs.


| >>579029 what exactly makes them facists, please tell me.


| fucking retarded political puppets acting like they're hot shit when they're soyboys who haven't read any other book than the commie manifesto.
the scum of the streets.


| >>578961 >>579077 >>579078 i see OP made this thread solely as a bait. and here i thought it was an honest question.
>>578986 >>579072 there's his gay lover


| >>579081 it was honestly an honest question


| >>579087
ok funny


| >>579080
>soyboys
I'd recommend not parroting a myth with as much credibility as anti-vax and flat earth myths if you want to be taken seriously.
-
And antifa are essentially fascists, they completely use violence and "wrong think" in their ideological approach. Which if anyone with any actual intelligence knows that's not going to work against facism in fact that's how the NAZI's came to power, public sympathy against the red shirts.


| >>579129
but they are soyboys. socialists are weak & unemployed.

>NAZI's
made me want to stop reading there


| At the end of the day, Antifa are destroying infrastructure. That results in a loss for some individual human beings who care for it.
It's common sense that when someone has a solution for a problem, there is a positive effect, unless there is another worse problem going unsolved or being contributed to.
Therefore, I cannot agree with Antifa in practice, as much as I can sympathize with their misguided cause.
They just don't have a solution worth fighting for in the long run.


| Research a solution that outmodes our social contracts. We have more information and scientific muscle than ever before. If we don't stop fighting each other to change our environment, like other human beings are always pivotal to our survival or something, we'll never figure out how to handle our problems without the crutch of society, which is just a big neural net behind which are the neurons, the people, who hold our world up by a thread. Wake up, society is an abstractive fog.


| One person can't change everything,but that's why tools exist. That's what science is for.


| If a single person with a nuclear code can destroy the world many times over, than there must be enough energy here to fix it.


| I'm an antifascist, but there are many antifascists i don't agree with in many things like radical pro-israelism and neoliberal fake anarchism. Nevertheless, fascism is the biggest threat to a class concient, revolutionary and international united proletariat, which is the only proletariat that will rule imstead of serving. Fascism is slavery, hate and irtationalism.


| >>579167
basically the same arguments are being heard from fascists about communism.


| >>579171
Yeah, but in the end fascists have no arguments except the weapons provided by their capitalist friends. Fascism is all about gloryfying the past, elitarism and jungle law. While it is sad truth that communists regimes pretty often developed fascist characteristics, it stood always contradictory to the original intention.


| >>579240
Sup NazBol here to say that you're a virgin soyboy nigger faggot kike. Btw I make dyke pussy wet.


| >>579240
of course they have arguments, you just didn't bother studying them.
you're putting forth the same arguments as many fascists have about communism
>>579295
National Bolshevik, a respectable taste.
>I make dyke pussy wet
woke


| They seem to believe that the end justifies the means
This mentality is always disastrous


| >>579314
i thought you were fou à lier


| >>579303
What kind of arguments? Post them here.


| >>579314 no they don't?

if they thought that, you'd see more terrorist attacks from people who identify as antifacists.

but instead we have nothing, not a single terrorist attack. which suggests that they don't think the ends justify the means.



| >>579349
argumentative fallacy


| >>579350 how is that an argumentative fallacy?


| >>579353
corroboration unequals causality or whatever the fuck. also ad populum.


| >>579349 so you think hitting people with crowbars and bikelocks is ok?
You think throwing stuff at people(harmless as the stuff may be) is ok?

You know what? I'm outta here, if you want to harm others that's none of my business, just know that if one of you ever hurt me or someone important to me, I'll go after you through the proper means and I'll get you to pay in the law, even if it takes years in delayed court cases.


| I was beaten and called racial slurs cause the dude they were beating up was crying for help. Was I suppose to ignore that? Fuck no! I wasn't political back then now I am since then. I'm Mexican and cause I did a basic human good they called me a spic, a wet back, a traitor. Back then I was confused, I had just got out of work. They beat me and gave me a spinal cord injury. Forever handicapped. Over what? Me not liking violence on someone calling for help.
-Ramirez.


| Political violence is usually bad, but i agree its necessary when defending oneself. In an ideal world every bit of it would be justified and against an instigator who deserved it.

But i dont trust mobs to hold back. They'll just fck shit up cause they have a bunch of pent up aggression that needs an outlet. Antifa has that anarcho stuff, so it'll mean capitalist small stores too. And equally alt righters will mess up who aint part of their identity.


| >>579413
defending against what


| All politics are violence in the end. Should the state have monopoly on violence? I don't like that this is where we,re at but people who advocate an ideological program that ends with genocide can't be reasoned with much of the time. Also anti fascists do a lot more than violence but that's not "news worthy"


| >>579507
>Should the state have monopoly on violence?
Depends on how this state is organized. It's a question of power distribution. A weak state favors only the rich and turns society into a corupted plutocracy/cleptocracy ruled by jungle law.
A too strong state on the other hand may offer too much power individuals can handle and end up autocratic or as dictature.
It's all about distribution of (economical) power.
Fascists are just extremely short-sighted and selfish assholes.


| >>579537
and yet here you are, a commie calling others out on selfishness when he throws a tantrum to get wealth he didn't deserve redistributed to him.

i'm a fascist because i recognize that the best deserve to be on top.


| >>579624
The best at what exactly? And who and how are you gonna identify these best people and give them power over an entire country without any form of corruption?


| >>579634
that's the entire problem... the men of action principle.
if there are no checks/balances then sure the whole thing is unstable. fascism does not mean that there are no checks/balances, only that those in power don't have to worry about campaigns and elections for three fourths of their political careers.


| with fascism they wouldn't need to pull shady businesses because they'd already have the country in their grip. of course they should still be kept in check, otherwise it just ends up in total shite.

politicians have become useless. we literally don't need them anymore. they are wasteful and corrupted.


|
the whole argument of elitism is to put the best of the best on top, the greatest individuals of the entire nation: the most educated, motivated, and experienced, the vanguards.
the biggest problem is who those people would be.

now of course (and at least to me) fascism does not mean that we completely override the people's will to implement some banker's wet and selfish dream.


| it should be that the state shuts up selfish people and gets them to sacrifice some of their comfort, for the good of the whole population.
that's because the driving factors of humanity (including selfishness, greed, all that crap) is very much reflected in a democratic system and thus bogs down the system. people want to sit on their ass all day watching TV. they don't care about making the system better as long as they're fed and can cum to their favourite degenerate media..


| i'm just saying that a dictator is as great as his country is, and the idea behind fascism is to use the system to force people to build a better system. no pain no gain. it's obvious that if you're the dictator of nicaragua, it's not the same as if you're the dictator of russia. so the one on top should make his country better if he wants to stand taller.
by the way, fascism doesn't necessarily mean that there's only one person on top. it's a very primitive & dangerous idea.


| i mean, it's the same thing for you, assuming that you're a communist. how would you get people to use a communist system? they're retarded and weak. they love to sit on their ass on the couch and eat and sleep and watch netflix. they don't want your system.
and yes, you could say that they've been corrupted by the vices of capitalism or whatever. we agree that they've been corrupted and are wasting their life as sad blobs. essentially you would want to force them to become better.


| our opinions diverge on what should be done to make the system better. i say it's based on people, and the ones that are better should be pulling the cart straight ahead while the ones that sit on their ass and watch netflix all day will surf the wave somewhere behind. it's their fault if they're not good enough.
using the best as vanguards at the front, we pave our way as we better the system.


|
the masses will simply follow, and if they want to make their voices heard, they should simply be worth the time.

where we definitely don't agree (again, assuming you're a communist) is that people's rewards relative to their efforts should be regularized in function of society's progress as a whole. to me it just demotivates the vanguards completely. would you work hard all day all night if you knew it wouldn't make a difference?

no, i think you'd just move back to the couch.


| exactly, you'd move back to the couch and watch netflix all day. occasionally you'd work, sure, but you can't rise above anyways, so why try to be better than others?

and you become soft, and weak, and dumb...

fascists reject the idea of a soft and mellow life. we believe that people should fucking struggle to make the system better - in a healthy way.
you probably thought 'hey, i knew it, the damn fash wants people to be hurt' but that's not the point.


| i want people to get off the couch and start becoming better. i want them to become smarter, stronger, more motivated. and with this i want them to then make the system better - but they won't do it on their own unless the state tells them "fucking go and do it or else". we have so much potential as humans and all we're doing is sitting on the couch and jerking off. humanity is slacking, and worse - it's pulling down the people that aren't slacking.


| and i would believe communism to be a slacker's system.
there is no reason to eliminate class differences. people are where they deserve to be in life. i am where i deserve to be in life. if they want to be somewhere else then they're gonna have to work for it.

okay, my thoughts don't really align with mainstream fashy thoughts but it's basically fascism alright.
i don't like the idea of dumbing down people or using violence to follow a regime.

but we're wasting time & potential.


| if only someone had been on my case when i was young, i'd be someone else. imagine someone commanding you every day and making you go through intense physical and mental stimuli. five years later, you'd be clever, muscular, honorable, etc... when you rise above you become better.

wow i could keep talking for hours. >>579644 >>579645 >>579646 >>579647 >>579648 >>579649 >>579650 >>579651 >>579653 >>579655 >>579658 is all me...

i forgot a few things, feel free to remind me of them


| >>579661
forgot to add that when a person thinks about fascism, they think bad. mostly because war, genocide, corruption, etc. but go beyond the reputation, if you please will. explore and study. think for yourself.

i would say the same to the strain of "fascist" (strasserist) imbeciles roaming the streets. mostly they're full of hate and ignorance. they want fascism just to shut everyone up who disagrees with them... they're just as bad as antifa, really.


| You're all wrong both fascists amd antifascists.

You talk about fighting the enemy destroying the oppressors/terrorists eliminating those who stand in the way of your ideals.

Where's compassion? Where's empathy? Do you really think crushing the enemy will solve everything like in a videogame? Don't you see that violence breeds more violence? Or do you simply not care for consequences as long as you have a cause to defend?


| >>579667
i haven't talked about crushing anything else than our own weaknesses


| A bunch of incels who want to "take a hundred nazi scalps" off of people who doesn't dress like a group of edgy goths on acid.


| >>579661
15 posts of preaching but you still never answered the questions I and that other guy asked you. Wtfu


| >>579668 and how is this fascist if it's not authoritarian? Or are you one of the rare people on the antifascist side that don't believe in using force to defeat fascism?


| >>579668
It seems to me that you're projecting weaknesses unto people who just want to live and enjoy life.


| >>579676
what
>>579677
let people enjoy their life? tell you what, cattle enjoys its life. cows have happy lives. animals are super ok with being alive. but we're humans and we're wasting potential as we are swamped with problems like criminality, overpopulation, climate change...
>>579675
i guess i let myself go! the question was how to make sure the leaders aren't worthless? remind me

i was just irked because so many people are fighting for the same thing against each other.


| Lol about half way through I couldn't even tell who was on which side. Honestly people should just chill. Nobody gets to rule forever, society will just flip back and forth for a while and people will never agree. Sometimes we'll coexist and other times we'll fight and in the end we'll all die like everyone before us. No matter your philosophy, just don't get too upset, watch your blood pressure, and try to enjoy the ride fam.


| >>579750
hard to do when you're really passionate


| >>579750 you're actually the sanes person here
I like the way you look at things


| >>579750 >>579753 agree
my own fascist ideas make me tired sometimes. i'm really not a political person in reality...


| I'd support them, why not? They're just an opposing political force to the right that likes to be involved in real life. If people think antifa is terrible, they should look at far right wingers and the shit they have done recently, then reevaluate their biased opinion. People complaining about antifa are literal right wing snowflakes that turn a blind eye to right wing violence. And no, milkshakes do not count.


| >>579800
apparently, two rights make a wrong.
it's now acceptable to beat people with bike locks everybody


| >>579804 someone hitting another with a bike lock isn't the same as shooting up mosque or a synagogue or running someone over with a car.


| >>579832 you're comparing a defined group that incites hate and acts together with murderers that acted on their own, very logical of you


| soyboys and snowflakes fighting to see who's gayer and dumber
Kek


| >>579800 Can we not condemn multiple people for their actions? I think antifa is terrible but that doesn't mean I don't think right wing extremists are terrible as well. Not everything is so two-sided, you don't have to agree with one. No violent extremism will ever be the right course of action if it's perpetrated against other citizens/denizens.


| ^^^^


| >>579836 antifa isn't a defined group though.

antifascism is an ideology or an idea.

and the groups they "incite hate and violence against" are just as defined as antifa, the only difference is that antifascists are more consistant with their naming scheme when compaired to alt-right groups.

and yes the people who committed the horrific attacks i mentioned acted on their own, but so did the antifacist who hit someone with a bike lock.




| They're an absolute disgrace, they're fighting for something by actually advocating violence against which is quite ironic because that's what real fascists used to do. They're considering themselves like the "defender of freedom" when in fact both side of the political spectrum cannot stand each others, that's how absurd modern politics actually is, we're like playing a giant tag.


| >>579919 what are you exactly meant to do when fascists advocate for genocide? appeasement doesn't work, it didn't work in the 1930s and it doesn't work now.

i would prefer there to be a way where all the fascists just admit that they're wrong and that they just try to be better, but the real world isn't like that. sometimes there's no other choice but to defend yourself.



| >>579919 all violent movements aren't inherently bad, the suffrage movement planted bombs all across the UK.

stonewall was a riot.

and we cannot forget the original antifascists who fought against hitler and mussolini's regimes.


and when it comes down to it, the majority of politics is violent.

sure, two wrongs doesn't make a right, but it's good to put things into perspective


| Yes it is ok to get violent if a government actively tries to start a genocide, when that happens I'll join, in fact. But random stupid people making racist comments aren't a fascist regime. They deserve to be ridiculed, and shouted at, and perhaps even deplatformed, and if they are actively calling for violence (which is a crime) then they should be punished in court, not by vigilanties.


| When you set the example that it's ok to hurt people as long as you've arbitrarily labeled them as a fascist it's guaranteed to be abused and backfire. It's short sided to think that your opposition won't start to use the same tactics or worse when they feel threatened. It's also important to keep in mind that labels being thrown around to justify violence without consensus on definitions of said labels is also guaranteed to backfire and be abused.


| If you just want to hit people who disagree with you then just be honest, no need to tack on some nice sounding name that doesn't even apply to you or your opponent. If you think America's leadership is fascist I suggest taking a trip to and actual fascist country to learn the difference.


| >>579933 i agree with all of this, someone being a racist doesn't make someone a fascist.




| >>579936 you did the same thing in regards to what you said about if a government actively tries to commit genocide?

you're justifying your own violence by saying that the hypothetical government are committing genocide.

and there is a consensus on the definition of said labels though, it's called the dictionary. sure, there are people who are falsely called fascists, but there really is no harm done in it since there's no antifa death squad going around killing those people.




| >>579938 i never said i wanted to hit people or that i have hit people.

and i feel that it's strange for you to be the judge on whether those "nice sounding names apply to me and my opponents or not, since i apparently cannot be the judge of that.

and where exactly did i say that america or it's leadership is fascist? if you really want to have an actual conversation on politics, you really shouldn't strawman the person you're talking to.



| In my country, fascists groups have deathlists with 25000 names on it. Names from left, green and even conservative politicians, artists and political activists. About 156 people were murdered since 1990 by right-extremists, while "only" the half of it is officially recognized. Guess how many victims of left-extremist (including antifascism) were murdered in the same time period (0).
And still the ruling "centre-mid" politicians and our executive organs seems to be equally...


| ...concerned about left extremism as a threat to democracy. Except from far-right conspiracy theories leftists have no real political power anymore. The centre-left party lost many of their supporting masses in the working class by doing neoliberal politics and the left party was successfully and systematically demonized over decades by the "centre" establishment and has to struggle with far-right-winged demagogues taking away their traditional voters.


| >>579936 if you think that everyone agrees with/uses the dictionary then I feel I should point you to the argument over gender where the entire disagreement is on how to define sex/gender. Also genocide isn't something you can arbitrarily claim, when people start getting killed in large quantities it's pretty obvious.


| >>579959 >>579961
Regarding this circumstances, I sympathize pretty much with antifascism in any form, even thought most antifascists I know are anarchists and belong to the "new left" which in my eyes is also part of the problem with their focus on identity politics over economics. Nevertheless we share the same enemies, and feel abandoned by the centrist establishment, which btw. is about to collapse due to the increasing success of the far-right in elections.


| Correction*
>>579947
I'm new to this whole message board thing.


| >>579953 >>579959
You're right I shouldn't have strawmaned like that. What I said before only applies to the general antifa members that I've seen and heard from in the US. Many of the members of a group calling themselves "antifa" in the US are acting in the ways I've described above and that is why I oppose that particular group. Other anti fascist groups in other countries are a different story and I have no knowledge of them so anything a say here only applies...


| ...to the US antifa that I've come into contact with.


| >>579964 the gender and sex argument is different since that's to do with science, this is to do with politics.

and the mass murder of people isn't even the only definition of genocide.

genocide is something that can be somewhat subjective.

a good example is how the native americans have been treated throughout history, you could definitely say that the settlers committed genocide against them. though not everyone agrees with that.


| >>579977 if genocide is subjective then I would argue that violence on both sides of the conflict would be equally justified because one believes they are preventing genocide while the other believes they are protecting innocent people who've been wrongly accused of attempted genocide. If we allow people to get violent of subjective things then we're just one step closer to actually anarchy which can only end with bad people on top.


| >>579974 thank you for being so polite.


i'd say it's hard to say that antifascists in america are all in one group. as far as i know, they tend to have more local groups as opposed to one big mega group. so it's difficult to pin down how american anti fascists think since they'll all have different ideas on how to combat fascism.


| On that same note if preventing genocide is justification for violence, and genocide is subjective, then all violence is justified as long as you frame it withen you're subjective definition of genocide and nobody else can argue objectively with subjective views.


| >>579980 no problem. I got caught up in the argument and lumped everyone into the same group, you're right about there being a lot of different groups in America that call themselves anti fascist while holding a variety of different beliefs.


| I just think that with the current situation in the US it's best to avoid violence on both sides and attempt to prevent an argument over philosophy and government policy from turning into a physical fight with potential death tolls on both side. And I wasn't helping that by doing exactly what I'm trying to go against


| >>579981 we're just getting into the fact that morality is subjective.

anyone can justify anything if they can find a justification for it.

and you're right that nobody can argue objectively argue it because objective morality doesn't exist.


| >>579986 i would agree that'd be the ideal scenario, but the world rarely goes that well...


| While I agree that morality is subjective, I feel like policy should be goal oriented and maintain logical consistency in order to maintain a functioning society. In other words, whenever you put forth a policy you should not only consider how it can help you but also how others can use it against you, and if you implement a policy only to retract it later then you will seem hypocritical and lose influence, which would be detrimental to your goals in the long run


| >>579990
This attitude is which paralyzes the political left since the end of cold war. Yes, the real socialists experiments weren't the heaven on earth and even had periods as dark, brutal and inhumane as their fascist enemies. But in the end the competition with the so called "real-socialism" made it necessary to tame and reform bourgeois capitalist societies. Now that this competition is no more, capitalism with all its flaws got unchained and the result is the rise of fascism.


| >>579990 >>579998
The left won't get the upper hand or even at least become a serious taken challenger to capitalism and fascism by proclaiming and strictly following ideals. The fascists don't share the moral struggle about oppressing and murdering their enemies like the political left. And this is what makes them successful in the world how it is now. I don't like opportunism, so called "pragmatism" and violence. But I also don't like dogmatism, self-sacrifice and martyrdom.


| Fascism is characterized as having a strong central government and authoritarian views and no tolerance for opposing opinions. All of these things run contrary to capitalism as it stands in the US. Capitalism and it's supporters here consistently push for more separation of powers and free speech. Again, I can't make any statements on the situations elsewhere but as I see it in the US an capitalist economy with socialist policies (such as wellfare) on top is the most effective way.


| >>580001
>Fascism is characterized as having a strong central government and authoritarian views and no tolerance for opposing opinions.
>All of these things run contrary to capitalism as it stands in the US.
Yeah, until the opposition to capitalism rises and finally the crisis comes. The "liberal" phasis of US capitalism was only temporary due to world war two and cold war, when capitalists had to demonstrate their reign is superior to any other kind of economical organization.


| >>580001
>Capitalism and it's supporters here consistently push for more separation of powers and free speech.
I don't know in which world you are living but in my world, capitalists put much effort in oppressing and demonizing criticism on the capitalist system. They say "there is no alternative". Also I call this "separation of power" thing bullshit regarding the continous fusions between big companys and the increasing concentration of wealth and power in few hands.


| >>580001
>Again, I can't make any statements on the situations elsewhere but as I see it in the US an capitalist economy with socialist policies (such as wellfare) on top is the most effective way.
What you describe is pretty untypical for the US and was, like in Europe where such things existed for much longer time (welfare estate, social market, social democracy, social liberalism, etc.) only an arrangement to challenge socialism. It lost its reason to exist in post-cold-war era.


| >>580003 as far as I can see what I described above is the current situation of the US and I haven't observed any real shift away from that on the conservative side. Simply denying and arguing with claims against capitalism is not oppression of those views. They aren't silencing opposite, just disputing it with their own claims. Also just because some people are getting richer doesn't mean they are victimizing others to do so.


| >>58004 the system I described with a capitalist foundation with socialist policies is in place in the US and other first world countries. Most notably the Norse countries, who are doing quite well utilizing this system.


| >>580006
But the system as you described it (which isn't socialist policy at all, just capitalism with some social minimum standards) is vanishing continuously. Not only offshoring inhumane working conditions (and all the conflicts which comes with it) and also technological advance but also lobby work by capitalists made this system erode.


| >>580006 >>580008
This affects mostly the working masses, which lost their trust in the established politics and seek their hail in far-right nationalistic, xenophobic, illiberal, religious fundamentalist pseudo-alternatives thanks to decades of anti-socialist indoctrination.


| >>580005
>Also just because some people are getting richer doesn't mean they are victimizing others to do so.
This is pretty ignorant to how things work in reality. There is no doubt that there is some kind of "the winner takes it all" mechanic in this system. And on top, the worst thing of all is that wealth can be inherited, which makes "chance equality" makes look like a cynical joke. Nobody gets rich by hard work. It's only by finding new ways to exploit others and having luck.


| >>f1f902
See you talking about how free and fair capitalism is to everyone, you also probably haven't heard about the practice called union busting. Because if working people start organizing themselves, they are confronted with massive oppressive measurements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_busting
The interesting thing is, that this kind of labour organization is fought with much enthusiasm, while the radicalization on the right is much more tolerated or even supported.


| >>580011 if Wikipedia is a reliable source then let everyone know that THIS os the face of a far alt-right member and a conspiracy theorist

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones


| Have heard? Farmers are fascist now


| >>580012
Could you please explain what you want to show us with your post?
While there is no doubt it has its (well known and transparent discussed) flaws and issues, wikipedia still is one of the most reliable sources for information in the internet.
There no commercial encyclopedia that could compete with it.


| >>580023
While it's not a rare phenomenon that workers and even more landowners on the countryside have an affinity to conservative up to far-right ideologies, I doubt anyone outside fascist propaganda believes that all farmers are fascists.


| >>579926 >>579927
That's why you guys, and in fact anyone actually defending and promoting their actions are an actual threat to western democracy. I've seen some of their doings and not a single time was that done through civic discussion. Moreover, how are you supposed to guess who's a fascist or not? Most of the time they simply target anyone that's holding conservative views which is a joke in itself. They're all about oppressing anyone that's not sharing their own views.


| >>579959
Only 150+? (also what country) That's not so bad in comparison to the mayhem the left created in a mere 30 years here in France. In fact most of the social unrest going on is entirely due to them. They've been segregating their own population through "racial" division and mass immigration while pushing their own agenda. The same reason why America is going to be falling apart through the likes of another Civil War within the next decade mostly caused by an identity crisis.


| >>580011 I never said capitalism was fair for everyone involved nor do I deny the fact that wealth can be inherited but some of the wealthiest people in America did come up from nothing and did so by providing something that people want. The vast majority of rich people are rich because they provide a luxury (such as cellphones) not a necessity. If you believe that necessities shouldn't be privatized then that can be done by putting in place a socialist policy dictating such.


| Also I'm well aware of union busting and I'm also aware that unions are still around and thriving. Just because some usions are dismantled doesn't mean their all going to be. On a similar note, to the person who said socialist policies are slowly disappearing, while some policies may come and go there are plenty still in place with no sign of going away, and in the US we have more socialist policies than ever and more to come in the future as we find ways to help the less fortunate


| This whole capitalism vc socialism vs communism shit is so annoying
It's like front-end developers when they start debating what Javascript framework to use, it's unproductive and no one choice will fit the needs of the system properly
The main difference is that at least you political guys don't try to make a new convoluted framework to replace the existing ones


| >>580071 It's mostly because people never compare the systems accurately. They always compare the worst facets of the systems they dislike with the best facets of the systems they like when, unlike javascript, a mix of the best features of each would be ideal.


| >a mix of the best features
let's invent something


| >>580056
Cellphones are no luxury. They even become more and more neccesary to get access to public infrastructure like banking, mobility and shopping. In fact cellphones are cheap as fuck, but sold overpriced as short-lived livestyle products with artificial dependencies, forced exhibition of personal data and thanks to the ridiculous biased realization of "mental property".
>in the US we have more socialist policies than ever
Whatever you took, it causes massive hallucinations.


| >>580084
Let's try this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn
And hope it won't get bombed away again by our peaceful, liberal and humane capitalist friends.


| >>580056 my claim about the number of socialist policies in the US remains until you feel like providing any evidence stating otherwise. Until then it'll just be my word against yours. And cellphones aren't a necessity for any of the things you mentioned. Just because you can't check your balance from anywhere doesn't mean you can't use the bank and I don't know what stores you go to that require you to have a cellphone to shop. Cellphones make things more convenient, that's it.


| Don't get me wrong. I'm not a fan of things like overpricing or planned obsolescence. But these issues can be changed by implementing policies on top of the capitalist infrastructure In the same way that we have policies to make working conditions more acceptable and insure safety of food products in the US.


| >>580096
>And cellphones aren't a necessity for any of the things you mentioned.
>Cellphones make things more convenient, that's it.
Well, if you start arguing that way, we end up realizing that people basically only need water, bread and a roof. Cellphones are more than just "convienent". They are a advantage in daily individual competition on the job market. It's even worse: People don't only rely on a cellphone in their daily struggle but also on monopolistic service providers.


| >580102
>Don't get me wrong. I'm not a fan of things like overpricing or planned obsolescence.
Good to hear.
>But these issues can be changed by implementing policies on top of the capitalist infrastructure
Theoretically yes. Practically nothing happens without pressure.
We can't count on the capitalists insight, wisdom and altruism. That would be naive.


| >580102
>In the same way that we have policies to make working conditions more acceptable and insure safety of food products in the US.
Yeah, the world wide known high labour and food standards in the USA. Don't make me laugh.
How it comes that every freed trade contract with the USA comes at the price of lowering standards of the other contract partners?
Stop dreaming! Capitalism can't be tamed without being threatened and challenged directly!


| >>580105 I'm not sure how much of US history you've studied but there have been many successful government policies put in place to fix some of the shortcomings of capitalism, such as the outlawing of child labor and the strictly inforced osha standards for workplace safety. Similarly the FDA is in place to insure food safety, and is one of the reasons we can readily eat virtually anything off of store shelves without worry.


| A naive world view may be unhelpful but an apocalyptic world view is equally unhelpful.


| >>580102 beyond that, we know that i support a capitalist infrastructure with socialist policies, and that you are against that, so what is the system that you support?


| >>580109
I support a computer aided central planned economy. I'm sure this is what we will get anyway, looking at the informationial revolution. But I want it, unlike what we're getting in capitalism, public, transparent, decentralized and with democratical control mechanisms.


| >>580107
I don't only know much about US but also about world history. As capitalism goes hand in hand with globalization, history also became globalized. If in russia a "communist" revolution occurs, it had of course an effect on US politics. Besides that, there once was a growing socialist party in the USA, threatening the capitalists reign. The pieces of sugar that were given to US workers were only temporarily, to calm them. At the same time socialists and unionists disappeared


| >>580107
Since "socialism" (or what was to considered to be it) failed, the pressure fall away and the working class got slowly boiled back into the good old times, where they have no rights and are separated and/or sedated by nationalist, racist and religious opium. The result is what we see today. The "liberal" democracy get more and more offended from the far right, who pretend to be the tiny mans voice with racist lies while in truth serving capitalist interests.


| >>580114 those policies weren't temporary, they're still in place and more have been added since then with more to come in the future. There arent some evil capitalist rulers trying to keep the entirety of society under their thumbs, that's just apocalyptic conspiracy in the same vein as the anti-Semites who think the "Jews" are ruling everything. The working class has plenty of power to get what they want through legal means.


| also what would a "computer aided central planned economy" entail? How does it work?


| >>580120 it's magic predictive A.I. that's probably beyond the current limits of technology


| >>580119
>There arent some evil capitalist rulers
I wouldn't say evil, but there is no doubt that capitalists are a global political power, who as a
minority have their own class interests conflicting the interests of non capitalists. Power corrupts, you know?


| >>580119
>in the same vein as the anti-Semites who think the "Jews" are ruling everything.
No, it's entirely different. A capitalist can be logically, rationally, scienctifically and economically defined, while antisemitism relies on a pretty random, pseudoscientific, ideological and racist distinction of people.
Class struggle is a real thing, while race, religious or national conflicts are all along artificial and made up in the spirit of divide and conquer.


| >>580119
>The working class has plenty of power to get what they want through legal means.
Theoretically ye. But they rather fight each other in the name of god(s), leader, nation, culture or race. They lack of class conciousness, which is destroyed by capitalist media, including fascist propaganda (e.g. robert mercer). As already mentioned: divide and conquer
>There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.
- Warren Buffet


| There's no evidence to show that all the rich people are manipulating the lower classes into fighting. Has it not crossed your mind that maybe people arguing over religion abd race will continue to do so no mater what economic system they're under? Or that perhaps people who have made they way to the top now feel like they should be making a difference in the world and are only inadvertently fanning the flames due to lack of forethought rather than mal-intent?


| >>580149 Also I would still like to know how your proposed system works and how it would fix the issues that you've pointed out.


| >>580090
>The futuristic operations room was designed by a team led by the interface designer Gui Bonsiepe.

I wonder why they don't make machines like that anymore. Perhaps because we can do it with a single computer now? I think I'd like to live under a Politics Computer, then maybe we could argue less.


| Where I hear, muh eutopia. I wonder which one you speak of? The white pan national eutopia or the socialistic eutopia. All eutopias require an imperialistic take on who knows best. Someone must rule, find me the most envious of status they usually weasel into power. I'm no archo. This system works best but people are too stupid and not educated in law to hold politicians in check. Complete tyranny.
-Ramirez


| >>580150
>There's no evidence to show that all the rich people are manipulating the lower classes into fighting.
Not all, but enough that it matters. And the few "philantroph" capitalists also benefit from it. On the surface they condemn racism and act open minded, liberal progressives. But this only works as long the status quo is not questioned. Also their philantophy is good PR and goes hand in hand with tax sparing and privatization.


|
>Has it not crossed your mind that maybe people arguing over religion abd race will continue to do so no mater what economic system they're under?
I'm sure they will. But capitalism obviously amplifies such things so far that it leads to world wars, holocausts and religious fundamentalist terrorism. It's necessary to protect itself from being questioned and overthrown, especially in the cyclic returning crisis phases.


| >>580185
>This system works best but people are too stupid and not educated in law to hold politicians in check.
The people are stupid and not educated because this is how the profiteers of this system need them. It only works best for the rich, the rest can starve, kill each other or be glad to get some breadcrumbs thrown under the table. Even if this breadcrumbs can be big and delicious it's always locally and temporary limited and still a treatment like dogs.


| >>580151
I would fix the issues by
- strenghten trade unions
- strictly sepparate estate from religion (laizism)
- get rid of nobles and monarchs (they're anachronisms)
- limit individual economical power
- wealth distribution transparency
- fight tax evasion
- make infrastructure, monopolies and cartells owned by public hand
- give control to worker councils
- education: push internationalism, class conciousness and restore the balance between specialists and interdiciplinarists.


| >>580151
Ofc. theoretically those things could be reached peacefully through reforms within the frame of capitalism. Practically I don't believe this will happen. Just look in which direction things go again these days, after unchaining laisez faire capitalism aka neoliberalism in the last 40 years: Global arms race, increasing nationalist conflicts, rise of far-right movemts and increasing mass poverty. For long time we didn't see so much homeless people and refugees like now.


| >>f1f902
Also talking about the rich: They're not living on the cost of the poor by exploiting them, they also destroy nature with their stupid decadence, power and war-games. I won't rest as long rich people feel warm and save in their ivory towers, think they don't have to bear the consequences of their failed leadership. And they are the leadership. They always talk about "responsibility" of individuals, but in the end the lower ones have to bear it for the upper ones.


| >>580268
*They're not ONLY living on the cost of the poor

Finally coming back to the topic: Rich people and fascists are natural allies. Fascists support elitarism and authoratism. And this is what rich people need, as soon the economy struggles in order to keep their privileges. Capitalism only allows liberal democracy as long economy is growing. But won't ever grow continuously and it can't grow eternally. In times of crisis things turn into fascism. That's what history showed.


| Fascists and imperialists may loose wars in the end, but the rich remain as the winners. They benefit from war preparations, they benefit from war itself and they benefit from the post-war reconstruction. It's a vicious circle that needs to be broken. Which means capitalism needs to be reformed until it is something different. And because the rich won't allow this kind of reforms going that far, they have to be disowned and capitalism has to be overthrown. End of discussion.


| Bruh, if you want communism because you want to bring down rich people then you're just as selfish and bad as the oh so evil capitalists you hate so much.


| >>580282 how is that equally as bad as capitalism?



| >>580302 don't tou know how to read? The post said that wanting to take down the rich is as bad as capitalists not that it's as bad as capitalism.

That is, even if the situation gets overall better than in capitalism the motivation behind it makes you as bad as capitalists who "oppress" the masses.

Oh wait, I forgot that you freaks believe that the end justifies the means so there's no way anything you do can be as bad as what capitalists do.


| >>580304 damn, you're quite rude.

how does the motivation of wanting to remove the class system and bring equality to everyone make me as bad as the horrible people who exploit the terrible system that is capitalism?

i don't believe the ends justify ALL means. for example, i don't support the murder of landlords and million and billonares. i do think the people who have done wrong should be actually punished for their crimes, not with death or torture or anything like that.


| i believe all people can be redeemed, even those who have exploited others.


| >>580282
>Bruh, if you want communism because you want to bring down rich people then you're just as selfish and bad as the oh so evil capitalists you hate so much.
I don't think this is a question of good or evil. It's a question interest conflict between classes and about how humans are. The capitalist class is with no doubt the leading class. And because of their "keep the status quo at all costs" policy they need to be dethroned, like it was done to monarchs and nobles.


| >>580304
>the end justifies the means
This is how capitalists argue, if you criticize them or question their status. They say, there is no alternative. No better option. There is only capitalism. Everything else is bad because Stalin and Mao. That's their argument now for over 40 years. But the developments in reality make these whacky arguments look more ridicolous every day that passes. They live in the past, and have no plans for a better future. Only business as usual.


| >>580322 wanting to remove the class system is ok
My problem is with jerks that want to bring the rich down because "we meed to oppress the oppressor"
Eye for an eye leaves everyone blind


| >>580327
Bringing the rich down is not oppressing. It is a measurment to ensure chance equality and a reasonable distribution of power.
I know that capitalists are no (stereo)typical tyrants, so that there is no need for a tyrannicide. But they won't give up their privileges voluntary just out of insight or philantrophy. They have some kind of religious faith that they are chosen to rule by the holy market they glorify. But that's not how things work.


| What I'm trying to say is that of you want communism to help the ones who are down and suffering, it's ok.

I don't like it but I think life's about surviving whatever challenge come your way amd if that challenge is communism then so be it.

But if you want it to get back on the "oppressors" and bring those with a fancy lifestyle down then you're a fool and you're no better then those "rich people scheming to keep the status quo"

we need to break this chain of hate first


| >>580333 i don't understand how wanting to bring someone down who exploits others for their own personal gain makes me as bad as them.

i don't want to bring them down because they have stuff i don't have and i want it, i want to bring them down so they can no longer exploit people with lesser power.


| >>580333 >>580334
as long as we agree that be both just want to build a better society, as a fascist i will gladly walk arms over shoulders with a communist with that stance. it's just that we disagree on how to make things better...

our political ideologies are, mostly, driven by our own ego.
our own worries make us take several mental attitudes and stances. we need to be smarter than this and think in adult terms about bettering the world.


| i think we should all take our politics and ideologies and roleplay them in bed together


| >>580397 how do you want to make a better society?


| >>580398 i'll take back your means of production any day~ <3


| >>580400
i think getting rid of 'politicians', shadowy international financiers, puppeteers, and generally worthless people should be a priority.
direct democracy sounds cool.
we could try experiments like democratic fascism...
>reich soars pushy


| >>580402
ooh~. you think your body can manage to resist my imperialism...?

the solution to any political debate: take it to the bedroom


| >>580402 what do you mean by 'politicians' exactly?

and who are the financiers and puppeteers?

and how can you define who is or isn't useful?



| >>580244 if you don't believe in the theoretical possibility of those things being solved under the current system then waht makes you believe in the theoretical possibility of it being solve under your system. A system which still requires people to lead, people who can just as easily be corrupted. Even if it's "computer aided" you have to keep in mind that it has to be programmed by a person, who could be potentially corrupt.


| >>580403
>democratic fascism
So what? We all vote on what the jackboot thugs will enforce upon us? Sounds like the current neoliberal world order with a little bit more democracy


| >>580409
and that's why we have parliaments
but your whole argument was men of action principle, was it not?


| And if war benefits capitalists, And you want to overthrow the capitalists, how do you plan on doing so without war? (which benefits the capitalists you're trying to fight)


| >>580410
it feels cooler to try to come up with new concepts. but think about it, really - the people vote for a specific platform they want to see enforced. a group of experts is called into power and given any means necessary to enforce methods to get to these objectives. five years later, if people didn't like it, they vote someone else. long ass debates and parliamentary snail-speeds taken out of the equation.

at least it'd be honest about the freedom thing


| >>580413
The last capitalist we hang will sell us the rope


| >>580413
by not trading with them?


| >>580414 that does sound like an interesting concept, it has the power to do great things and terrible evils.

i don't really know if it'd actually be great in practice though...



| >>580417
whatever. we all sound like ideological special snowflakes. at least we're all here in this thread because we're angry at how much better society could be...


| >>580414
So what if we all vote democratically to nationalize an industry? All industries? You can create a de facto communist state in this case.

I guess what i’m asking is what makes such a system fascist? Fascism is an economically right wing ideology, and further is a suspension of democracy.


| >>580244 basically what I'm saying is that your system is theoretically just as viable as capitalism but practically just as corruprable as capitalism.


| >>580424 how's that just as corruptible as capitalism?


| >>580423
well it would certainly enforce the people's will.
but perhaps i'm confusing fascism with authoritarianism. perhaps i'm just thinking of totalitarianism.

so the actual concept would be "Democratic Totalitarianism".

and the despot would be the entire population.


| Reminder that under fascism everything is controlled by the state, going directly against everything capitalism stands for, so this notion of fascism and capitalism inherently working hand in hand is fucking retarded.


| >>580449
isn't that an argument that communists always make?


| >>580449 that's not really true, you can still have capitalism without a free market.
fascism and capitalism aren't inherently related, but they both do work well together.

capitalism helps keep the state in power by weakening the lower classes, and the state makes sure that the power gained from capitalism goes only to the state via regulations and taxes.


| >>580449 inb4 the anarcho communism preachers explaining how capitalism is fascist because the rich are the dictators


| >>580454 shit I was too slow


| >>580449
>under fascism everything is controlled by the state
By a state that is led or at least supported by capitalist elites, whose property remains untouched after society was purged from socialists, communists and eventually some ethnical/religious minorites that were scapegoated for the capitalist crisis.
>going directly against everything capitalism stands for
No, fascism is exactly what capitalism stands for. Fascism is capitalism in crisis mode.


| >>580454 capitalism isn't fascist, it's closer to authoritarianism imo.


| >>580449
>so this notion of fascism and capitalism inherently working hand in hand is fucking retarded.
No it's historically exactly what happened several times. Take the WW2 Axis powers, Nazi germany, italy and japan as example and also later during cold war in many third world countries like Iran (Pahlewi), Chile (Pinochet) or Indonesia (Suharto). Officially supported to "protect" democracy and freedom from communism, but in truth only serving capitalist interests.


| >>580458
Again: Fascism is one variation of capitalism. It occurs as soon a crisis comes and capitalism and the capitalist class become questioned by too many people. But fascism does not aim to overcome capitalism, and it never did so. In fact fascists only want to restore a glorified past and mass murder communists/socialists and eventually other random scapegoats.


| >>580454 >>580455 there he is>>580456 >>580462 >>580466


| >>580469 implying that there's guys on the internet smh


| >>580469 implying that there's guys on the internet smh


| >>580472 >>580473 ...


| >>580482 >>580482 ...


| >>580487 >>580482 let's all hug, gurls!


| >>580488
yehalso why has no one rounded up fashies and commies yet and pit them in a fuck-war against each other fashies vs commies
do you think a fashie would be a better lay than a commie?


| >>580489 i'd imagine that the commies would be better. the communists/socialists i know are pretty darn cute.


| >>580491
wouldn't that make them sub/bottoms? fascists have that supremacist manly power to them...


| If fascists and capitalists are the same then I'd assume fascists are richer and have a nicer place to fuck and more money to spend on me so I rather get with the fashies.


| >>580497 i definitely know some doms/tops who are socialists/communists.


| >>580501
the question is how will commie tops fare against fashie tops
i'd imagine the commies will get subdued and get topped
>>580500
but there would be more commies according to their ideals, sooo gangbang?


| Can confirm, am socialist sub boy


| why do people seriously believe in fascism?


| >>580555 because of an Italian nazi dude that wanted a different name from nazi so he called his group the fasci


| >>580555 it's probably just a matter of definitions and interpretation. It may be that when they think of "fascism" they're thinking of something completely different than what you're thinking of.


| >>580544
i'd dom you with totalitarian authority


| I don't care what your ideology is, fight me with honor, one on one and no weapons allowed


| >>580707
nice


| >>579027
>and the chemical opposite of acid too, don't remember what it's called but it's also harmful and dangerous
basic bitch


| The behaviour that Antifa demonstrate is still equivalent to fascists, I don't support the far right, neither do I support the far left. They are detrimental to politics in general and still are extremists, just like the far right.


| >>580855 how is their behaviour equivalent to the far right's behavior?


| >>580940
What about hating people for "wrongthink"?
Or wanting to take down the enemy by "any means necessary"?


| >>580943 they don't take down people with 'any means necessary', and what do you think they consider to be 'wrong think'?


| I think the idea is that you can't even so much as question antifa methods or else they'll label you an alt-right fascist and feel justified in attacking you. Of course I'm only referring to US antifa and I'm not talking about EVERY member of antifa, but while not all participating in questionable methods, the main base of the group refuses to condemn the extremist members. In the end this isn't a case where we have to choose the lesser of 2 evils. Both extremes are wrong.


| >>580987 what do you consider to be antifa's methods?


| Blocking intersections even if it means fighting people who try to get through. Doxxing people. Some members have attacked people with things like bike locks. And then there was the man recently who attacked an ICE facility. The biggest problem is their willingness to use violence and how quick they are to label someone an enimy.


| >>581027 i don't see how those are equivalent to the things the far right has done.


| I wouldn't necessarily call it equivalent either. But I get where they're coming from, if we just consider something good or bad without quantifying HOW good/bad something is then you might say they are equal in the fact that they are both bad and shouldn't be allowed to continue.


| >>580555
The lower classes believe in fascism because of lack of class consciousness and stupidity.
The upper classes mostly don't really believe in fascism. For them it's just a tool to divide and conquer the working class and to fight socialism, communism, anarchism and any other kind of anticapitalist opposition.
Fascism, other than liberal democracy, allows the upper class to rule autocratically. The social darwinism and elitarism also legitimates their reign.


| I'll support whatever gets me where I wanna be honestly. I couldn't really care less about people I don't know. If a system forces me to be stuck at one level with everyone else then I'm just not down for it. Unless you have a system that let's everyone live like the current rich, in which case I'll take it into consideration. I don't mind a system that brings the lower class up to middle but I don't like the idea of a system that prevents me from rising above middle.


| It's pretty simple:
Liberal Democracy is the face of capitalism in good times.
Fascism is the face of capitalism, in bad times.
Prepare for the next crisis, comrades. They are on the rise again and well prepared. We hear ugly stuff in the parliaments, we were promised to never hear again after 1945. We were fooled. Again. You will see what I mean, as soon the next crisis comes. And it will come. Again.


| >>581035
>but I don't like the idea of a system that prevents me from rising above middle.
Is a casino a system that prevents you from winning?
No.
How good are your chances to win, compared to those who own the casino? Low.
Do you want to have a society that works like a fucking casino?


| Doesn't crisis cripple any system? Isn't that's why it's called a crisis? If the system handeled it with ease then it wouldn't be a crisis. People seem to think that their hypothetical systems will hold up against anything but that mentality will probably just make your proposed system less flexible and even more susceptible to crisis. Even if it happens to be the case that your system mighve worked out better, the fact of the matter is that in today's world no other system...


| Is going to get implemented without destroying innocent people who disagree with it.


| I don't mind casinos, I'll take the risk of losing for the chance to win. A system with no chance to lose but also no chance to win is just boring and stale. It won't get society anywhere.


| I mean of course it's possible for capitalism to turn out badly, it's also possible for it to turn out well. Just like any system there are many possible outcomes. No matter what system is in place someone will take advantage of it, and it's possible that they will use it to harm people. Changing the system won't change those possibilities. It's more reasonable to work at preventing the negative outcomes and maintaining the possitive ones.


| I'd rather place my bets on solving the current systems problems rather than throwing the whole thing away and starting from scratch with an untested or previously failed system. There are always unknown variables, no system turns out just like the theory it's based on. If there are holes in the ship it makes more sense to just patch the wholes rather than get a whole new one.


| >>581038
>Doesn't crisis cripple any system? Isn't that's why it's called a crisis?
I agree.
>People seem to think that their hypothetical systems will hold up against anything but that mentality will probably just make your proposed system less flexible and even more susceptible to crisis.
This also applies to the current (capitalist) system and all theories of a true/better capitalism.


| >>581047
>Even if it happens to be the case that your system mighve worked out better, the fact of the matter is that in today's world no other system...
I agree. But I don't accept "there is no alternative" and "things are good as they are" and "it was always like this" as an excuse not to change things. This is exactly what you meant about the lack of flexibility and being susceptible to crisis.


| >>581048
>I'd rather place my bets on solving the current systems problems rather than throwing the whole thing away and starting from scratch with an untested or previously failed system.
There are problems in the world that are so fundamental that they can't be solved by adjusting some parameters here and there.


| >>581048
>There are always unknown variables, no system turns out just like the theory it's based on.
This also applies to all theories on which the current system is based on.
>If there are holes in the ship it makes more sense to just patch the wholes rather than get a whole new one.
Yeah, this is exactly the aproach how you end up having shitty software. Learn something about theoretical informatics and mathematics, then look at common practice and you'll understand what I mean.


| >>d848a4
You have no Idea how frustrating it can be to watch people trying to fix/patch something which follows a fundamentally stupid concept in it's core. This is an immense waste of resources and time. And in case of capitalism it's also a waste of human lives. With humanities current and still rapidly increasing technological capacities we can't allow world wars or big fascist regimes - which are tightly connected to capitalism in order to solve its inherent contradictions.


| >>d848a4
Also with the rise of massive data collecting monopolistic technology companies, we'll end up having some kind of planned economy anyways. Antitrust laws are failing horribly, either due to good lobbying of those tech companies in liberal countries or due to authoritarian estates that see the positive aspects of central data collection. Noting of this is desirable but without fundamentally changes in our economys power distribution unavoidable.


| >>d848a4
Also in neuronal sciences and AI development we increasingly go into direction which is about creating an army of slaves. Conscious enough to solve complex problems, but easily controllable/manipulable to serve the interests of those who own the means.

All in all: you can't heal cancer with patches. Capitalism is cancer, and either it will destroy its host on the long term or it will be destroyed.


| >>d848a4
i have a dream
that one day the little niggers that click ID instead of Post number will live in a nation where they will be judged for the color of their skin AND the content of their character


| >>10193e
What a stupid dream. Because referring to multiple posts written by one id is more economical and reasonable than using this id instead of the multiple post numbers.
I have no dreams, but purposes. One of them is to liberate twisted minds like yours from shitty dreams and help you to become a more valuable existence than the waste of biomass and time you are right now.


| >>581088
>he says, as he replies to my ID instead of my Post number
how about you fuck right off this website if you don't know how it works, you dumb ass arrogant nothing of a person.
i suggest you find a song ass rope and see how fast your body can swing when you tie a noose around your neck. it's a better waste of time than what's you're doing now.

PS. you're a newgurl


| >>581095 you're quite rude


| >>581097
yeah well she came at me first
it fucking gets me out of my mind when some tiny little bitches think they can look down on me and be all arrogant and shit. i hate that

also she didn't recognize her own fault so there's that i guess. if you're gonna be a bitch then i'm gonna be a bigger bitch.

also do you recognize the "other side against me" and "i'm so better i'm so intellectual" kinda vibe she was going on about?
sounded like a communist to me tbh


| >>581099 yeah what I hate most on these commies lately is how arrogant they're getting


| >>581107
it's hard to explain what exactly irritates me so much with them, but the "i am euphoric in my own intelligence" atheist fedora meme pretty much does it. it's also how they 100% believe to understand the world and behave like intelligentsia and anyone who disagrees is a capitalist oppressor or the people.

i think communism's got a few swell ideas but as with everything, a bunch of retards ruin everything.


|
we should remember to agree that the system is something subject to collective betterment


| >>581095
At least I gave you the option of betterment, while you basically just said "go kill yourself"
Typically fascists: physical extermination of any opposition. In your world is no place for my kind in live, but in my world your kind will have a better live.


| >>581149
so apparently i'm a fascist now!
deluded commie doesn't know what he's talking about. everything is black and white in his world: those that pander to his retarded arrogant ideals, and all the other bitches (probably just fascists lol)

if you really want me to have a better life then stop posting or just start being normal for once in your life.


| >>581099
>also do you recognize the "other side against me" and "i'm so better i'm so intellectual" kinda vibe she was going on about?
>sounded like a communist to me tbh
Well, look I wouldn't say I'm an "intelectual". But if obvious things seem "intelectual" to you and some unimportant things piss you off that much, it says more about you than about me. Turn on your brain. Not as an intellectual, but as an respectable, average human being.


| >>581150
>so apparently i'm a fascist now!
You aren't? Then what are your positions?
>deluded commie
all opposition are deluded commies...
>everything is black and white in his world
...and only they have the black and white world perception.
>stop posting
censorship
>or just start being normal for once in your life.
homogenized/normalized ideal of how people should be


| >>581150
>retarded arrogant ideals
because you're holding the one and only holy grail of non-arrongant and true pragmatism. Every position that differs from yours is arrogant idealism. You don't notice how easily your accusations are invertible. Instead arguing referring on my statements here or other sources, you just make up nice sounding stories based on assumptions.

Btw. even I wouldn't call myself so, I have no problem beeing called commie or idealist.

Total number of posts: 250, last modified on: Tue Jan 1 00:00:00 1563641241

This thread is permanently archived