/lit/ - Literature

it's just the identity politics crew jumping on something to seem more radical or whatever without actually having any beliefs about anything

>>17644785
Wrong. Free sex and free abortion was practiced in soviet russia directly after the revolution.

The real explanation is that leftists are subhumans, and so they will support subhuman politics.

>>17644774
>Why are they pro-women and pro-multiculturalism?
They like having friends and getting laid.

>>17644810
>being a male feminist will get me laid
Kek.

>>17644862
Believe it or not, being nice to women does wonders.

>>17644774
Go read that book and use your brain if you have it.

>>17644883
Being nice to women has nothing to do with feminism

>>17644810
Being a communist will get me friends and get laid?

>>17644887
Nor with getting laid. Women love psychopaths that manipulate and beat them. Not soft smarmy redditors.

Reminder, keep it literature else prepare to flee in terror.

>>17644774
well you see man, communism is jewish.

>>17644774
You can read the manifesto in like an hour. Don't be a lazy nigger.

Because gender and race divisions stem from a variety of economic relationships, as those circumstances inevitably alter, so will ones approach to the subject.

Smarter people tend to be less bigoted and blaming others for their problems

>>17644774
>I want to understand why communists are generally so ''open minded"
they are?
>pro-women, pro-multiculturism
those are just western social norms.

>>17644905
No, it's a LARP

>>17644774
>from what I know about communism,
You must know very little. The idea is that by forming a classless society there would be equaliity

>>17644774
If you open your mind up too much your brain falls out.

>>17644810
ah yes, here we have the prototypical chad, somebody who respects all cultures and races and treats women likes the goddesses they are. Your world view is insane and blatantly false and shows that the only people willing to be friends or have sex with you weigh at least 200 lbs.

>>17645206
I was told not to pick my nose for this very reason.

>>17645180
you're confusing success with intelligence

>>17644774
pro-women? Simply forcing females to work LITERALLY on the same level as males. pro-multiculturalism? Stalin threw native populations of north Caucasus from their lands to Kazakhstan deserts, very multicultural.

>>17645308
>Simply forcing females to work LITERALLY on the same level as males
According to feminism this is pro-women. Feminism is literally just a capitalist movement to flood the labour market, and doesn't really give a shit about women, just about making production cheaper.
Same goes with giving the vote to women. All it does is make democracy even worse than it already was, and harder to overthrow the system democratically.

>>17644798
Didn't they abandon all the revolutionary degeneracy once they realized it cause a bunch of problems and they had to actually govern that shit?

>>17645180
Commies blame the rich for their own failures.

>>17645323
Yep, there was a saying that unlike the capitalists, we in the USSR don't have sex (at all)

>>17645308
That is Bolshevism not Socialism. Know the difference.

>>17645320
Exactly! Giving women right to vote was only to get power into specific peoples hands, not to be pro-women.

>>17645355
another commie excuser. yes yes, communism was never achieved, therefore uncle Marx is not a genetic trash, but a genius.

>>17645167
Exactly, Communism has never incorporated racism into its ideological structures, unlike bourgeois capitalism, not to mention Nazism.

>>17645167
>Because gender and race divisions stem from a variety of economic relationships
Whenever I think Marxists might have a point, I just remind myself they believe utter tripe such as this. Talk about being blind to reality.

>>17645380
*forcibly Russifies all the minorities in the Soviet Union*
*rounds up Uyghurs*

>>17645320
Feminism might've started off that way, but in the course of that, it also brought genuine progression in a lot of aspects, which probably happened as a by-product, but it's still because of the movement

>>17644905
yeah, women love guys who care about others and manage to do it in an anti-establishment way. Combines benefits of being kind and daring

>>17645380
yep, because it incorporates another form of bigotry, classism. For any commie out there. If communism is SO fair and good. And let's say you got the powers to implement it, but 30% of population refuses, what will happen to them? Gulags I guess?

>>17645329
tell me who is stealing my labor value if not my boss

>>17645420
>implying your labor has value

>>17645420
>stealing

Yikes.

>>17645398

>>17645373
This isn't an excuse, this is literally common sense. If I point to a rose and say it's sunflower, it doesn't become a sunflower. If bolsheviks didn't follow how socialist systems are supposed to work, it isn't socialism no matter how much they claim it is.

>>17645427
If it didn't, the business would have no need for me. Literally the source of profit

>>17645439
So how was Martin Luther King's activism useless?

>>17645404
True, but generally in the most meagre of ways. The only significant thing I can think of is that it's now totally unacceptable to beat women (even though I think it was frowned upon anyway prior to feminism), which is a good thing, but apart from that... I can't really think of much that is really a huge net positive for anyone including women.
Was "sexual liberation" such a great or important thing? Prior to it, people could still pretty much have sex with whoever they want, and even cheat on their partner, but sex wasn't trivialized and made into a cheap thing that's done with anyone. Now sex has become a cheap commodity that is progressively losing value, along with all of the social ramifications that come along with it like social alienation caused by cheap, casual relationships which make one feel totally detached from other individuals, so it becomes progressively difficult for anyone to form meaningful and long-lasting relationships.

>>17645420
Your self perceived labor value doesn't matter. Nobody is stealing you anything.

>>17645449
If you look at EVERY single country that called themselves socialists, you may say that they were not. It only proves that socialism is impossible due to human nature, therefore it should be abandoned.

>>17645420
You only think that you have a value. That is the problem with premise - that everyone's opinion matter. Nope, I don't care about Starbucks employees opinion, literally anyone with IQ a little above 83 can replace you.

>>17645449
There is barely a consensus on "how its supposed to work" anyway so who cares.

>>17645466
If labor were paid the full value it produces, there would be no profit for the business owner. By definition, a for profit enterprise must do this. Consequently, the laborer is getting jewed

>>17645496
>I don't understand basic economics: The Post

>>17645496
How do you determine the full value? Is there some kind of mathematical formula?

>>17645496
What's wrong with profiting from your business? That's basically what anyone would do.

>>17645496
That would be perfectly fine, so long as the workers have to accept the risk just as the employer. Ie, if the business goes under, then the workers have to accept the consequences of that risk, whatever they may be. So long as the workers DO NOT accept the responsibilities of economic risk, then the employer is perfectly justified in appropriating "surplus labour value", because the employer is actually mitigating risk for the employees.

>>17645522
the problem is that owners contribute nothing to the actual work being done, but get to pocket the profits while ruling a petty dictatorship.

>>17645465
It's just not the palpable stuff like beating women, sexually liberating them, etc. It reset the mentality and attitude of men towards women in general. This latter change is much much bigger than any of the former changes imo.

>>17645540
>risk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPF63nqHJW0

>>17645559
>owners contribute nothing
>what is infrastructure

>>17645559
The owners is the reason the company exists to begin with you fucking imbecile.

Don't like it? Start your own company and become the owner, see how easy it is for yourself.

>>17645577
>Richard Wolff
Just fucking kill yourself you braindead commie retard

>>17645395
>It's another episode where r*ghtoids are too lazy or stupid to engage with a point, so they retreat into indignation
I've seen this rerun so many times

>>17645577
If you want to be paid your full value of labour, then you need to be fully self-sufficient and responsible for your product (if someone else was helping you, they would need to compensated for their help - basic law of exchange). Whether you believe employers are bad guys or not is irrelevant. If you don't compensate someone for providing a service to you, then you are extracting value from your them unjustly and we essentially just have reverse capitalism where employers are exploited by employees.

>>17645596
Refute what he said if you can

>>17645623
It's not a point, it's an opinion. Gender and race differences are indisputably biological in origin, not economic. Women have two X chromosomes, men have an XY, and the differences provably alters behavior and social organization.

>>17645465
>Prior to it, people could still pretty much have sex with whoever they want, and even cheat on their partner
Men could
> Now sex has become a cheap commodity that is progressively losing value, along with all of the social ramifications that come along with it like social alienation caused by cheap, casual relationships which make one feel totally detached from other individuals, so it becomes progressively difficult for anyone to form meaningful and long-lasting relationships.
Ah yes, the loveless economic arrangements of yesteryear were far superior

>>17645577
>everybody takes risk
>therefore employers don't take risks and shouldn't be compensated for them
That is his whole argument.

>>17645652
>Men could
It takes two to tango, did you never take sex-ed? Masturbation doesn't count as sex.
>Ah yes, the loveless economic arrangements of yesteryear were far superior
There was more love back then than now, unless you think countless tinder hookups are a decent substitute.

>>17645636
>provably
Go ahead then, prove that hardwired biological traits have a more substantive impact than one's economic situation or cultural conditioning.

And if we were examining race on a regional level, like dissecting the distinctions between various regions of France, you'd find something substantive. But """white""" and """black""" are such vacuous, broad amalgamations that they hardly mean anything.

>>17645674
He didn't say employers don't take risk, watch the whole thing. He says *everyone* is taking a risk, employers AND the employees.

>>17645681
>It takes two to tango
It was considered more acceptable for men to cheat than women. People still fucked secretly, but if it was discovered women suffered far worse consequences for it.
>There was more love back then
[Citation needed]
It was a more conservative society and they talked a lot about the wonders of love, but give me something substantive that proves it wasn't just rhetoric.

>>17645559
>the problem is that owners contribute nothing to the actual work being don
The owner bear the risks associated with establishing a business in the first place. There is no guarantee that a business will succeed, but you seemed to believe that it would, otherwise you wouldn't have """""given away""""" your labor. If owning a business is so easy, why don't you go do it?

>>17645688
Yes, which was irrelevant to the point I made. I never argued risk wasn't ubiquitous, I was arguing that there is specifically risk involved in the management of capital (and in purely quantitative terms, much more than the average employee who only owns a home would ever be exposed to). So, are you going to exploit the employer by piling ALL risk onto him without any compensation? Or are you going to share the risk equally onto employees and employer (which is the equitable situation I am arguing for)?

>>17644810
Good for them. I like having a functioning family and future for my children.

>>17645703
>It was considered more acceptable for men to cheat than women.
[citation needed] A marriage would end regardless of which partner cheated.
>but give me something substantive that proves it wasn't just rhetoric.
There are no studies on this so it's impossible to prove that way. All we have are cultural mediums which are a decent reflection of reality. Look at our mediums today, no hint of the same level of romance. All we have are Tinder and cheap hookups and our culture reflects that.

>>17645687
>prove that hardwired biological traits have a more substantive impact than one's economic situation or cultural conditioning.
This is what I mean, I don't have to because it's already been done to death. If anything the burden of proof lies on you to prove it ISN'T these obvious factors, and is instead economic relationships, which is the more absurd claim.

>>17645708
The point he made was, if everyone is taking a risk, everyone should be compensated equally as well. The employees are in fact taking a bigger risk because employers are usually better off than employees, so if the project folds, the consequences will hit the employees much harder.

>>17645757
>businesses will themselves into reality, pop up out of thin air, there are no startup costs, and the property maintains itself

>>17645687
I can even give you some basic historical evidence which requires almost no referencing, because it is commonly known:
Every developed civilization in the history of mankind, all over the planet, has organically developed a system where men are dominant, and in diverse societies the darker colours were kept at the bottom of caste systems (India), even in tribal societies prior to private property and property rights. Was this a gigantic, global conspiracy of capitalists and men against women and darker skinned people, or is there some natural tendency of man which results in this system of organization? In light of these facts, I'd say the natural history of mankind all over the globe is a strong case in favor of the biological determination of our social and economic systems.
>>17645757
Workers do get compensated for the risks they take in their work. Risk is risk though, it can never be fully mitigated without losing all the boons derived therefrom. The average worker today is only at risk if he has serious addictions or problematic spending habits.
> The employees are in fact taking a bigger risk because employers are usually better off than employees
That's not how risk is measured. You also vastly underestimate the magnitude of risks involved in most operations. There is a reason you see white-collared executives jumping out of windows when market crashes occur. Bigger risk -> bigger reward or bigger loss.

>>17645757
>employer maintains the whole bussiness
>employer's profit and resources rely on not fucking everything up
>employer loses 10 times more money than everyone below him if the enterprise fails

>employees get fixed paychecks
>somehow employees are taking a bigger risk

>>17645757
Ask me how I know you haven't taken a single course in business ever.

>>17644774
Communism is and has always been a Jewish plot to subvert populations that are actually capable of civilization and cosmopolitanize them, mixing them into atomized and equally malleable masses of mongrelized retards who can then be corralled by the only group that still feels in-group preference: Jews.

This was even true in China, the Chinese just caught on to it and countered it by openly teaching their people that Jews run America and not to trust them.

>>17645819
If communism was a Jewish plot, Israel would've been communist.

>>17645819
how come the only not “jew-run” countries are communist then? Absolute retard take, jews dont run shit, they just have a lot of lawyers

>>17645857
Actually, it would be the only country that isn't communist

>>17644774
Marxism is narcissistic and has always been fashionable to elites and those who aspire to be. Progressive, "open-minded" causes and lifestyles are fashionable to them as well, hence why they adopt them.

>>17645879
This guy gets it.
>>17645857
you don't

>>17644774
>Do I have to read the main book to understand what makes them this way?
No the book is just about economics , there’s nothing about cultural progressivism

>>17645409
No, that bigotry is precisely what the capitalist class exemplifies--nice projection tho.

>>17644883
Nice guys can’t fuck CHUD

>>17645308
no you see comrade state oppress, Soviet Union oppress multiple cultures so multicultural state

>>17644883
women want benevolent sexism not feminism

>>17646349
Realistically what would happen to them

>>17645687
you are such a fucking idiot. this is nobody wants to be a communist anymore

>>17645784
anon when they jump out of windows they have a golden parachute.

at first it was about liberation of the worker--the proletariat class--but since class consciousness failed to manifest, and since communism has widely failed as an ideology, they have had to invent new appurtenances for their failed ideology; this takes the shape of progressiveness

Communism is just a commodity. People don't actually want communism, people feel like they aren't part of the problem in a capitalist society if they criticize it. People watch movies that criticize capitalism, then go to starbucks and discuss with their friends how terrible consumerism is. It's too late for communism, capitalism has already absorbed and commodified it.

>>17645420
the tax man and landlord. your boss is the only one who actually pays you

>>17647962
Yeah none of these 20 year old girls wants to live in 1980s Romania

>>17645636
At the same time economic principles are applicable to everyone regardless of race or gender. Studies of chimpanzees show that they basically follow economic laws when placed in economic circumstances.

There is no point in Communists needing to deny reality about differences between humans when innate human equality was never a pre-requisite for Communist ideology. Its literally a study of economic relations between capital and labour.

It is however a pre-requisite to deny reality if all these "communists" are is blank slate liberal faggots who want to be edgy.

Not all communists and socialists are like that, but those who are usually do it because of solidarity. It should be no secret that capitalism is at fault for a lot of issues regarding 3rd world countries, as well as inequality.
>>17647958
imagine believing this

>>17645323
yes lol because the number of abortions especially in cities was insane, women were using it as birth control

>>17648042
>There is no point in Communists needing to deny reality about differences between humans when innate human equality was never a pre-requisite for Communist ideology
There is actually, because they need class warfare to be an objectively valid historical mechanism, which is only valid if we accept human behavior as being determined by economic mechanisms, rather than some other force or factor (root biology being one). Without it, the entire historical theory falls apart. If class warfare is only a modern phenomenon and restricted to liberal capitalist states, then there is no real reason to view communism as special or unique with respect to older, or new (eg fascist), regimes which have/had a system of class solidarity rather than class warfare.

>>17645223
Incel hands typed this

>>17644774

>>17644798
>Wrong. Free sex and free abortion was practiced in soviet russia directly after the revolution.
That doesn't mean it was policy.
>“You must be aware of the famous theory that in communist society the satisfaction of sexual desire, of love, will be as simple and unimportant as drinking a glass of water. The glass of water theory has made our young people mad, quite mad…I think this glass of water theory is completely un-Marxist, and moreover, anti-social. In sexual life there is not only simple nature to be considered, but also cultural characteristics, whether they are of a high or low order…Of course, thirst must be satisfied. But will the normal man in normal circumstances lie down in the gutter and drink out of a puddle, or out of a glass with a rim greasy from many lips?
>t. Lenin
Even the Communists understood feminists were fucking stupid deep down.

>>17648088
This is only necessarily if you seek to undermine the legitimacy of any other systems of thought. If you keep the goal focused on the relation between capital and labour the fact that other relations might interfere with that necessitates internationalism and women's rights (as workers such as day care provided by the employer) as a strategy rather than as a goal in of itself.

>>17645223
Chads are nice people, think about it, why would a Chad be constantly seething with impotent rage like (you)?

>>17648355
Yeah man just myopically shove your round peg into a square hole

destroying capitalism only makes sense if the artificial disvisions of the working people caused or exacerbated by capitalism are done away with as well.
hating women, black or gay people is a trick from piggy to distract you from the real boot on your neck.

>>17644774
Communism has been so vilified in the west for nearly a century that only people with open minds will consider it.

>>17644774
they are carrying the intellectual tradition of the frankfurt school and, to a lesser extent, early bolshevism

it helps that every other mainstream ideology is either retrograde or outright puritanical

>>17648203
>lenin was an incel
I could have done without this information

>>17648902
this propably plays a huge part. decades of propaganda from politicians, mass media, CIA, mossad and bourgeoise talkingheads have made it so that only people who already have some distrust for the western institutions or are generally open minded are even considering reading some communist /lit/.

>>17648911
oh no lenin wasn't an incel - he was having a fling with kollontai while married to krupskaya, but any sensible person can realize the effects that this "sex-positive" feminism can have on any society - be it neoliberal, oligarchic or socialist: Women must be trained to think beyond getting wet, or must be leashed to the kitchen.

>>17644774
Because Communism is Marxism but it is spun in a nation state flavored propaganda of reformation. It's the same as Machiavellianism because it's more about the political leaders serving themselves instead of the people.

>>17645463
How was it useful?

The 60s civil rights movement saw for an immense increase in single motherhood among afro american families, which is the root problem of these communities.

>>17648983
every person must be trained to think beyond the simple pursuit of stimulation and gratification. you're either a reactionary imbecile or extremely sexually frustrated

>>17648911
Literally everyone before a few decades ago is going to have opinions you think are unacceptable

>>17648997
he showed the white liberals that a black person could be exactly like them; well groomed, articulate and completely ineffectual

>>17649030
I get what you mean but let me reassure you that this has not damaged my belief in Marxism-Leninism in the slightest

>>17648993
unironically define your terms
this is kermit peterson level word salad

>>17644883
>being nice gets you laid
Dood, you're a literal meme.

>>17645180
>Source: my ass

>>17649041
>>17649027
>>17648911
Fuck off back to twitter subhuman.

>>17649365
impotent manchild rage

>>17644774
Communists don't know aythingabout how to sell your land your liberty your freedom if you want to selly ou reedom you come to me

>>17649374
You vermin are ruining/lit/, but go ahead and celebrate like a twerking nigger in rubble. Everybody can see what a complete subhuman you are.
Why do non reading leftists think their twitter tier politics gives them the right to go on a literature forum?

>>17644774
Becomes communists, at least ostensibly, begin from a common starting point with liberals, enlightenment values.

>>17649461
>wah wah your are ruining /board/
you inbred /pol/ yokels have successfully spread your nazi gangrene to every single board, how are you still not satisfied

>>17649570
You're literally the kind of twitter commie we make fun of all the time here. No understanding of their own ideology. Doesn't read. Completely worthless. Go back.

>>17649600
impotent manchild rage

>>17649604
social shaming in an anonymous forum is the dumbest thing ever

Reading all these non ironic comments from the champagne socialists is pretty hilarious. They literally look at themselves as superheroes and sophisticated/intelligent. I really wonder what’s going to happen when they start putting people into power with their blind arrogance in their ideas. And I wonder how committed to their ideas they will be when things inevitably turn violent

>>17649648
things are already violent, liberal. you're just not at the receiving end

>>17649662
no I mean real violence, like when we start shooting your candidates in the face when our country starts to get worse and worse. you’re going to be cowering in the corner and pretending you had nothing to do with it all because you’re a fucking pussy and everything you believe is surface level to appear fashionable.

>>17649698
>fedposting on fedchan
go for a walk and eat an apple

>>17649698
>our country
is that supposed to be the united states of america? I don't live in that nihilistic shithole

>your candidates
now who could you be talking about exactly? american democrats can't even get a social democrat nominated and you think marxists are about to take over

be careful, if you project any harder the 25w lightbulb you have in place of a brain is going to blow up

>>17649749
Nobody thinks marxists are going to take over lel, everyone knows that marxists will fall in line behind liberals now if they just press the racism button. Liberals might imitate some commie policies though

>>17649777
I'm honestly curious, why do you think your country is getting "worse and worse"

>>17649786
Sorry I wasn't that guy, I just insult marxists about this several dozen times a month in the hopes that they will eventually snap and go nazbol

Most self-proclaimed communists never read Marx. If they did, they wouldn't like him at all.

>>17649749
Never said anything about marxists or whatever meaningless labels you have, idiots like yourself and the other posters on this board are going to take over, what they call themselves is irrelevant. You are all followers trapped inside a secular religion due to your inability to self-think, Europeans are even more guilty of this than Americans though they really buy into their superiority. Followers who want to appear as the good guys in a comic book, who are only using people to feel good about themselves, are not going to bring any positive change to a country and they will only make things worse. Can you expect anything different when all you can do is repeat things that somebody smarter than you has said?

>>17649821
how do I "self-think" then? do I start by hating brown people?

>>17645577
>Employees only run the risk of getting fired
>They can find another job
>Employers run the risk of bankruptcy, losing everything they have, living in debt until they die, not being able to get back up because of the bankruptcy stigma
>It's the same thing hurr durr
Commies are so retarded.

>>17649786
Are you serious? Take a look outside? Our cities are disgusting and they look like something out of a horror movie and the people there are absolutely fucked. I assume you believe that as long as we have the latest iPhone then we are progressing though

>>17649801
they're only going to develop a thicker skin for it, which they're going to need either way, so thank you I suppose

What's wrong with being pro woman? Should we treat women unfairly just for being women? One aspect of socialism is combating exploitative relationships and it could be argued that in a patriarchal or racist society that one class (men, whites, etc) would benefit from materially exploiting or oppressing another (women, non whites)

>>17649829
This really goes to show the depth of the champagne socialist. The dichotomy is really between /pol/ and /leftypol/. I would start with honestly questioning where your desire to become political comes from

>>17649837
The point is associate progressive ideology with bending over for liberals in their minds

>>17649843
Not sure if you don’t have a lot of experience with women but nobody treats women worse than other women, do you actually disagree

>>17649876
That is irrelevant to policy.

>>17649898
It is relevant to feminism you fucking loser. Do you have a job of are you a neet? Women sabotage other women at work all the time, tell me what policies you are going to use to stop that from happening you autistic atheist faggot who thinks life is a math problem and muh policy will solve anything.

>>17649861
you have been making lazy passes at my credibility for a while now but you've yet to identify and address any sort of value judgment I've made

>>17649863
very unlikely to happen. liberal progressivism is downstream from leftist progressivism

>>17644810
Lots of bad sex with ugly people.

>>17649923
Irrelevant to the discussion, you are just ranting about incel nonsense and resentment towards women rather than a discussion about rights

>>17649843
women were never treated unfairly

>>17649923
>if I use expletives they will have no choice but to admit my anecdotal bullshit

>>17649930
>liberal progressivism is downstream from leftist progressivism
No it's not lel. They have totally hamstrung leftists, they literally call leftism 'class reductionism' now and force you guys to talk about idpol

>>17649937
>>17649943

Ohhh I hit those larpers right in the feels and they are getting emotional now. Disregard what I said before, you are a very brave and intelligent man and people like you are moving the world forward. Thank you for your service. Somebody had to stand up to those bad bad evil powerful white men with their giant succulent cocks that you don’t want to suck, and YOU anon are the one making the change. You are a defender, a protector of the weak.

You guys have to be European with these awareness levels!

>>17649983
Mmm yes
Tell me more

>>17649953
this is actually not a bad point, but class theory and idpol are not strictly incompatible; as a matter of fact it's well travelled pathway to radicalization. the real problem is that liberals are completely unable to sublimate idpol into anything better than pepsi commercials.

nothing will happen until they are brought into class consciousness. woke or not we were already hamstrung to begin with.

>>17649997

>completely unable to sublimate idpol into anything better than pepsi commercials

fuckin based

>>17649997
>sublimate idpol into anything better than pepsi commercials.
such as? what would be better

90% of "communists" are liberal retards who were already fully brainwashed by steven colbert and the new york times by the time they discovered marx in college

Socialism/communism is just an edgy aesthetic for them, not a genuine belief. Marx was the type to kick feminists out of his meetings for distracting from class issues, modern day "marxists" are the type to cancel someone on twitter for suggesting that priveledge stems from class rather than race or gender.

>>17645652
Love is a joke.

>>17650033
the best liberals could conceive of would be "reparations", which may or may not do some good. the part of the political establishment that represents them would fight it every step of the way though.

the ideal scenario is radicalization. 20th black activists became marxists all on their own, essentially. that's because the theory is compelling to them.

>>17649648
Dude they wont get any power ever. It's just the elites duping the subhumans with a theory they know is harmless. Biden and co use blm commie and trannie shit to get the subhumans to do their bidding.

>>17649837
No they're 16 year olds and trannies.

>>17650108
how are not blacks radicalized today?

>>17648858
I hate all those things t.b.h.

>>17650108
>20th black activists became marxists all on their own
They didn't give a shit about the dialectic or historical materialism. They were niggers promoting their own race interests and picking up any remotely superficially fitting symbol to slap on it. Be it islam or marxism.

>>17650166
they're not different in that regard. most think reform under dem leadership is the way to improve their condition.

>>17650228
don't you have a cousin to fuck, or did they reject you as well

>>17650108
>>17650228
The agitator jews who riled them up sold them marxism as a worldview that would end their exploitation by the big bad whitey

>>17650244
Twitter tier.

>>17650041

i agree but people who focus on race and gender as THE problems and people who recognize that the predominant race and gender of the ruling class can worsen class disparities are two different kinds of people

>>17650255
>>17650262
>magic global jew hive mind is why I can't fuck
get back into your playpen
>>>/pol/

>>17650265
what stops you from converting the first sort of person into the second? is it because you get called a "class reductionist"?

>>17650285
funny how these people view sex as teenagers. they honestly believe only the cool "social"ists are the ones who have sex. bro, if you brag about having sex on the internet, i don't even want to know they look like especially considering how people who are obsessed with politics are usually weird as fuck

>>17650285
can you people only think in terms of social validation and sexual gratification or what? cringe as fuck my dude uncoom yourself

>>17650285

That's part of it, but it really bugs me when people take that a step further and assume that I don't care about the issues they care about because I see them as being caused by a bigger problem

>>17650265
> the predominant race and gender of the ruling class can worsen class disparities
How?

>>17650388

wouldn't a ruling class be more likely to accept people similar to themselves?

>>17650317
>>17650340
incel mentality is informed by sexual frustration. the problem is not that you don't fuck. the problem is that not fucking very clearly bothers you, to the point of informing most of your world view.

people can smell the virgin on you, anon.

>>17650347
well, the people who have been harboring one pet cause their entire lives probably don't like being told to get in line and wait for a classless society that almost certainly will not happen in their lifetime. especially given the fact that reform under liberal democracy does actually work, sort of. it can't solve the fundamental problems but it can solve some surface-level ones.

what I'm not getting is why these two things cannot be done at the same time, by the same people.

>>17650388
racism and white supremacy aren't just things /pol/ retards shitpost about. there are elements of it in the police, in the justice system, in law making. and that's just the part that's intentional.

>>17650413

>probably don't like being told to get in line and wait for a classless society that almost certainly will not happen in their lifetime

fair but the difficulty of achieving something in a short period of time doesn't make it less important

and i DO agree with you that liberal democracy isn't the worst but i don't understand how the two kinds of people i outlined don't have somewhat conflicting mindsets. that's not to say that collaboration between them is impossible, just that those groups have different ways of looking at things

>>17650423
What do you call Affirmative Action, you know actual state-supported racial discrimination, unlike your 'white supremacy' which of course is not backed by anything concrete at all you can point to

Just gave my grandma my copies of the manifesto and capital. Lets see what happens, lads.

>>17650413
Sex comprises most of your worldview because you bring it into arguments that are about politics because you believe it’s the weakness of your opponents. And again I will repeat that not everyone who disagrees with tow the line leftie politics is an incel, but I know believing that makes you feel superior.

>>17650519
I'm not really seeing the contradiction, unless you're talking about the incompatibility of reform under liberal democracy with revolutionary activity.

in any case, even the Bolsheviks dealt in idpol to some extent. Stalin was the "People's Commissar for Nationalities" under Lenin. ensuring proper representation was his job. you could argue that it was mostly strategic but still.

>>17650557
there is hard statistical evidence for institutional racism. someone I'm not going to name went through the trouble of aggregating it.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ido70LgXsEhxcnyXE7RVS0wYJZc6aeVTpujCUPQgTrE/mobilebasic

you'd deny the truth even if it dick slapped you in the face though. we both know that.

>What do you call Affirmative Action
a band-aid solution that probably caused as many problems as it solved, if not more. the reasoning behind it was correct though.

>>17650594
I am doing it because it makes you mad

I'm not going to meaningfully interact with someone who barges into a discussion saying "hurr durr niggers". as far as I'm concerned you should be euthanized.

>>17650606
>there is hard statistical evidence for institutional racism
is the evidence more reliable and is its effect better than the evidence for race differences? no it's not

>>17650634
there is no "evidence for race differences" beyond the observable and the observable is strictly limited to physical characteristics. the research documents I've linked thoroughly destroy the "criminal statistics" angle; that is to say both their validity and applicability are essentially nil.

scientific racism is universally regarded as pseudo-scientific. there's a reason nobody admits this shit outside of your internet bubble. it's not just morally aberrant, it's also stupid.

>>17644798
>free abortion
It was banned in 1933

>>17650689
Race correlates with the homicide rate more than poverty does

>>17650606
>there is hard statistical evidence for institutional racism

>>17650606

it's def less of a contradiction from a theory perspective than i'm making it out to be but the difference sometimes feels massive, especially when people pull out the class reductionist card even though i agree with them

>>17650713
indictment rates, incarceration rates and sentence length for first time offenders are all much higher for black people. it is largely understood that excessive sentencing can have the perverse effect of making crimes more likely to escalate.

>>17650756
they are most likely doing it on purpose. some people aren't just liberal because that's the default; they are ideologically committed to it. they are trying to discredit you.

>>17650616
Ok well that wasn’t me anon so I guess there is a misunderstanding, my only reply was saying it’s weird to say that people who believe in my politics are the sex-havers, and the others are worthless, doomed to virginity. Also, if you are implying racist people don’t have sex that isn’t true either. There are a lot of racist women, also there are racist non-white women surprisingly

>>17650403
How does that worsen class disparities?>>17650423
Nobody would believe this if they didn't have the media around to tell it to them. Black people which I assume you're talking about have problems with the police and law because they are more likely to be poor and to live in cities and therefore commit more crime. If america which I'm assuming you're talking about was actually "white supremacist" jews and asians wouldn't be better off than the whites themselves. Retard.

>>17650837
jews and asian were never chattel. most of them are wealthy migrants or descendants of wealthy migrants.

furthermore jews (and other european immigrants like the irish and italians) are white. they're just white.

>>17650836
it doesn't have to be true. it just has to be accepted. the conflation between "racist' and "weird frustrated pervert" is useful because it discourages people from becoming racists.

why would anyone play fair with a fucking nazi

>>17650889
The chinks were practically slaves half the time, they're just higher IQ

>>17650903
they were never slaves, "practically" or not. the work conditions and racial tension they endured was more akin to those of eg irish immigrants. they were able to work for wages, own property, attend white schools and marry into white families long before blacks could do any of those.

learn history, you scum-sucking rube.

>>17650999
Chinks obviously faced more discrimination and worse conditions than eg. Poles or Irish, yet they do better than them on average, it's just IQ. You can throw however much money and programs you want at low IQ populations, they will literally never start behaving like chinese, if you disagree then show me even one example, it doesn't exist.

>>17645206
Such a Reddit expression

>>17651013
they have access to generational wealth. modern day statistics are skewed by the emergence of wealthy migrants these past few generations.

unless you mean to say that an average IQ discrepancy of ~2 between white americans and chinese americans also accounts for a difference of 20,000$ in average income, in which cases things aren't looking great for whitey are they?

the only thing you need to take away from discussion as far as IQ goes is that mine is drastically higher than yours.

>>17651061
The difference is more like 5 points, and wealth doesn't affect IQ or SAT scores much

>>17650815
>>17650713

Let me bring the middle-ground between the racists and the motherly instinct liberals. Black violence is a cultural issue, black people are just more okay with violence, on average as it stands, than white people. Now we have white people inspecting black people and telling them what their problems are and how they should fix it. Kindly fuck off please, and mind your own business. Also poverty doesn’t make you violent, lmao. If somebody gets shot over a woman it had nothing to do with poverty.

>>17648788
I'm not shoving class relations into any hole other than the hole of class. I'm just saying that we are going to ignore everything else because it doesn't really matter.

If you want to kill each other over race or being a trans or whatever you can do that after the revolution against the bourgeoisie.

>>17651126
material conditions absolutely 100% affect "IQ or SAT scores". they correlate strongly with poverty. wealth resolves poverty but wealth in excess makes little difference.

poverty seriously profoundly fucks people up. it's linked with a ton of developmental issues.

>>17651135
I can't completely dismiss the culture argument. it can also explain why white americans are so much more violent than white people in other occidental nations. with that said we can't ignore the relation between material conditions and culture either.

>>17649997
wokies are never going to do anything. you have a greater chance of converting /pol/. just tell them about how based marx insulted the succdem jewish nigger lasalle

>>17651175
roll with it, if only for this reason : if you want a proletarian movement then you need the support of your ethnic minorities and to win this support you need to incorporate idpol into your movement.

it works. that's why the Bolsheviks did it. they didn't even fucking believe in it but they did it anyway.

>>17651253
yeah let's convert fascists to marxism I'm sure that'll work great. fucking idiot

>>17650403
if anything a ruling class would hate those more similar to themselves. tyrants always surround themselves with foreigners because they can't trust their own

>>17651271
Leninism was a failure though. It only works in semi-feudal shitholes as a result of piggybacking off the general liberal bourgeoise democratic revolution. The types of states it works in never have the productive capacity to make it work.

>thinks fascists are a real thing
its just an aesthetic. they are "fascist" for the same reason extremist liberals are "communist". Its because it is what is expected of them and they meet those expectation. The reality is that wokies would get what they want with actual fascism and /pol/ should unironically be communist

>>17651351
the only existing communist states were created through Lenin's theory of revolution or some derivative of it. we can learn from its successes. vanguardism almost certainly wouldn't work in a developed and heavily militarized liberal democracy (for obvious reasons) but the fact is that the soviets accrued a lot of good will through identity politics. stop getting mad at twitter libs because you can't say the gamer word anymore and learn to recognize a useful tool.

rest of your post is just word salad

>>17651184
>material conditions absolutely 100% affect "IQ or SAT scores".
oh no no

>>17651442
>line going steadily upwards
your unsourced graph from 1995 makes the opposite of the point you were trying to make. you are so hopelessly stupid holy shit

>>17651472
it makes the point that income clearly matters less than race lel

>>17651472
this one also produces lols

>>17651475
it doesn't even explain itself. is this the score of children grouped with family income or is it the income of test-takers grouped by scores

I'm guessing you don't actually know

>>17651512
It implies the same thing regardless of which of those 2 it is

nope, he doesn't know

gas every last /pol/tard

>>17651540
pls give your take on the homicide/income/race chart I want to lol at what you come up with

>>17651506
Nigga you weren't even alive in 2006

>>17651584
I was though. Also my IQ is 82 so it's not racist for me to talk about this subject, in fact you should defer to me about it if you want to be sensitive

>>17651571
in both cases there is a clear correlation between wealth and the measured statistic. they would also imply the presence of other factors that correlate with race; factors which may include genetics, but good luck actually proving that

that's what I would say if you'd bothered to actually tell us where the data comes from

>>17651608
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/revcoa18.pdf

When you're done baiting this is an interesting read

deliberately lying about race statistics should be a hate crime tbqh

>>17651699
>hate crime
is this like when you're mad at your dad so you break his model boat and tell him you hate him

>>17644774

Maybe they're generally just decent people.

>>17649843
There's nothing wrong in being pro women. I'm just wondering in the OP why commies are overwhelmingly that, whether it has anything to do with the ideology.