Thread 150876678

>CAPITALISM IS LE BAD!!!!
Wooow. Great message there, Illumination.

>"I am The Lorax, I speak for the trees. The trees say buy a fucking Mazda"
Thanks Illumination

Just cause capitalism brought you this bullshit, it doesn't make it bad.

>>150876678 (OP)
Has there ever been an animated film where the moral was capitalism good?

I thought it was more that destroying nature was bad

>>150876678 (OP)
The moral of the story was to learn how to exploit resources properly. The Onceler was cutting down the whole tree for some reason.

>>150876695
perhaps one of the dumbest /co/-related ad-campaigns in history?
probably in the top 15

>>150876702
Animal Farm

>>150876678 (OP)
>hey, this thing isnt a pure unalloyed good and can cause bad things
>WAAAH, WHY DOES MEDIA SAY THING BAD
this is what discourse sounds like half the time

>National Parks are good
>BOOOOOOOOO PROPAGANDA

Meanwhile in the OG
>Onceler: Well, what do you want? I should shut down my factory, fire a hundred-thousand workers? Is that good economics, is that sound for the country?
>Lorax: I see your point. But I wouldn't know the answer.

>>150876839
but then the workers all lost their jobs anyways when the sneed trees ran out

>>150876881
What about the feed and seed

>>150876742
It never says capitalism is good actually

>>150876839
>thousands of workers lose their jobs to mechanization, claim that opposing mechanization is just being a luddite
>thousands of workers might lose their jobs because the factory is literally killing the environment, suddenly those same workers rights are sacrosanct

>>150876742
>he thinks the direct opposite of authoritarism is capitalism
yep, capitalist realism actually exists

>>150876998
He meant the animated movie from 1954 which was backed by the CIA

>>150876839
>>150876881
The message is: aim for sustainably

>>150877027
late stage capitalism isn't sustainable

Fern Gully but with extra steps

>>150877073
Would the Onceler be considered "late stage" when he's the settler of the region?

>>150877073
And yet it remains sustainable throughout all the decades of people whining about that made-up term, unlike every iteration of communism

>>150877905
True, Ohara would be more aligned to late stage
>>150878048
>all the decades
late stage capitalism is the post fordism period we are today, retard. unlike the usual capitalism from decades ago.

>>150876702
Not a film, but Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck.

Scrooge does become greedy and has to overcome this flaw with the help of his family, but absolutely nothing is said against his entrepreneurship. The final panel is about his wealth being his memory of obtaining his wealth, tied to all the adventures, bold challenges, and people he got to know along the way.

>>150878098
>today, retard. unlike the usual capitalism from decades ago
So late stage capitalism is overregulated market with bullshit rules like requiring new garages to have plugs for electric cars regardless if electric car is owned (hi Cali), while offering businesses no protection from thrid world countries that don't give a fuck about worker and human rights or environment, and the state is openly waging a war against merit and strong-arms companies to give special treatment due to race/sexuality/gender/immigration status?

>>150876678 (OP)
I remember another message. Protagonist and his kins were clearly jewish.

>>150878166
>So late stage capitalism is overregulated market with bullshit rules
Yes, because monopolies (which are inevitable) WILL lobby gov to suppress any would-be competition. Or just outright buy them out

>>150878166
Unironically, yes. The state is bourgeois.

>>150876678 (OP)
he also committed tax fraud

>>150876702
Hercules

>>150877828
Stupid fuck take.
Fern Gully had an evil spirit take advantage of industrialization.

>>150878222
Herciles were about "elitism is le good" probably.

>>150876964
They were all formerly chucked.

>>150878166
look up with lobbyism is and you'll finally grow out of your adolescence

how bad me be?

>>150878198
>>150878205
>>150878260
communism will never work

>>150878372
This is how you look like.

>>150876702
The Incredibles

>>150876742
Orwell was a democratic socialist.

>>150878048
Remaining "sustainable" for decades isn't impressive for a broad economic system, its like if a human was healthy for several years while smoking cigarettes.

>>150878198
>which are inevitable
natural monopolies can never happen, monopolies can only come about from corruption of the state

>>150878542
There is no capitalism without the state so thats a meaningless distinction. What happens is that a business becomes wealthy enough to buy up or cancel competition. The state is used as a tool in that arrangement but its not the source of the issue. The source of the issue is that monopolies make perfect economic sense and capital attracts more capital. Its only through state intervention that monopolies can be broken up. For corporations, the incentive is always to become as monopolistic as possible. Its part of the infinite growth mindset. Democratic socialism cuts against that tendency towards monopolization through worker ownership. If workers own their corporations, they aren't incentivized to sabotage and assimilate other enterprises to the same extent private shareholders are. Their profits and pride are more tied to the goods & services they provide. Its a different logic.

>>150878542
> natural monopolies can never happen, monopolies can only come about from corruption of the state
Never played economial or strategical games? Huge factions that fight for sole dominance over map is alvays an end game.

>>150876678 (OP)
Man Dr Seuss is fucking rolling in his grave, it’s not just these shitty Illumination movies that miss the point of the original, but more recently we got
>upcoming shitty Grubhub style Cat in the Hat movie
>Walmart Grinch ad that shills it and makes Christmas all about corporation
>a collection of shitty Cocomelon Netflix toddlerslop shit series

Never have I ever seen one’s legacy disrespected this much holy shit

>>150878592
Wow. This is really bad...

>>150878222
Wait actually that's right, lol.
There's no downside to Herc monetizing himself like a sports star. It just validates his ego positively.

fucking trannies get out of my board

>>150878098
Are you some kind of historically illiterate retard? Communists have been calling the age they live in to be "late stage capitalism" for at least a century. They call it that because they want it to transition to socialism so fucking bad. The entire 20th century is that unfounded belief being put into practice and it killed millions by the decade.

>>150876678 (OP)
>Great message there, Illumination.
They aren't wrong.

>>150878577
Distributism > Socialism.

Guys, this isn't complicated. Normalfags hate capitalism because they perceive rich capitalists as talented autistic people and want to slaughter them because they consider them a threat to their species, a la video game YouTubers like Arin and Dunkey who treat Sonic Adventure as a proxy for autism as well. Communists are inevitably going to win in the States and then they are going to create a communist society that is equally fucking stupid and antagonistic towards anything exceptional where they will execute you for being able to draw. This is because there is no actual difference between communists and capitalists (or even communists and Christians) and you fell for their stupid distortion tactic that you could have ignored by watching cartoons and masturbating instead. I am poor; I have faced uncountable instances of persecution in my life. The revolution is not going to help you. Go do something fun instead.

>>150878048
The fact of the matter is that this concept of "capitalism" is a system that is most sensitive and cognitive to the fluidity of any given market. It is by its own merits, synonymous with being financially literate. So whenever a socialist or a communist uses capitalism in a derogatory manner, their mental pictures are all caricatures meant to aggravate people and themselves.

>>150877073
Late stage capitalism isn't real, it's just capitalism being exploited like it always has and people only made up the term because they don't want to figure out a real way to deal with it

Fucking commies, I thought this place was based

>>150878690
No thank you. Distributism even with the theocratic influences sawed off isn't sufficient to the task of distributing the nation's wealth, ironically enough. If there's no collective ownership of the workplace by the workers then private hands will continue to skim money off the top and pull up the ladder as they climb. Work would remain an autocratic affair you have no say in. It'd be better to protect democracy by assuring every worker a vote in their work and government while instituting wealth caps. I also think the billionaire oligarchs like Gates and Musk owe the working class reparations.

>>150878407
No one is saying that you oversensitive commie faggot

>>150878743
The only thing Marx got right was he theorized that people see society via class. It wasn't even an original thought from him. Virtually all of his other theories are not only wrong, they were fundamental misunderstandings from reading Wealth of Nations, inventing an imaginary boogeyman class called "capitalists" for all the ills of the world for the unexplained fluctuations of markets and exploitative practices one would engage in. Nobody even knows what the fuck a capitalist is, they just point to "oh it's the rich" when that's not even correct.

>>150878407
In fact, different from the government, those companies want the same thing the regular joe wants: freedom

>>150878750
Right and thats why everyone loves subscription models, software only gets better, nobody even wants a right to repair their goods and our economy isn't predicated on widely unpopular child labor in Africa.

Capitalism is blind, it can only chase profits. Eternal growth, also known as cancer, isn't a realistic goal for any enterprise. If we want thoughtful outcomes in our economy we need thoughtful actors, we need democratic socialism. Workers know their business better than shareholders and private equity firms, they'd be able to respond more readily to community & national concerns. Profit sharing and wealth caps would reduce the ability for oligarchs to purchase elections.

How's that line from the Godfather go? "When you hold a gun and I hold a gun, we can talk about laws. If you hold a knife and I have a gun, we can talk about rules. But if you hold nothing and I hold a gun, then the truth is in my hands."

Capitalism obliges workers to disarm. Democratic socialism is economic self defense.

>>150878783
Distributism argues that the nuclei of any given state is the family, The theorized pitfall of Distributism is that you cannot mobilize your work force in any directionable and actionable manner since they are nearly all family-owned and work towards their own families or co-ops instead of the state's wants or needs. Bureaucracy is limited in its scope in this manner and the booms of economic capital growth is slowed down due to a focus on family-building incentives rather than any industrial or scientific advancements. Essentially it makes the state into a neighborhood committee.

>>150878533
What a stupid fucking comparison
By your logic a person can live a good life under capitalism regardless of how bad it can get

>>150878838
The common argument of why people love things in capitalism is in direct correlation with what they are spending money in. That is as close as a 1:1 to market reality to any economic system as you can get.

niggas really need to read some deleuze

>>150878807
Companies wants freedom to sell dangerous food and untested medicines without those gov regilators and restrictions. Hardly it's the SAME freedom that commoner Joe wants.

>>150878791
>Nobody even knows what the fuck a capitalist is
You've never read Marx or spoken to a Marxist lol. A capitalist is a private owner of capital who does not need to sell their labor to make a living. A worker is someone without that capital obliged to sell their labor to a capitalist. Marx was also 100% correct about the declining rate of profit, the need for constant expansion being self defeating and about democracy being generally preferable but not fully delivered by liberalism. Marx and Engels also very accurately predicted that industrial capitalism would become the dominant economic system, an observation and model they deduced from observing English mills. And there's no doubt about his theories on profit where a capitalist can only find a "profit" by taking a cut from the workers who produced the value. As an American I also know that Marx was a huge supporter for the Union against the Slavocracy and he championed President Lincoln.

Marx was wrong about Jewish people, Mexican state planning and the economies of Asia. But I dont think you'd even be aware of that. Also he fumbled on Stirner.

>>150878838
Arguments of will to power is wielded strongest by socialists because their entire arguments boil down to Marx's invented boogeyman of a shadowy cabal he coined as "capitalists". Even though that's not a strata that has any discernible meaning other than "rich".

>>150876702
I can do one better: That goddamn Bee Movie. Not only pro-capitalism, but also pro-Slavery.
>Bee was thought of as hardworking and love making honey for generations
>Turned out, no matter how hard they work, their labor and honey are always stolen by the Evil Humans, under the barrel of smokers that yes, are very "inhuman" and bad.
>MC successfully brought the Entire Human Race to "court", Human court, and won, freeing all the Bee kind, returning all the honey back to the BEEs.
So the MC did a good thing, right? Fighting for his own race, end slavery, bee no longer have to work hard anymore and can have all the honey for themselves or can finally own their "means of production" and sell their honey??? FUCK NO
>The ecosystem of the entire world starts Dying because Bee was not just the one specie that was important for not just producing honey and won against the evil capitalist humans, but the only specie that could pollinate all plants and keep the whole world alive and running.
>"Oh no guy, my one good deed that helped Freed my entire race, society and equality with the Humans was LE BAD all along."
>>Solution: Finding the last truck of flowers and pollinate the entire world, go back to "keeping the world alive", and also open a law firm to fight for all oppressed animal kind.
Likely lesson of the movie: Yes, slavery is Le Bad, but maybe too much freedom and no labor is ""equally"" Le bad too, and there should be a balance between pro-work and pro-worker to keep the world's economy running.
My view of the movie, young and now: Even if the MC did a good thing and free his entire race, he almost destroyed the entire fucking world in doing so. All his frustration about how bee are oppressed and abused? All down the fucking toilet in the span of 5 mins from the environment falling apart cause Bee is the most important specie of the entire world and his human waifu he stole is mad at him now. LET'S GO BACK TO SLAVERY.
Is slavery bad or not? WTF

>>150878908
You're going to be a worker drone and you will like it, mind-slave.

>>150878850
No, by my logic you could only delude yourself into thinking its sustainable until the negative effects become apparent.

>>150878860
And thats nice but we would have that under democratic socialism as well in addition to workplace democracy, the antidote to offshoring and an end to incentivizes for enshittification. Capitalism took away the right of repair. Nobody got to vote on that. Democratic socialism would eliminate the perverse incentive to make wasteful products for money's sake.

>>150878892
And it was already noted that distinction is flawed because it hinges on a fallacious theory he invented via Labor Theory of Value. LTV is not only wrong, it's backwards. Not needing to "sell labor" is not even a thing, the prime movers of industry are not the workers themselves despite making a huge portion of it via the workforce, it's the industrialists. The amount of "work" you put in does not correlate a value and it never has. Marx congratulating people is a non-sequitur.

>>150878896
There's nothing shadowy about capitalists and Marx knew that, he was very clear that they dont even care to hide themselves because they are the de facto rulers of society. Everyone knows who Peter Thiel is, it isn't secret knowledge. And there's no ritual inducting this class of would be elites, their means to entry is in their name: capitalist. Owner of capital. One who does not work but lives off the work of others they employ.

Honestly dude Marx isn't that inaccessible, you could have just read *a* book.

Destroying the environment is the entire point of capitalism.

>>150878919
When you say "capitalism" took away right to repair, what exactly do you even mean? Do you mean the influence of businesses?

>>150877073
“late stage capitalism” is tankie cope

>>150878937
I have read Marx and I'd argue that he is neither an economist nor any metric any person that warrants dictating how industries work. You are equating everything bad in a society to "capitalism" like he did. It's nonsensical in an unscientific way because capitalism is not a person, it's not even a real thing, he made it the fuck up to explain bad business practices.

>>150878932
No, you're wrong again. Marx was a political journalist and a famous one, support for the Union was not assumed. Many wanted to support the slavers in fact. Marx coming out in support of Lincoln as a champion of liberty against slavery shows moral clarity and strategic prioritization. It was a great call.

Marx was 100% correct about profit coming from the efforts of working people. The capitalist class does not contribute in a proportional manner to their takehome pay. Many make several hundred or thousand times more than what their average employee makes; despite never even clocking in to a real job once. To whatever extent they do contribute, which is rare, they function essentially as corporate managers. They can be paid a managers fee.

Democratic socialism is fair because your co workers talk about the company's budget and who gets how much of it in pay. If the capitalist is really that important, there's no risk his employees wouldn't vote away his exorbitant profiteering privileges. But everybody knows that they dont contribute 1/100 let alone 1000x more than their employees do.

>>150878577
>There is no capitalism without the state
There definitely is capitalism without the state. Capitalism is a system of voluntary exchange without coercion or state privilege. What you're doing is conflating crony capitalism with laissez-faire capitalism. The state is not a neutral enforcer but a coercive institution that distorts markets by privileging certain actors.
>capital attracts more capital
In a truly free market, monopolies are economically unsustainable due to entrepreneurial innovation, consumer preference shifts, and competition. The only way to sustain a monopoly is through coercive exclusion, which requires state power.
>only through state intervention can monopolies be broken up
The state itself is a monopoly of force, it uses its power to pick winners and losers, distort capital allocation, and socialize losses. Asking the state to break up monopolies is like asking an arsonist to fight fires.
>infinite growth mindset
Growth is a byproduct of voluntary saving, investment, and consumer satisfaction. Corporations grow only insofar as they serve consumers better than rivals. There is no "imperative" to grow, only the imperative to avoid losses. The real driver of artificial, unsustainable growth is state-induced credit expansion (via central banking), not private enterprise.
>democratic socialism
Worker-owned firms still operate within a framework of scarcity and competition. There is no magical altruism in worker cooperatives, they still seek profit, market share, and survival. Worker co-ops are just as likely to lobby for protectionist policies, subsidies, or barriers to entry as corporations. The structure of ownership does not eliminate the incentive to use state power for advantage. Only in a pure private property order, where all resources are owned and disputes resolved through voluntary arbitration, can genuine competition flourish.

>>150879009
capitalism != market

>>150878999
Marx is bad because I don't like him. *You* invented QP logic and existentialism and all the other pseud fag shit you need to bleat out like this instead of just being able to say "I'm better than you, fuck you, die" because *you're* the savage. *You're* the one getting superseded. *You're* the outmode. You have no talent, no intellect, no worth, and the guy you're yacking about died 100 years ago because he's retarded like you.

>>150878999
>using slavery out of nowhere
This is about economies of scale, appeals to morality is out of the scope. Whether one supports slavery or not, historically, has no bearing in this argument as historically, the Atlantic Slave Trade as you keep citing as a plus for Marx's insane theory failed to mention that it was a holdover of landed European gentry that hinged on a cash crop. It's "capitalism" because they used slave labor?

>>150876678 (OP)
>the virgin How bad Can I Be
>the chad Biggering
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpgUQYARIsw

>>150879039
That's technically how a socialist argues. There are degrees of boogeymanism and quasi-true agitprop so most of it devolved into appeals of morality based on a skewed view of every injustice in the world.

>>150878947
I think you ought to just Google it desu, its a huge topic. Farm equipment and smartphones are the worst offenders. There's downstream effects too. Some farm equipment have a subscription model now, I know for a fact there's a sprinkler system that requires regular payments or it simply shuts down. Printers are also transitioning to this model. In both cases you aren't allowed to fix the deliberate flaw, you have to pay. So in addition to not being able to fix natural wear and tear without violating the terms and conditions, you also are obliged to not fix an intentional defect that pumps you for money.

>>150878981
I dont think you have, I'm not sure you've even read me. Neither of us attribute everything bad to capitalism. Im not even a Marxist frankly, like I said he got a lot wrong. He just also made some frankly fantastic calls, like the dominance and failures of industrial capitalism. Capitalism is a very real system, well documented and defended by name by its elites: the capitalist oligarchs.

>>150879009
>There definitely is capitalism without the state.
No, there isn't. In history there aren't any examples of this. The closest you have are informal markets with profiteers in disaster areas that used to have a state backed capitalism. Capitalism without a state would just become feudalism.

>coercive exclusion, which requires state power.
No, it doesn't but that doesn't matter anyway. Capitalism always has a state. Regardless, money is coercive.

>Worker-owned firms still operate within a framework of scarcity and competition
Yes, I could have told you that. This isn't utopia, its just preferable in its sustainability and efficiency. Capitalism's private ownership introduces perverse incentives that poison society and pervert our economic aims away from sustainable production to short term profits. Working people in their communities have a reason to care about them. Capitalists dont. And when a capitalist runs a business into the ground they aren't ruined at all, 9 times out of 10 they simply move onto a new business. Meanwhile the workers who had no say in their dissolution are destitute. Insanely wasteful and cruel way to organize production.

>>150879104
>dominance and failures of capitalism
Which is something he didn't do, Adam Smith did that, Marx's biggest contribution was coining the term "capitalism". Please read Wealth of Nations before reading anything Marx wrote because that is the one book he cites his works in. I'm going as far as to say even the class lens Marx views was Adam Smith's rejection of classical economies and mercantile practices. Adam Smith pushed forth the "idea" of labor theory of value based on that but Marx just argued in behalf of it as a truism and altered most of his class definitions and pushed forth to agitate workers into a frenzied uprising.

>>150879039
You're just weaker than I am. You talk like a toddler about things you dont understand with authority you dont have. Weak men like admire capitalists because capitalism allows weak men to live off the labor of good men. Good men dont need billions of dollars to live good lives, they just do it. Meanwhile Elon needs billions of our dollars just to be a drug addict and deadbeat dad.

>>150879059
We were discussing capitalism and Marxism, why would we not discuss slavery which is a key aspect to both? Capitalism is private ownership of capital. We usually see it with wage labor foisted on the working class, the productive class. Slavery is just when parts of the working class get an even worse deal from the capitalists. Its why Marx and so many socialists oppossed the Confederates. Radical Republicans were very socialist, Auguste Willech considered Marx to be too right wing in fact and he was a military officer.

>>150879099
Its not how I argue but I can see how it would be comforting to ignore what I said in favor of that. Thats because you cant give me good responses to these basic facts of democratic socialism:

>Workers should vote in their workplace like citizens vote for their government
>Workers should own their workplace like citizens own their government
>Capitalists are incentivized to make short term profits by sacrificing working class wealth
>We dont need billionaires
>Its preferable to have a say in what your company does than to have no say
>Capitalism's eternal growth model is unsustainable
>Democratic socialism's cooperation model is sustainable

>>150879182
I can't believe a guy who can't use apostrophes is lecturing me about intelligence! It's funny you're using the word authority, because you absolutely could not be an author, and that's a huge part of my point.

>>150879179
I've read Smith lol but he didnt account for things like the declining rate of profit or the exploitative nature of private ownership being social poison. He made good calls! But compared to Marx and Engels, he didnt make enough of them. Really Smith is in the tradition of liberal failures that Marx and Engels expanded upon and critiqued; pointing out that while their systems were created, the goods they had promised were not delivered.

>>150879199
We're speaking informally on a chatboard you little crybaby. I wouldn't mind your syntax if it allowed you to actually debate me instead of throwing a tantrum.

>>150879205
>Adam Smith didn't predict private capital ballooining
>but instead of leveraging that, the workers should wrest complete control of the industries
>when the prime incentive of workers is to not work, it's to live their private lives
Hence Bastiat is the better purveyor of Adam Smith's ideas than anything Marx wrote

>>150876678 (OP)
>yes i love tearing down the forest for "affordable" houses and bottling water so only i can have it!

>>150879220
Sure, maybe because Marx wasn't "purveying" Smith's ideas. He was self consciously formulating a rebuttal and follow up to the ideas of Smith's ideological peers writ large. These are the sorts of dead ends you twist yourself into when you talk about things you dont know about.

>>150878048
ahh yes, insurance rates are higher than ever
we keep on encroaching on the wildlife because housing keeps getting more expensive
we just need another lane for all the traffic
the water table is getting more and more fucked because how much food and bottled water just goes into plastic bags and then into landfills trapping the water in a sea of pollution for centuries
its all so sustainable! look how sustainable it is!

>>150878750
why doesn't everyone just stop and admit everything is just fine!

>>150879246
Everything Marx wrote is hinged on Adam Smith's ideas, that's not something I don't know about, that's something that's obviously read when you read their works. My counterpoint to socialists is to literally just read The Law by Bastiat (you don't even have to read Locke or Hazlitt to properly parse it), it better explains market reality than the moral tantrums of socialists.

>>150879279
Ultimately, I'm not fine, because me just trying to live my life and do what I want has led to people like this trying to put me on a stake over and over again for 25 years.

>>150879295
what?

>>150879279
Nothing is technically fine, but the avenues to pursue "fine enough" is the pragmatist option one should at least accommodate himself.

>>150879286
OK, thats wrong though. Who told you that? Marx was responding to a very large body of work that included Smith's writings, but wasn't limited to them and certainly wasn't propagating them as complete. So who told you otherwise and why? Thats just so odd. Did you confused Smith and Hegel maybe?

>>150879302
Uh, on a pike, rather. They've subjected me to extreme abuse and it's had a very real and devastating impact on me that I haven't fully recovered from yet.

>>150879320
what are you even talking about

>>150878918
Oh yeah I forgot to add 1 more thing, thanks for reminding me:
The Broke take:
>Bee movie is bad politically cause Seinfeld is a hack
>pink hair college spoiled manchildren are stupid for believing in having muh rights and muh equally, cause it's bad for the economy and will be called lazy for not contributing to society like everyone else
>no labor will cause the whole society to collapse (literally, all trees were rotting cause they need pollination too, somehow, I'm not even a botanist, but really?)
The Woke take
>Bee movie is bad apolitically cause Seinfeld is still a hack
>the story sucks and unsatisfying, ends where it begins, literally "friends we made along the way" but even lamer
>the most insufferable MC for a minority race, no jokes were funny, stole some guy's girl and somehow still aren't even dating that girl
>the resolution sucks cause unlike most stories where the MC learns to change for the better and outgrow their childish desire for the benefits of his group and society, Seinfeld the Bee condemned his entire Bee race back to the start of the movie and possibly killed millions of Humans from starvation cause no one told him bee stops working means all plant-life dies, killing thousands of crops and destroying the whole ecosystem, making Bees the de-facto "master race" of the entire animal kingdom????

>>150879304
No thats insane and self defeating behavior, its kind of pathetic and tantamount to laying down and dying.

The human spirit is to always find a way to make things better, to never rest or waiver in the face of adversity but to climb higher and see farther than our ancestors did.

"Fine enough" is dodo talk, we're humans, we dont do "fine enough". Our motto as a species should be "better than I found it"

If you aren't willing to burn the world so you can rule the ashes, you are weak.

>>150879351
bro you work in retail

>>150879318
I didn't say limited, I said it's his main influence since WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LABOR. He is influened by others in other facets but if we're talking about his treatise on labors and the unequal powers of the strata of any given industry.

The real crime of that movie is not adding this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUl_m5l5JHI

>>150879366
It is our destiny to destroy the world through endless, insatiable greed.

>>150879348
That's not fucking laying down and dying, please re-read what the fuck I wrote. What part of that is giving up? You argued that "everything is fine", my argument is "nothing is actually fine" so the best way to live through life is to pursue CONTENTMENT via "fine enough". "Everything is fine" isn't even a goal, it's a statistical improbability but the road to pursue that infinity is always paved through the pursuit "fine enough" practice.

>>150879404
It is also our destiny to be able to bounce back from any destruction that is inflicted. Humans, metaphysically, are immortal as they are part of nature.

>>150876702
Maybe not "capitalism good" but rather "hard work good," Princess and the Frog is pro-entrepreneurship and never actually condemns the rich for being rich.

>>150879451
Humanity craves the end. We must sacrifice our entire world on the altar of pointless evil.

>>150879471
That movie's been clipped by idpol regardless for turning the black prince and princess into frogs.

>>150879476
Humanity craves living more than it does dying. Evil, in of itself, is not pointless it is in fact very self-serving, hence people are enticed to do it.

>>150879496
Then why are there a million stories about the world ending?

>>150879588
I don't know.

>>150879628
I told you why: because it is humanity's greatest desire. Deep down, every living being shares the same inherent desire: to stand alone on a mountain of corpses at the end of all things and say "I win."

>>150876678 (OP)
>please don't destroy the entire planet for personal gain
>woah, cool it with the anti-billionaireism

>>150879773
LET IT DIE
LET IT DIE
LET IT SHRIVEL UP AND DIE
- The Mayor

>>150879691
That is more of an expression to excel rather than to die.

>>150878244
I don't see your point

>>150879875
And that's the goal of evolution: to produce something strong enough to kill everything else.

>>150879691
I mean, I know that this quote originated from a place of sarcasm, and I acknowledge that capitalism is a fuck that demands the strong worship the weak, but the line speaks to my heart. This is what I want. And it is what I believe everyone else wants as well.

>>150879160
>In history there aren't any examples of this
The Icelandic Commonwealth from 930-1262 was a stateless society with no executive government. It operated through a decentralized legal system based on voluntary chieftainships that could be bought and sold as private property.
>Capitalism without a state would just become feudalism
Not only are you now conflating coercive hierarchy with voluntary association, but you fundamentally misunderstand feudalism. Feudalism emerged within a statist or proto-statist framework, where land titles derived from conquest or royal decree. Feudalism is more like an example of pre-capitalist statism.
>Capitalism always has a state
Historically, yes, capitalism has coexisted with states, but it doesn't mean it requires them. The same could be said of science, art, or religion. Entanglement doesn't prove ontological dependence.
>Money is coercive
If I offer you $20 for your book, you are free to say no. Your preference to keep the book or accept the money is yours alone. Coercion involves threats of violence, capitalism operates through mutual benefit.
>Capitalists dont
Yes they do, because unsustainable businesses fail. The idea that they "just move on" unscathed is fostered by state intervention: limited liability, bailouts, subsidies, and central bank liquidity. The idea that only working people in their communities have a reason to care is a romantic collectivist fallacy. Many capitalists, like local shop owners or family businesses, are deeply embedded in their communities. State-managed enterprises are notorious for what you're describing precisely because they lack profit signals and ownership stakes.
All the waste and cruelty you talk about comes from the absence of clear property rights, which the state constantly undermines through eminent domain, inflation, and regulation.

>>150878222
In Hercules it's explicit that no amount of glory was ever going to get him among the actual stars, and he wasn't a true hero until he gave something up.

>unironic ancap in the thread
the equivalent of talking about traditional values in media and summoning an actual tranny groomer to lecture you on why they're bad

>>150879949
Everyone wants to be the one to kill the world.

>>150876742
The bad ending of Animal Farm is the revolution (Communism) becoming just as bad, indistinguishable even, from the farmers (Capitalism).

>>150876678 (OP)
A COMPANY IS AN ANIMAL
TRYING TO SURVIVE

>>150876678 (OP)
I mean, yes. Look at the state of the world now? Microplastics in the balls causes autism and infertility in men. Datacenters specifically made to gather information in the people of the world that spies on them are destroying the climate with the energy consumption. Automation is removing people from the workforce faster than the ability to replace those missing job positions to keep people from being unemployed.

This isn't a meme. They were right. You just hate hearing the truth because you're a faggot whop don't like being talked down to when corrected.

So kill yourself now.

>>150876742
The animated film was financed by the CIA

>>150876742
...
No you fucking imbecile.

Animal farm directly states that both are bad and just quasi-religious justifications for slavery.

>>150876742
The point of animal farm is no governing body is immune from corruption nor greed. Eventually the governments of the world will us AI to make all the hard choice to remove the burden of responsivity from themselves so they are not see as the target of violent uprisings. We thought we would never use drone technology to remove the human element from war. Look were we are today?

>>150883757
Its actually the vaccines and circumcision causing autism.
The vaxxx has also sterilized nearly every man a d woman who took it.

>>150883820
>Its actually the vaccines and circumcision causing autism.
you're a dimwit living in maga retard bubbles. you're on 4chan so you belong here

>>150883836
I read the reports and listened to the parents.
While you wirship people who are hiring outed as frauds who sell their name for cash snd clout. And eugenicist lunatics who want us all DEAD.

Wake the fuck up.

>>150876839
>workers lose their jobs anyway because the Onceler realizes he can just import Thing 1, Thing 2 and all the way to Thing 7 million to do the same work for less money

>>150878180
I want to have sex with his jewish mom

>>150878592
>The Sneetches
Coulda sworn we already have a Racism: The Animated Series.

>>150884039
Not racism. Its litterally "israel was right" the series.

Its not for anyone anymore. Its base propaganda by out of touch west coast types who dont have the talent or self awareness to make media for the masses.

>>150884084
>Not racism. Its litterally "israel was right" the series.
No, that would be Dr. Suess' Butter Battle Book. Israel is a Christian proxy state for western superpowers during the cold war and continues to this day. Although the west is to blame for the second world war for their inability take in jewish refugees for other racist reasons and not just economical ones.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeoggnNIg64

>>150876678 (OP)
>capitalism is le bad
yes, thank you op for sharing that with us
it is true and now we can all go to bed and forget about your shitpost about a 1/10 movie
very cool

i heckin love big corporations

>>150876678 (OP)
hammer Deatb NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>150884581
I was actually surprised it lasted this long, most of my threads get to page 10 in under 4 minutes. Huh.
I'm improoooving.

>>150876678 (OP)
why do you fags keep pretending that indians aren't the ones making these posts?

>>150886441
No saar please understand that I am an American, yes? Do not redeem the thread, sir.

>>150877073
Is the "late stage capitalism" in the room with us right now?

>>150879973
Thats nice for Iceland, its not capitalism. And even if we extended the definition of capitalism to include Iceland pre 1500s (fucking L O L but its fine) that'd still fall under the purview of either many state entities as headmen or a continuing market after state collapse. All of which would be very, very "generous" to say.

>feudalism
Was mentioned because reducing the state to many privatized entities in confederation with each other that others are obliged to be exploited would be a nightmare synonymous with what we call feudalism. Overprivileged weak men lording over good men denied their own support networks.

>>150879973
>>150887492
>capitalism and states
Capitalism has only existed with state backing. Without it, there is no means to defend oligarchic property relations and people will simply take or manufacture what they need. If there's no state nothing stops people from abandoning your "private" workplaces in favor of whatever they prefer. Without the state there's no proper currency to finance and organize the whole affair.
Art, science, philosophy, these are human things that predate the state by thousands of years. We never even conceived of state power by the time we were already painting beautifully shaded pieces of art on cave walls, domesticating animals and plants to better enable our survival and forming unique cultures and languages. That requires no state, its human nature.

>money as coercion
Forget your book offer, look up what private equity firms do and get away with. Its not even uncommon for them to purchase companies with money they take out on loan, then place the burden of that loan ON THE PURCHASED COMPANY while stripping it for parts. Shameful, and while its a major part of our so called economy under capitalism, its just one of many coercive situations brought about by capitalism.

>Yes they do, because unsustainable businesses fail
No, they get bailed out lol. You're living in lalaland friend. The capitalists are almost always just fine, the Theranos scammer is doing just fine thank you for asking. Once you have enough money its almost impossible to fuck it up. Many unsustainable businesses exist just fine thanks to government subsidy.

In fact every corporation that does not pay a living wage is unsustainable without government intervention to pick up the slack. The majority if not outright entirety of the capitalist model is unsustainable and has been grinding itself into lower rates of profits ballooned temporarily by ever shrinking & bursting bubbles.

>>150879691
No, if everyone was that weak we'd be
extinct.

>>150878372
True. You need a system where neither the state or capital is too powerful. It's only in the fervent struggle between the two that ordinary people can have some modicum of leverage.

>>150887615
That'd be democratic socialism, workers owning their workplace in a market economy and democratic state.

>>150878499
>Socialism
>democratic
Socialism by design cannot be democratic.

>>150887526
>Capitalism has only existed with state backing
You are too focused on the idea that capitalism NEEDS the state that you're unable to imagine how capitalism can function without it, even with me explaining it to you.
>people will simply take or manufacture what they need
Taking someone else's justly acquired property is aggression, you do not need a state to determine if what you own is actually yours. Communities would defend property through private security, mutual defense pacts, and reputation-based arbitration.
>nothing stops people from abandoning your "private" workplaces
Nothing stops them from continuing work either.
>Without the state there's no proper currency
Money emerges spontaneously from barter. Gold, silver, salt, cattle, hell even bitcoin have all functioned as money without state creation. The state monopolizes and debases money (via central banking), causing inflation, boom-bust cycles, and wealth extraction.
>human nature
Yes, these are products of voluntary human cooperation, like capitalism. You do not need the state to apply value to something, that is something innate in humans.
>private equity firms
Again, it's not capitalism but state-enabled financial predation. What you just described is state-created loopholes. In a free market, your reputation matters a whole lot more since you can't fall back on the state to bail you out. People will see you're untrustworthy and go to someone better.
>bailed out
You've just described socialism for the rich. Bailouts, subsidies, and regulatory capture are socialist mechanisms, they involve forced redistribution from taxpayers to politically connected firms.
>Theranos
The state's justice system is slow, politicized, and lenient to elites. In a stateless order, fraud would be treated as theft, punishable by restitution, ostracism, or private enforcement. No plea deals, parole, or PR teams.

>>150888921
>living wage
Yes, the STATE subsidizes capitalist exploitation by socializing the costs of poverty (food stamps, medicaid, housing vouchers). Without such a state, wages would reflect marginal productivity, and charity would be voluntary and community-based.
>bubbles
Those are caused by monetary intervention, specifically central bank manipulation of interest rates. Artificially low rates misallocate capital into unsustainable projects. This is not capitalism failing, but state-managed pseudo-capitalism imploding. The solution isn't more regulation, it's abolishing the state's monopoly on law, money, and coercion.

>>150888841
socialism ≠ dictatorship

Just like how capitalism ≠ corporativism or unsustainable consumerism.

>>150888951
But Socialism IS a Dictatorship of a party over the people. Socialism cannot survive in a democracy because the people will oust a very unpopular and FLAWED idea, which is Socialism.

>>150888841
> Socialism by design cannot be democratic.
Why?

>>150889422
You don't know what words mean

Capitalism is bad though
>hurr durr you must be a Marxist then
No, it is equally retarded. Both philosophies boil down to worshipping economic theory instead of actual reality. The industrial revolution made people slaves to economic theories for some reason instead of just changing policy based on the needs of the time. Well, apart from Fascists who just do whatever works, but that is because it is based around more classical methods of supporting the abstract concept of a nation instead of "the method on how the economy is run MUST be first".

Putting economic theory before reality is such a backwards way of thinking and we have never really recovered from this issue starting to dominate discourse and economic planning after the industrial revolution even though some people tried really hard to not fall into this trap. Fucking Hitler was more reasonable regarding that shit that ultra dogmatic economic theorists of today with the incredible simple policies of
>be as self sufficient as possible
>don't put economic dogma above reality/keep a flexible society
>loosen or tighten restrictions based on actual need, not theory
Wow, so hard.

>>150876678 (OP)
tertiary you are shitting yourself i npure rage about a movie that was already old when you were born. Stop going to war for all the youtube bullshit you watch

>>150891036
I'm a proud american patriot who believes in ownership and capitalism.

>>150876702
HE'S GENEROUS
SO GENEROUS
HE'S GOT SLAVES
HE'S GOT SERVANTS AND FLUNKIES
PROUD TO WORK FOR HIM!

>>150891019
>we have never really recovered from this issue starting to dominate discourse and economic planning after the industrial revolution
Who's we? The Scandies seem to be doing alright. Actually the whole capitalism (corporate oligarchy!)/socialism (Bolshevism!) emphasis seems to mainly be a product of the Americas, it's obvious that say China doesn't actually give a fuck about communism.

>>150876678 (OP)
It's even funnier considering how much marketing and profiteering this film did
I wonder how many trees were chopped down for it?

>>150876702
Possibly The Real Ghostbusters since the original movie was as pro-free market as you can get.

>>150888841
Socialism can only be democratic imho, but democratic socialism certainly is at any rate. The whole idea is workers having a direct democracy and ownership of their workplace together prevent oligarchs from sabotaging our democratic state.

>>150888921
The reason you can only "imagine" capitalism without a state instead of finding it anywhere is because it couldn't exist. Its an act of fantasy. Capitalism has only ever existed under state coercion, some of the first markings of the capitalist model were enclosure acts that privatized once commonly held pastures.

>Socialism for the rich
Is a meaningless deflection desu, its capitalism pure and simple. Socialism would be if a business had to offer the right of first purchase to it's staff before being sold to anyone else, preferably with generously subsidized federal loans to finance the transfer. If we're bailing out a company, we should own that company. Democratic socialism is common sense applied to market economics. >>150891019
>Fucking Hitler was more reasonable regarding that shit that ultra dogmatic economic theorists of today with the incredible simple policies of
You've been watching too many memes. The term privatization was literally coined to describe hitlers policy of selling off public goods to corporate allies. Mussolini accurately described fascism as "corporatism", emphasizing the idea of running the state like a business. The economies of fascist countries are not self sufficient, they require constant extraction and war or else some link to civilized nations to trade with them. The fantasy of "self sufficiency" (as though our ancestors didn't love to trade for exciting foreign goods and show off their artisinal skills) is propaganda, it's something they day to justify privatizing everything and promoting corporate profits.

If you want sensible economics you want Vic Berger or Zohran Mamdani. Hitler wasn't fit to wipe my ass.

>>150891019
>Both philosophies boil down to worshipping economic theory instead of actual reality.
Does the Communist Manifesto really count as "economic theory"? I know invisible hand shit definitely doesn't. Theory implies like, an actual testable theory.

>>150893237
Socialism can be other than democratic, that's a dumb thing to say. They're separate concepts. Anarchists for example aren't democratic, neither is an unelected government that controls production. Capitalism, yes, relies on having an encompassing government framework and couldn't function without it, fairly obviously.

>>150893254
The Communist Manifesto was political propaganda, not economic theory. It was a supplement to liberal policy suggestions during the revolutions of 1848. Importantly, it predates Marx and Engel's work as economists and is an explicitly political polemic. Its not talking about economics, its making broad critiques of the du jour liberal policy because 1848 was a time where those policies were being renegotiated. What we call Marxism today (Engels is underappreciated) came later, with Marx and Engel's being inspired by industrial England. That was when they made their famous predictions about how capitalism would become a world system, the working class would be exploited and the rate of profit would decline as new markets dried up. Marx got a lot wrong, mostly about people foreign to him as a white antisemitic European guy in the 1800s. But he nailed those, the theories were solid.

>>150893380
Anarchists are democratic, I've never met a single one who wasn't. Without hierarchy there can only be democracy. A war of all against all only creates hierarchy. So anarchists value democratic organizing and its actually a huge part of how they organize mutual aid groups. Socialism refers to collective ownership of the means of production, thats workers owning and managing their workplaces. If the state owns it without any worker control or input, "thats just not cricket" I think is the expression. Remember, people will lie so its best to look to history. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea isn't exactly democratic just because they say they are, democracy means something. Something they aren't practicing. These aren't teams, they're policies.

>>150888921
>Taking someone else's justly acquired property is aggression, you do not need a state to determine if what you own is actually yours. Communities would defend property through private security, mutual defense pacts, and reputation-based arbitration.
This is not capitalism. Using mercenary forces, military alliances and honour to defend your holdings predates capitalism by some thousands of years. Barter and money are not capitalism.

>>150893448
>Anarchists are democratic, I've never met a single one who wasn't.
Then you have never met a single anarchist. Or else, you are distorting the word democracy in a similar way to how your opponents distort the word socialism. I believe you when you say so-called "anarchists" value democratic organizing, but as you say, democracy means something, as does anarchism, and at least one of them doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. In an environment rife with misrepresentation and deliberate distortion of left-wing views, don't you think it pays to be precise, and not define words by how you personally feel about them?

>>150893237
>Its an act of fantasy.
So is democratic socialism. In all the times it's tried, it never worked. But I don't need to fall back on history to tell you how it's an inherently flawed system.
>enclosure acts
The enclosure acts violated, rather than exemplified, capitalist ethics. Capitalism without the state requires that property be acquired via homesteading or voluntary transfer. The enclosures expropriated customary common rights through parliamentary fiat, this was state theft, not market process. This was a primitive accumulation via state violence, not "capitalism in action."
>Socialism
So you no longer want someone to own private property, turning it into a collective entitlement instead. Who decides the price? If set by the state, it's arbitrary. If workers lack capital, then there would be subsidized federal loans - forced redistribution from taxpayers to preferred buyers. If the business is failing, then workers may buy a sinking ship out of loyalty rather than rationality, misallocating scarce resources.
>If we're bailing out a company, we should own that company.
There it is, it's not that you hate corporations for exploiting the state, it's that you're not the one financially gaining from it. Bailouts should not exist at all, they are theft from taxpayers to politically connected firms. Without private ownership of capital, there are no market prices for means of production, so no way to know if resources are being used efficiently. State-owned enterprises inevitably waste, stagnate, or require endless subsidies.
>common sense
Your "common sense" ignores scarcity. Resources are limited, only private property and profit/loss provides a rational feedback mechanism to allocate them. Democratic socialism replaces this with voting, lobbying, or bureaucratic decree, which respond to political power, not consumer demand or technical efficiency.

>>150878372
The problem with communism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. Any commie is just a lazy sack of shit who isn't skilled enough to hold a job.

>>150894265
>So is democratic socialism. In all the times it's tried, it never worked.
Yeah it invariably produces hellholes. Just look at, uh, Denmark

>>150876678 (OP)
It's less of a capitalism is le bad and more of a DONT OVEREXPLOIT THE NATURAL RESOURCES YOU DUMB FUCK

>>150876881
He should help them to find better job!

>>150876678 (OP)
How bad could he possibly be?

>>150894843
Not bad really, I guess all he needed was to replant the trees. He can still make the thneeds as a product with seasonal scarcity.

>>150894265
>So is democratic socialism. In all the times it's tried, it never worked.
Norway, Sweeden, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland omg country that "never worked"

>>150894314
Any X is just a Y, that's why thinking is bad.

>>150894946
He drove off all the swoomee-swans and bar-ba-loots and killed all the humming-fish. You can't replant swoomee-swans and bar-ba-loots.

>>150894265
You've buried the lead. If you genuinely want to meaningfully argue with socialists you need to ditch most of your shit, which assumes a framework socialists don't share, and address your actual top-level disagreement first thus:
>Resources are limited, only private property and profit/loss provides a rational feedback mechanism to allocate them.
This isn't - I'm genuinely not sure if you're aware - either the prevailing historical opinion or conventional wisdom. If you believe it, and want to convince someone else of it, you'll want to marshal an actual positive argument for it.

>>150876678 (OP)
it's true though. capitalism is actual garbage. no literally, the ocean is full of it. ever heard of the great pacific garbage patch? microplastics in everyone blood?

capitalism is just economic cannibalism and junkyard shenanigans

Could a USA American explain to me what "capitalism" and "socialism" actually means to them? I'd be grateful.

>>150891628
>The Scandies seem to be doing alright
They aren't sovereign. They are American puppets at worst, vassals/client states at best. A sovereign nation also must be able to defend itself which most of Europe can't right now especially with internal problems brought by outside groups and fags inside wanting to test economic and social theories instead of sticking to what works.
>>150893254
>Does the Communist Manifesto really count as "economic theory"
Yes. Post scarcity is an unobserved phenomena and also no nation which is advanced enough for industrialization can survive without things like borders, money, religion, etc.

>>150876839
It acknowledges the Once-Ler's humanity while admitting he's in the wrong. How Bad Can I Be was trying to do the same thing.

>>150893237
>The term privatization was literally coined to describe hitlers policy of selling off public goods to corporate allies. Mussolini accurately described fascism as "corporatism", emphasizing the idea of running the state like a business
They sometimes did this, and sometimes nationalized businesses. You are falling into the trap that they were pursuing any particular economic theory, they took elements from Marxism and Capitalism.
>they require constant extraction and war or else some link to civilized nations to trade with them
Apart from the trade which most nations require on some level, incorrect. People like to ignore that every European Fascist state since the 20th century was surrounded by enemies who embargoed them at all times, if say America turned Fascist it would be a different scenario than somewhere with a trash starting position like 30's Germany which has enemies on all sides or Italy who also neighbors lots of enemies.
Pre industrialization Fascist like societies such as the Romans needed constant war and slaves but post industrialization not so much. It boils down to location and the fact that if you have too many people with a vested interest in seeing you fail nearby there is nothing you can really do.
If the British cooperated with Hitler instead of picking fights with him and refusing peace Europe wouldn't be in a situation where they have to rely on the US for so much, for example. Whether you agree with Hitler's policies or not, he was the last chance for an independent Europe in the last century. It is embarrassing that Churchill had to have so much help from other people to win considering the sheer difference in resources, and I am convinced with how that led to the decline of the empire 500 years from now he is going to be remembered as a poor diplomat and leader.
Fascism has it's problems but economics isn't really one of them - it just depends on what the leader wants to do at the time rather than following some theory.

>>150876678 (OP)
The bore-ax was right

>>150891250
That's not capitalism, that's feudalism/monarchy.

>>150899371
They weren't pursuing economic theory, they were pursuing naked self interest. Hitler defined himself as a champion of private property and an enemy of socialists. Mussolini similarly allied with capitalists to crush a rising left wing.

>People like to ignore that every European Fascist state since the 20th century was surrounded by enemies who embargoed them at all times,
No one is ignoring that, we're all just patently aware those were not sustainable economies nor were they even self contained ones. You're omitting the extraction I told you was necessary. Besides which fascism can only ever be a temporary infection, because it only seeks to reward power with power it inevitably exhausts itself of talent and morale. There's nothing sustainable about it, even without examining the catastrophic ecological failures of fascism.

>Whether you agree with Hitler's policies or not, he was the last chance for an independent Europe in the last century
No, he was actually one of the leading reasons why Europe became subordinate to America. Fascism was so weak and so aggressive in it's desperation that strong ties with the democratic USA (then experimenting with socialism) were requested to oust the fascist invaders and heal the land from the damage they inflicted. Europe's current re-emerging "independence" (all nations need trade to flourish, we're a global species, dont deny human nature and youll live longer) is owed to trade with Asia and the legacy of social democrats; its jeopardized by the fascist threat who once again seek to pillage what good men have made.

Among all of fascism's endless weaknesses and failures, its inability to create a pro-social economy is its most obvious. The so called pursuit of economic independence is only ever intended to give oligarchs more taxpayer money and control over human beings. Fascism is to political corruption what organized crime is to extortion. They only help themselves.

>>150876678 (OP)
The only complaints people have for 'capitalism' are actually of Corporatism and IP Law which they like to conflate with free market capitalism because they're retarded, and act like a communist government wouldn't just turn the state into its own megacorporation now with complete monopolistic control over all land rights and business, also socialism can only last as long as people work to fund it's own welfare, which the people who support it clearly don't so yeah.

>>150903682
If capitalism inevitably results in those affairs, then what is the distinction between them in practice? Seems natural to me people would begin by outlining guardrails before moving onto a sleeker, more robust economic system. A market economy is a fine thing but its not wedded to private ownership of everything productive. Workers can own their work and still trade their production in a free market; freer markets even, since worker owned enterprises would be more self regulating you wouldn't need to invest as much in government oversight.

>>150903828
>If capitalism inevitably results in those affairs
Oh it's not inevitable in fact I'm for the complete abolishment of all forms of IP law. Immaterial things ideas or processes that can be replicated by anyone should not have an ownership protection to prevent people from doing such. Ownership should only to apply to things such as your house, car, and material things which you worked for to get and people can't just replicate by picking up a pencil (Because if they could replicate it why do you need to own all instances of it), only in those matter am I really capitalistic I guess.

>>150903671
>enemy of socialists
Marxists
If you can't separate the two then can't help you and no point wasting either of our time
>champion of private property
Is a far cry from just letting people do what they want. Ideally the Nazi/Fascist system is to leave you alone unless you are doing something to hurt the people, otherwise just try to keep the nation as cohesive as possible.
You can argue about corruption but at it's essence, this is what it is.

>>150903955
>its not inevitable
And yet we have no instances of capitalism that didn't develop it. Im open to being wrong. But I'd need to see it. Anything could look good on paper, *capitalism* looks good on paper. I need proof.

>>150903968
Not Marxists no, socialists. Also liberals, trade unionists, ethnic and religious minorities, the disabled and many veterans. He was a true lowlife and a disgusting embarrassment to every proud German, a stain on a noble culture.

>Is a far cry from just letting people do what they want.
Fascism isn't like anarchism or democratic socialism, its not even like libertarianism; fascism is 100% authoritarianism. Its entire reason to exist is to make demands of good people on behalf of the greedy. Fascism was concocted and enacted as a scam to allow selfish men to rise to power without merit and siphon off precious resources to furnish their fantasies. The ideal state for a fascist is one where criminality is omnipresent, where anyone and everyone could be subjected to the unimpeachable iron fist of the government. Thats what they said they wanted, what they did and what they're up to even today. Its why they despise democratic socialism so much and often try to obscure it as an option.

I wish we could've seen where Mussolini's original "less workhours, minimum wage, progressive tax, and woman's suffrage!" fascism would've led to if they had fought the Nazis and gotten rewarded by the allies for it

>>150904398
The same thing, why would he ever not be Hitler's ally? I wonder what my ice cream cone would be like in the sun if it didn't melt. Why the fuck wouldn't it melt? Of course Mussolini lied to the public about delivering socialist aims while he was crushing trade unionists. Its in their makeup, its what fascists do. Hell we were too kind to the fascists after WW2 and too hard on the socialists who fought them tooth and nail. It seems like everyone's noticing that now.

>>150904169
>And yet we have no instances of capitalism that didn't develop it
Comiket and dojins at large in Japan is basically a market of people being able to create whatever shit they want and sell at a personal profit with basically no restrictions, and it flourish I tell you, flourishes. It's only a shame we can have more of these worldwide.

>>150904497
Stalin literally starved millions more of his own people, than Hitler ever killed, because he believed a retarded scientist who said he could grow food in snow with no proof and then jailed his opposition and actually smart scientist who is responsible for us even having certain tropical foods in the first place and letting him rot in a gulag.

>>150904497
Hitler promised him the land the allies promised Italy for joining WWI. Depending on allied powers Yugo could've been recarved in Italy's favor for WWII support. State-run unions also appeared in the USSR, since ideologically the state is supposed to be run by the labor themselves.

>>150904524
Thats a slice of an industry not an economy though.

>>150904581
Sure yeah whatever, kind of a non sequitur. But yes, nazi Germany was so aggressively parasitic and invasive while being so hollowed out and weakened from within by fascists that they were somehow less stable than the USSR. And they were """outcompeted""" in the race to murder by virtue of incompetence and unsustainable economic policies. Frankly most of what was suggested as a myth about fascism ITT is more true of a soviet influenced communism. If Russia had linked up with a German communist revolution it would've been curtains for US dominance in Eurasia. I dont know why you brought up the USSR desu.

>>150904717
There wouldn't have been a WW2 if Hitler, Mussolini and Imperial Japan hadn't had been natural allies. Your hypothetical doesn't make sense. WW2 was instigated by the fascist threat. If they didnt exist, you wouldn't have had WW2.

>>150898054
Capitalism is when someone does something I like.
Socialism is when someone does something I don't like.
t. burger pro

>>150898054
Capitalism is when your workplace is owned and managed by shareholders for the shareholders. It may include some social safety features, corporation friendly regulation and possibly public healthcare that will be forever besieged from the right. Because private ownership of your workplace means oligarchs stealing your money legally, there isn't any check on the monopolization of money. There is a market. Capitalism fades into oligarchy.

Socialism (democratic socialism in the USA) is when you own and manage your own workplace for your own profit. It also features a robust social safety net, food and environmental regulation, new infrastructure and public healthcare. This is paid for by reclaiming both our future productivity as workers and our previously stolen productivity in billionaire pockets. There is a market. Democratic socialism protects democracy.

>>150906016
>Democratic socialism protects democracy
lol

>>150906046
Billionaires are a benefit to democracy how?

>>150876678 (OP)
Its funny yo think that this made viv horny and helped spawn hazbin hotel

>>150876702
>Has there ever been an animated film where the moral was capitalism good?

Most western cartoons. They all operate on capatalism as a given and often paint law enforcement that protects capital as good.

If a show deviates from this, the problems are caused by a handful of bad actors and problems inherent in the system as a whole isnt taken seriously

>>150888951
>>150890969
>>150893237
Socialism requires that all parties pull their resources together and openly share it amongst the community removing the concept of private ownership. This state can literally not exist without an authority forcing compliance among all parties involved. If a farmer chooses to refuse providing his service, food, or land to the cause he is actively harming the community and must be forced to comply making the system inherently authoritarian in nature. With the necessity of a state and armed force to force compliance among the people this also centralizes power, goods, and services to a point where democracy cannot possibly function due to corruption and government oversight. Socialism cannot exist peacefully outside of family groupings that have a personal vested interest to comply. Barter and capitalism have and will continue to exist outside of a state, socialism cannot.

>>150906016
Socialism still results in oligarchy, dipshit, just said oligarchs can legally imprison and kill you for stepping out of like.

>>150876745
More like
>Reasonable take that people could discuss
>such as consumer wants and needs requiring an industry to grow to meet them
>and dozens to hundreds of various industries wull be created in response that support or could only exist because of the original industry
>but it can grow out of proportion if checks and balances arent put in place
Movie
>durr capitalisn bad
>company evil and business men stupid
Biggering wasnt even an anti-capitalism song to start.
It could be quite important for people to see how growth is required for sustainability
But no
How bad can i be instead
Ceo is dumb boy

>>150904169
>fascism is 100% authoritarianism
kek, yep as Mussolini said

>>150905127
I genuinely think that even if Italy went neutral Hitler still would've maneuvered with the USSR to split Poland and trigger WW2. No WW2 because there were "natural allies" doesn't make sense because it happened anyways even when Spain, another fascist country and natural ally to those three, stayed neutral.

>>150903682
>conflate with free market capitalism
tell us about your snowflake capitalism that does not in fact result in overall monopoly every single fucking time

>>150906583
>Barter and capitalism have and will continue to exist outside of a state,
When and where did you imagine this happening?

>>150906633
How would democratic socialism as I outlined promote a more oligarchic environment than capitalism?

>>150906782
I dont see 1 absentee as a deal breaker quite frankly. And I dont see Franco as a natural ally in the same way. Too religious. Furthermore Francoist Spain did assist Nazi Germany materially. And it was coming off the heels of a civil war. It involved itself as much as it could risk to lose while having little to gain. So your point isn't taken.

>>150906762
Its not about words, its about deeds. Fascists will lie, but we have the historical record. They were brutal proponents of an anti-democratic, anti-liberty police state hellbent on subjugating the vital working class to the decadent elite.

>>150899085
Denmark is absolutely a sovereign nation. It is absolutely not a vassal state. Please use the English language if you're going to post on an English-speaking board.

Denmark is also not an American "puppet", it's an ally, a concept you may not understand. The EU is ABLE to defend itself, it's a very wealthy economic bloc and can put up the resources, but up until now has had a mutually beneficial arrangement with the USA whereby it didn't really have to do much on that front.

Denmark's economic and social theories very clearly "work", it's one of the wealthiest countries in Europe and reputedly the happiest in the world. I'm not sure literally anything you've said has any relationship to the truth and I'm not sure you care.

>>150899371
>People like to ignore that every European Fascist state since the 20th century was surrounded by enemies who embargoed them at all times
>If the British cooperated with Hitler instead of picking fights with him and refusing peace
>Fascism has it's problems but economics isn't really one of them
You are really hooked on that fascist kool-aid
This is all so wrong I don't want to touch it. It'd be like trying to argue someone out of a religion. "Actually an angel rolled back the stone from Hitler's grave and he solved war and economics forever and everyone clapped"

>>150906633
Outside of the USA socialism is not considered a dirty word, and is not even vaguely associated with autocracy. It's considered a graduated thing, from centre-left outward. So clearly Americans have a different definition of the word. You're hostile to the concept: I'd like to hear what you think the word means.

>>150906960
>Denmark is absolutely a sovereign nation
It's a client state. Under US protection. All of western Europe is. The east is where it gets shaky.
>The EU is ABLE to defend itself
Some nations in it can, most can't. The EU isn't one nation after all.
>>150906985
When did I ever say I was Fascist? All Fascism is when you separate it from modern pearl clutchers saying it is the ultimate evil is modern day Roman principate/dictatorship. Caesar was a Fascist. If you didn't like him you would like no dictator, and fair enough, but it isn't some eldritch evil. It is something we can understand and has reasons why people follow it and why it comes into being.
>>150906889
>They were brutal
Historically speaking, kind of, but still on the lower/middle end of brutality at worst. People just pearl clutch about it because it was relatively recent. Fascists have been less brutal than say Maoists or the shit Pol Pot got up to. Or historically the Mongols or Jews. Or Romans. People like you have just gotten so hopped up on modern morality you have forgotten people used to be crucified to death or thrown in a sack into the sea. The fact they were using firing squads or just imprisonment a lot of the time means that, in the running, they are more humane that a vast stretch of other societies
>proponents of an anti-democratic
Yes. But there is nothing special about democracy as a system. Just like Fascism.
>anti-liberty
No, but liberty is in the eye of the beholder I suppose.
>police state
Federally yes, locally no. As opposed to now where both are pretty militarized in the US at least.
>subjugating the vital working class to the decadent elite
Not really. Though some like Goring fit your description. The actual policy in a Fascist state is to be a bridge between workers and the business class, and replace business people who don't want to play along. Augustus did the same shit with the proscriptions too. Basic shit of reward allies, punish enemies which all societies do.

>>150907024
>So clearly Americans have a different definition of the word
Most times when people complain about Socialism they mean to complain about Marxism, which is a wide spectrum. Nothing wrong with Socialism (being pro society) in reasonable amounts, but Marxist Socialism is what most people are referring to when they say that word and people have a problem with some of the things it proposes, yes. Because it's based on Marxist thought which people see, rightfully, as flawed, since it denigrates things like religion, classes/heirarchy, borders, money, etc as irredeemable sins for an ideal society. And some people like having their own nation and religion.

>>150894265
>only private property and profit/loss provides a rational feedback mechanism to allocate [resources]
The Lorax is literally about how this doesn't work.

>>150907068
"Client state" is more arguable. They aren't actually dependent on the USA, they could get along without it, but yes, they currently have agreements which it would be a bitch and a half to do without and would need restructuring to get away from.

Fascism BTW isn't just dictatorship but a particularly incompetent form of it. Even if you like dictatorships fascism is shit. Its root problem is it doesn't recognise or deal with reality very well.

>>150907173
>they could get along without it
I would bet all of my money that they couldn't defend themselves without US support.
>Fascism BTW isn't just dictatorship but a particularly incompetent form of it
No, it is just pro nation dictatorship (what pro nation means is left up to the dictator, obviously). Yes, there can be incompetent versions of it just as there can be competent versions of it. It has weaknesses, and it has strengths.
I don't think it has an issue with reality at it's core - it only arises when democratic or existing systems fail to address the concerns of the people, so they want something to sweep away red tape.
I believe that good people can make any system work, and bad people will ruin any system.

>>150907200
>I would bet all of my money that they couldn't defend themselves without US support.
Sorry let me amend this, without US/NATO support

>>150907200
>I would bet all of my money that they couldn't defend themselves without US support.
Against who? Russia? They together with their other allies absent the USA absolutely could, no sweat. To get Europe together as a formidable military bloc in its own right? That would take a few years and some belt-tightening, but they could do it. They were slow to recognise that America might suddenly and unilaterally terminate their commitments. Those agreements by the way are one part of the reason the USA is so powerful in the first place, if they do pull out it's a "fuck you, I got mine". Bad policy to be so reliant, I guess, but not reflective of what they could do if they had to, if they weren't on short notice.

>No, it is just pro nation dictatorship
In practice and by common definition it's more than that. Fascists appeal to a myth of national superiority, a necessity of purging the nation of undesirable elements, total economic self-sufficiency, and war or at least violence as a core value. On a personal level it invariably appeals to emotional positions rather than reasoned ones. The problem, from a fascist's perspective, is that the nation is not inherently superior, the undesirable elements tend to include ones that keep the nation afloat in the long term, complete economic self-sufficiency is less beneficial than trade, and they invariably are total shit at war, valuing pomp over policy.

>>150907213
US =/= NATO. NATO would be greatly lessened without the US but they're not identical.

>>150907333
>war or at least violence as a core value
Not as a value, just as a viable solution if there are problems.
Value implies that they will see any reason to squeeze it in

>>150907377
Yes, that's correct, they will see any reason to squeeze it in. They place value on violence per se. That's one of the elements that distinguishes fascism from other forms of dictatorship.

>>150907132
Anon that person literally said that everything should be private but also you should let that private infrastructure fail as if that wouldn't result in everyone starving to death.
They're beyond stupid to the point that you'd have a better shot of talking sense into them by barking than by using reason.

>>150879471
The moral of PatF was not "hard work good", it was "Dont forget to live your life while on your way to your goals"

>>150907723
It's just so dumb. Fucking Imhotep realised you have to store your surplus grain in good times and give it back to the public in bad times
These Ayn Rand motherfuckers are literally 5000 years behind the curve

>>150907393
>They place value on violence per se
Not really. They don't value violence itself, just that it shouldn't be taken off the table as a solution. They value effort from struggle.

>>150907768
>These Ayn Rand motherfuckers are literally 5000 years behind the curve
Much like silicon valley "rationalism" is just a bunch of twats that refuse to read philosophy starting it over from zero, Rand libertarians are a bunch of twats rebuilding civics from zero.

>>150906095
>random red herring

>>150906095
For democratic socialism? Billionaires and their megacorps spread propaganda for that system all the time, and also for diversity shit which that system loves even if it ironically undermines it. And faggots like Bernie in the US or plenty of European socialists are plenty happy with the status quo of banning mean words and importing unsustainable amounts of cheap labor, not understanding or caring if it is unsustainable for the actual nation.
You can argue "no they aren't" all you want, they have been in office for fucking decades in some cases and have changed nothing substantially regarding shit that people actually care about like immigration or scummy megacorps doing scummy anti consumer and anti worker practices. The only thing that has happened is that the bureaucracy has spiraled out of control and does everything it can to sustain itself at the cost of everything else.
What's the word they used for 2020 in America? "Fortifying the election"?
You might have a point if they didn't ban people for saying nigger on social media for the last 10 years at least. But apart from Elon who is a faggot in his own way, it's pretty clear where all the mainstream money is going for support and propaganda.
Pushing hedonistic shit like fag/troon rights and empowering women and antiwhite decolonization shit takes priority over people not being able to afford homes or the drug crisis for a lot of these faggots. If no one advocated for these faggot minorities then maybe work could get done fixing fundamental issues but alas "democratic socialists" care more about these fucking sexual, racial, or whatever minorities than the type of people who actually did 99% of the work building the nation and culture.
No system can fucking function if you shit on the people who built it and instead favor outsiders who only care about their own group for everything.

>>150907783
Not really. No extant polity takes violence off the table as a solution. I think the Chatham Islanders did, before the Maori came and enslaved them, I can't think of any other historical examples.

Fascists value violence and rely on it generally because it promotes unity in the in-group by directing them against an out-group. "Effort from struggle" is, in fascist philosophy, inextricable from violence. The idea of peacefully competing ideologies is rejected in toto; violence is not just the last resort, it's the only resort of any consequence and we might as well skip straight to it and get down to business.

>>150907828
tl;dr

>>150876742
Animal farm is specifically a critique of Stalinism.
Orwell himself was a staunch socialist who grew to hate authoritarian commies during the Spanish civil war after they ran roughshod over the groups he supported as ostensible allies.

>>150907828
Format your text if you want people to read it.
I didn't, but I'm guessing it was some specious racist nationalist tripe

>>150907840
>No extant polity takes violence off the table as a solution
That's a complete lie. For example, look at immigration, which is the number 1 issue for a lot of people. A lot of bureaucrats go white in the face when you say "force them out they aren't here legally and by the laws of the land they were never intended to be here". But violence is on the table for beating "white supremacists" or any number of other things. It's just utterly hypocritical violence that people take issue with.
>Fascists value violence and rely on it generally because it promotes unity in the in-group by directing them against an out-group
Yes, but even just the existence of an enemy lets them do this. Like a neighboring nation to shittalk or something. And you know what, all groups have this same exact shit. Fascists just recognize that tribalism as part of human psychology and seek to harness it rather than ignore it. If other systems were more honest about it they could probably get more appeal nowadays.
>"Effort from struggle" is, in fascist philosophy, inextricable from violence
Wrong. They respect a scientist who achieves a lot through hard work, they respect the builders of a building, etc. Things that deeply contribute to the advancement of the nation and culture. Obviously, the soldier too, because that is something that even the lowest skilled man can do and because you are literally putting your life on the line.
>The idea of peacefully competing ideologies is rejected in toto
This is true and can be a real flaw in the same nation at times. Again, I think Fascism has flaws too. I just think people like you who write it off as being only violent and crazy are really biased in looking at it, because you are viewing it from only a modern lens in this time of plenty rather than comparing it to other systems and cultures.
>>150907845
Billionaires are beneficial to democratic socialism because they spread propaganda supporting it for a variety of reasons. pic related

>>150907024
Socialism is a system where private property is either entertained as an illusion by the State who actually plans and controls the economy, or a collectivist junta that wants to abolish the concept as a whole. On paper, it's all fluffy bunnies and everyone having a nice home, but in practices, it is mismanagement at every level, authoritarianism, and health care that is a tax-funded Ponzi scheme that inevitably introduces euthanasia as an option to cut costs as resources are stretched thin.
It's a "dirty word," because Fascism and Communism are both socialist systems. In both cases, it has failed so miserably that it irrevocably altered biomes from mismanagement, to say nothing of famines and genocides.

>>150907876
>Fascism and Communism are both socialist systems
Yes and no.
Fascism is socialist in the function of being pro society.
Communism is socialist in the function of being Marxist Socialist, which has other demands than simply wanting a society that people can coexist in, like people can' t be too successful, or people need to be stripped of religion and oust it from the public sphere, and what have you.

>>150876702
Frozen i dunno

>>150883776
War is love the CIA now???

>>150876678 (OP)
Yes

>>150907870
>hat's a complete lie. For example, look at immigration
I said polity. That's policy. Understandable mistake.

>Fascists just recognize that tribalism as part of human psychology and seek to harness it rather than ignore it. If other systems were more honest about it they could probably get more appeal nowadays.
"and that's good actually" I await a meaningful response.

>Wrong. They respect a scientist who achieves a lot through hard work
I did not say that fascists don't value anything except violence, or that violence must be included in everything they do. I said that violence is inextricable from struggle in fascist philosophy.

>I just think people like you [...] are really biased in looking at it
Back atcha. I've described fascism accurately and without emotional bias and you've yet to really contradict me on a factual level. Do I think there are other systems and cultures that aren't fit for purpose? Yes, absolutely.

>>150907024
Socialism is a system where private property is either entertained as an illusion by the State who actually plans and controls the economy, or a collectivist junta that wants to abolish the concept as a whole. On paper, it's all fluffy bunnies and everyone having a nice home, but in practices, it is mismanagement at every level, authoritarianism, and health care that is a tax-funded Ponzi scheme that inevitably introduces euthanasia as an option to cut costs as resources are stretched thin.
Socialists pretend that government can abolish fundamental laws of economics on a whim for they do not understand what a price or money actually is. Neither respond well to artificial changes, and you ask any ex-soviet babushka what is was like finding clothes and shoes for children when quotas are decided by bureaucrats.
As for why it is a "dirty word," Fascism and Communism are both socialist systems. In both cases, it has failed so miserably that it irrevocably altered biomes from mismanagement, to say nothing of famines and genocides. Democratic Socialism is literally what comes before your business is seized, as the state needs more of whatever widgets you produce (or discovered you don't agree with the Party on something.)

>>150907930
That seems like a hell of a lot to put on one word
Like the Oxford definition is twenty words or less. When you need paragraph breaks to lay out your understanding of a word I think that's a warning sign

>>150907922
>I said polity
I am aware, but people nowadays have this weird thing now where they think it is okay to use violence on their own citizens but not foreigners, which is completely backwards to how a state is supposed to be.
>and that's good actually
More like every system does it. Sad truth about all tribalism is that is boils down to that, but at a basic level you should be for your own countrymen, race, religion, etc because that is WHY nations even form to begin with. If you put other stuff above that then it is counter intuitive to the whole purpose of a nation.
>I said that violence is inextricable from struggle in fascist philosophy
Yes, meaning that it is the same thing
You are saying violence cannot be separated from struggle, when it can in their philosophy.
>I've described fascism accurately and without emotional bias
I don't think so. The proof is that you think that Fascism is about violence at it's core layer. In reality, it's a means to an end of human fulfillment and actually getting stuff done. Whether or not you think that is positive is another discussion that is more about values, but you keep saying that violence is the same thing as struggle. By struggle, I mean something challenging to accomplish, not a literal struggle/fight. Fascists think fulfillment can only come from overcoming struggle, whether it be physical, mental. Rather than violence, the word I would use to describe them is persistence/perserverance. Whether you take that as positive like a persevering over adversity from trying over and over, or poorly like a persistent cough that won't seem to go away is up to you. But violence isn't the core - it's persistence and loyalty to what they consider "their own" (though the definition of "what is your own" can differ among different fascists. Some just say nation, others say race, others say other fascists around the globe, etc.)

>>150907946
It's more that I really. REALLY. And I cannot say this loud enough, really hate Socialism. I can't give it's definition without rake it over the coals and shoving a handful up its ass for good measure. It is one of the ideas humanity endlessly regurgitates, forgets when the empire collapses because of it, then the next mid-wit demagogue starts spreading the idea that eating the rich will feed everyone instead of killing off the winners in a society for a kakistocracy.

>>150907969
But this is about definitions. You really really hate SOMETHING, but it's not universally agreed on that "socialism" means that same something. If you bind up everything you hate in one little word, you're never going to be able to properly communicate or debate about it.

>>150906889
>When and where did you imagine this happening?
For most of human history

>>150907959
>I am aware, but people nowadays have this weird thing now where they think it is okay to use violence on their own citizens but not foreigners
I don't see the relevance.
>If you put other stuff above that then it is counter intuitive to the whole purpose of a nation.
The purpose of a nation is to improve the lot of those within it, not to stick it to other nations. Those are not opposite ends of a spectrum.
>Yes, meaning that it is the same thing
No, that is not what it means. Yes, in fascist philosophy, violence cannot be separated from struggle, it is an intrinsic and essential part.

I'll give your last paragraph the response you deserve which means going over the word limit.

>>150908058
I know what struggle means. What you say is not exclusive with the notion that violence is intrinsic to struggle in fascism. Violence is not only a universal practical tool of fascism to encourage in-group unity, which you seem to admit, and is not only preached by all fascists once in or close to power, which is easily verified. It is also a basic core belief. To paraphrase everyone's favourite Nazi, Carl Schmitt, all disagreements come down at the most fundamental level to basic convictions that are inalterable by dialogue or reason, thus all matters of real importance are only resolvable by force - physical or otherwise - and the only real distinction of importance is friend/enemy. This is core to fascist principles. It is not necessarily the conscious belief of the rank and file, who as I've said are mostly emotionally driven, but it's the underlying philosophy of the movement and its movers and shakers. On a practical level, this inevitably means violence.

I can see that as a fascist-curious person you're exhibiting some signs of this yourself. You are, however, talking to me like a human being and trying to reason with me, so you're fine by me. When I talk to a true blue fascist, they try to score rhetorical points if it's public, puff up their own ego if it's private, and if they can't do either of those turn completely dismissive and disinterested, because they truly DO NOT VALUE the debate on an intellectual level, only as a means of recruitment or self-aggrandisement.

>>150908058
>>150907959
I know what struggle means. What you say is not exclusive with the notion that violence is intrinsic to struggle in fascism. Violence is not only a universal practical tool of fascism to encourage in-group unity, which you seem to admit, and is not only preached by all fascists once in or close to power, which is easily verified. It is also a basic core belief. To paraphrase everyone's favourite Nazi, Carl Schmitt, all disagreements come down at the most fundamental level to basic convictions that are inalterable by dialogue or reason, thus all matters of real importance are only resolvable by force - physical or otherwise - and the only real distinction of importance is friend/enemy. This is core to fascist principles. It is not necessarily the conscious belief of the rank and file, who as I've said are mostly emotionally driven, but it's the underlying philosophy of the movement and its movers and shakers. On a practical level, this inevitably means violence.

I can see that as a fascist-curious person you're exhibiting some signs of this yourself. You are, however, talking to me like a human being and trying to reason with me, so you're fine by me. When I talk to a true blue fascist, they try to score rhetorical points if it's public, puff up their own ego if it's private, and if they can't do either of those turn completely dismissive and disinterested, because they truly DO NOT VALUE the debate on an intellectual level, only as a means of recruitment or self-aggrandisement.

>>150906306
Ohhhh so that's what the radio guy was based on.

>>150908058
>I don't see the relevance.
There is a lack of will to use violence on behalf of citizens to protect from non citizens. A state cannot sustain itself if it won't even do the bare minimum to protect it's citizens - it's founding people that is its life blood.
>The purpose of a nation is to improve the lot of those within it, not to stick it to other nations. Those are not opposite ends of a spectrum.
I am aware. But if you do not respect the founding principles, people, and religion, then the nation no longer has a reason to exist.
>No, that is not what it means. Yes, in fascist philosophy, violence cannot be separated from struggle, it is an intrinsic and essential part.
Violence can be separated from struggle though. This is your bias. Climbing a mountain and seeing unexplored vistas would be just as respected as a soldier protecting the nation in such a society.
>>150908083
You just are so biased you, yourself, cannot separate Fascism from violence in your mind. If you want to hate the ideology fine, but at least hate it for the right reasons instead of just parroting this moralism that doesn't even make sense because it's not even true.
When you say
>all matters of real importance are only resolvable by force
You completely miss the objective of Fascism and the means for that objective.
You can hate that they use it, but as much as you claim they rely on it, other ideologies do the exact same. They just try to shroud it. Fascism, and dictatorships broadly, arise because partly of the willingness of other people and ideologies to hypocritically use violence while decrying it when it is levied on them.
Marxists hate the rich and want to have a violent revolution, Capitalists hate those who they feel restrict their freedoms and wish to remove them by all means, etc. Fascism doesn't use any more violence than these other systems, they just don't hide that they do or pretend it isn't something that is foreign to human nature.

>>150908117
>There is a lack of will to use violence on behalf of citizens to protect from non citizens.
I don't see the relevance to what I said, which is that no polity takes violence completely off the table. You just disagree with their decisions as to when it's appropriate.
>Violence can be separated from struggle though. This is your bias.
Violence can be separated from struggle. In fascist philosophy, violence is a part of struggle - not the only part, not necessarily involved in every facet of life - but is and must be a component. I'm not sure how many times I can restate this.
>You just are so biased you, yourself, cannot separate Fascism from violence in your mind. If you want to hate the ideology fine, but at least hate it for the right reasons instead of just parroting this moralism that doesn't even make sense because it's not even true.
I "parroted" noted extremely influential Nazi political theoretician Carl Schmitt. This is not moralism. I am describing the philosophy in the words of its own proponents. "All matters of real importance are only resolvable by force" does not miss the point of fascism, it is foundational to its intellectual principles.

Incidentally, the claim that other ideologies do the exact same and just try to shroud was ALSO most widely propagated by Schmitt. You are repeating back to me the words of the same man you claim to disagree with, filtered through however many intermediaries.

>>150908171
>no polity takes violence completely off the table
It does though for multiple issues regarding policing of laws. You can spam your rhetoric all you want but frankly, it's dishonest. You know and I know that violence is something that they do not do to enforce a multitude of things and is never even considered. For instance, BLM protests in the US would have never been allowed in 100 years ago and there would have been violence used to disperse them. As in, mass arrests leading to hangings, firing squads, or even forced labor. Now? Unthinkable. Even if the constitution explicitly says it was for the writers and their posterity and all rights in the constitution were supposed to be exclusively for them.
Same thing for other laws straight up not being enforced with violence in other nations, like how judges in Europe are super soft on migrant rapes of natives when that usually carries a huge sentence and historically people would have been fucking lynched for that.
>In fascist philosophy, violence is a part of struggle
Violence CAN be struggle, is not a part of it by default. Honestly, why even bother having this back and forth, you are so dogmatized that you just keep trying to push this point no matter how many rational points I make against it.
>I "parroted"
And why do I care about that? What is happening is that you are trying to use an appeal to authority rather than rationally coming to a conclusion right in front of you.
>This is not moralism
It is. You are the one obsessed with violence, not me, and how it's bad. I'm just saying that
1. You are incorrect that Fascism only concerns itself on modes of applying violence
2. Every mainstream ideology uses violence with the exception of ones that are explicitly pacifist, because the only way to directly defend your nation from exploitation of others is through violence

Last post, this is a waste of time. Hopefully lurkers can either criticize Fascism better or clear some of their biases about it though

>>150878768
>Late stage capitalism isn't real, it's just capitalism being exploited like it always has and people only made up the term because they don't want to figure out a real way to deal with it

I mean...the way to deal with it is to regulate it and hold companies accountable.

But large companies spend a lot of money to get average people to feel empathy for them. Look at the guy in this thread equating the regulation of putting a car charger in his garage to any regulation.

Somehow in his mind his inconvenience is the same as preventing large factories from hurting others. If there was no regulations companies would gladly work people for 80+ hours. No benefits. No safety rules. No environmental protections. They would burn their garbage to power a generator and then let the employees breath the exhaust. They would dump their waste water to the local streams, killing fish and animals because thats cheaper than treating it on-site.

Its amazing people still fall for this bate and switch. There is a world of difference between an unregulated individual and an unregulated company that produces over 100 tons of product a day

>>150908254
>Last post, this is a waste of time.
I'll choose to take this to mean you're giving me the closing statement, and will presumably read it.

I haven't said anything dishonest and I'm sure that if you're able to read over what I've said with a measure of objectivity, you'd agree. If the BLM protests had been significantly more violent, they would have been violently dispersed. Ergo, violence was not off the table - my statement. Though that you suggest mass hangings leads me to reconsider whether you're arguing in good faith.

Violence CAN be struggle, is not a part of it by default. That is correct. It is a part of it in fascist philosophy. I've attempted to rephrase this multiple times and have apparently still failed to communicate what I mean.

I do not personally think paraphrasing the words of a highly influential fascist thinker when describing fascist intellectual thought is an appeal to authority, but if you'd been willing to continue the conversation I'd have been happy to retract that and continue to describe the (identical) actual attitudes of practicing fascists.

I am not obsessed with violence. Fascism is. That was my claim. You can't refute that claim by saying "no u". Every mainstream ideology employs violence but fascism views it as a good while most western ideologies view it as a necessary evil.

Thank you for coming to my TEDx talk, have a nice day.

>>150878791
>Nobody even knows what the fuck a capitalist is, they just point to "oh it's the rich" when that's not even correct.

Its kind of funny, but anti semites kind of finish what Marx started and see the rest of the picture. The issue isnt just wealth that owns the means of production. Its wealth that seeks rents and fees. Literal money that seeks more money without even producing a good or service. Anti semites see this and rightfully see it as wrong but then drop the ball at the very end and blame it on a secret league of jews but the truth is it's just a league of old shitty people made up of jews and non jews. Thinking that seeking fees and rents is only bad when a jew does it but some how wonderful when your uncle does it is stupid nonsense. I suspect antisemitism at its heart comes from seeing a great evil while also wishing to be a part of that evil. So a race fantasy is made up to absolve the anti semite of guilt. "We'll get rid of all the jews and then ill seek rents and fees and everything will be great."

Im sure someone will point out that Marx dis talk about rent seeking, but until the current housing problem, no one really talked about it. People tend to frame Mary's arguments around owning production

>>150908363
>I suspect antisemitism at its heart comes from seeing a great evil while also wishing to be a part of that evil.
Antisemitism at its heart comes from where every conspiracy comes from, fear of chaos. Everything bad being the work of a secret league of villains is a definite and fixable problem. Everything bad coming from the world being a fucked place with innumerable bad or incompetent actors working independently and at cross purposes is much harder. That + religious bullshit + the traditional dog you kick = antisemitism.

>>150908296
>Its amazing people still fall for this bate and switch. There is a world of difference between an unregulated individual and an unregulated company that produces over 100 tons of product a day
It's hardly amazing. It's actively propagated so why wouldn't they? Recycle your home plastics - 90% of it is incinerated rather than recycled while corporations meanwhile dump billions of tons a year. We're generally taught to be conscious of our personal impacts and ignore corporate ones.

>>150908405
>Antisemitism at its heart comes from where every conspiracy comes from, fear of chaos
It comes from people not liking Jews.

>>150908536
Yeah but that just makes them a convenient target. Anon was talking about "secret leagues of jews" ruling the world.

>>150907726
Oh, kek. I haven't seen the movie in over a decade, all I remembered was Tiana getting her restaurant at the end of the film

>>150907024
>Outside of the USA socialism is not considered a dirty word, and is not even vaguely associated with autocracy. It's considered a graduated thing, from centre-left outward. So clearly Americans have a different definition of the word. You're hostile to the concept: I'd like to hear what you think the word means.

Ayn Rand spent most of her life conflating socialism with communism because of her trauma over her family losing their assets in Russia and being forced to leave. She was an autist or sociopath that made some what rational arguments for individualism and selfishness, making her popular with wealthy americans that were already selfish and secluded

>>150907024
This is such retarded garbage. You fags conflate social programs to socialism when those social programs literally only exist as a direct result of taxing capitalist economies.

>>150909080
While capitalist economies literally only exist because of governmental structures, which by definition must on some level be socialist. If you think associating socialist programs with socialism is conflation I suggest you take a minute.

>>150907333
>and they invariably are total shit at war, valuing pomp over policy.

The Germans and Japanese were pretty good at war. Theh tended to kill many for every loss taken. Its more that eventually that peters out when you only have so many people to use as solders. Their populations should have told them that ducking with such large countries was a bad idea

>>150909109
>capitalist economies literally only exist because of governmental structures
You can't be this retarded. Capitalism can exist without any sort of government system because the exchange of goods and services will always exist regardless of the oversight of the state. Don't be fucking stupid.

>>150907785
>Rand libertarians are a bunch of twats rebuilding civics from zero.

Oh its worse than that. Selfish weird people following queen selfish weird person. Rand at best was a traumatized child that never got over what Russia did to her parents and saw communism in everything. At worst, she was the creepy sociopath girl that idealizes murderers and couldnt understand social bonds

You could pose a simple word problem to her like Rand has 3 apples, and Billy and sandy have no apples, what should Rand do? Rand would say keep her apples and would argue the teacher had done her some great injustice by telling her thr write answer was to share.

She was a weird selfish person. Wealthy people loved her because she was so articulate in defending selfishness

>>150909114
The Germans and Japanese fought very obviously losing wars of choice for no good reason. War is Policy > Strategy > Tactics. KDR is tactics. Their policy was shit.

>>150909118
Exchange of goods and services is not capitalism. Dumbass. Again: take a goddamn minute to think.

>>150909177
I will never get tired of socialists calling lolbertarians selfish for wanting to keep their own shit. Like you guys say people are sepfish while demanding others give you free shit. The irony is insane.

>>150909198
It literally is. But keep pretending otherwise

>>150907828
>Pushing hedonistic shit like fag/troon rights and empowering women and antiwhite decolonization shit takes priority over people not being able to afford homes or the drug crisis for a lot of these faggots

Anon, here is the thing, its not even hedonistic. The left supports minorties because its almost free. There are less than 1% of americans are trans. Giving them what they want is cheap.

Same with attacking them. You could kill every trans person in the US with fewer bullets than in a single gun store. You could fit them in 1 closet.

Both sides are conning you. Your imagined enemies dont really matter

>>150909234
>its not even hedonistic
It is. Instead of leaving it until actual problems are solved, they demand that they must take priority. All they have to do is drop it.

>>150909227
I would like you to consider some things. Don't bother to answer, I won't answer back. Just, as I said, think for a moment. Is every single society that has ever existed in all of history and prehistory capitalist? Which of those societies has not exchanged goods and services? Do you think, when people criticise capitalism, what they are saying is that we should not exchange goods and services? Do you think at all?

>>150876678 (OP)
that was the message in the og story
illumination ruined it by making onceler a good guy

>>150909213
I'll put it in lolbertarian language: We gave them a lot of our own shit and want at least a modicum of return on investment in the aggregate - at least, enough to cover costs, including opportunity costs.

>>150876678 (OP)
>ecofascist propaganda

I am surprise by how much /pol/ likes AI art, makes me wonder why

>>150910112
No you aren't and no it doesn't and what does that have to do with anything

>>150876678 (OP)
>being a cuck is... LE GOOD
Wow, great message there, OP

>>150876702
Every woke shit slop ever. That's why they are bullcrap
lol

These threads always dissolve into some idiot that only knows 60 year old anti socialism propaganda arguing against Marx is the best boy, that will eagerly remember the horrors of capatalism while hand waving the sins of communism.

I dont know if I ever read an even handed take. Maybe people from Europe shrugging their shoulders at how ignorant and batshit insane americans are

>>150909392
You were compensated with a wage and didn't recieve any of the risk involved with running a business. You didn't supply the raw materials, you didn't supply the workplace, you didn't invest in the work place. You aren't owed profits when you take on none of the risks. If the business goes under you don't go bankrupt. So shut your fucking mouth.

>>150910366
I think there was maybe only one Marxist mouthing off this time. One embarrassed fascist. Pretty chill all considered.

>>150910366
Oh wow crazy you've never heard an even take from schizos shitting up /co/ with politics?
That's wild bro I can't believe retards on 4chan aren't writing you clear-eyed dissertations on the pros and cons of a mixed economy with specific guardrails for corruption.

>>150910366
You are entitled to the property you worked for or the property your family worked to provide for you.
Simple as.

>>150910454
You misunderstand. People who support the idea of having a society, and pay for it, extended the benefits of that society to everyone in it. You've benefited from that and don't want to pay back in. We expect contribution proportionate to means. You could not possibly have achieved what you have without that society - socialism, one might say - so you owe back, by social contract.

I'm sympathetic to libertarians who complain there's no unclaimed territory they can go and set up their tax-free paradise. I wish they'd fuck off too. You didn't opt in to society, you were born in it, so you should be able to opt out, I'm happy to cut our losses and forgive the debt. But I do suspect they'd shortly descend into a bloodbath and/or slavery and we'd have to sort their shit out on our dime again.

>>150910614
Hey numbnuts the vast majority of government spending does to shit you and I will never benefit from. In fact a shit ton of government spending lines the pockets of corporations and billionaires with lucrative government contracts.

>>150910669
Sure, I won't get into the weeds on that. Compare that to a fucking stone age tribe, because that's what we're talking about in terms of what society has provided for you. Like I said, I wish you could opt out, I don't want to keep you here against your will, but don't pretend you haven't benefited from the existence of government.

>>150910570
Simple as, agreed. Are other people entitled to compensation for the work they did that enabled you to work for and obtain that property?

>>150876678 (OP)
>CHOPPING TOO MANY TREES IS BAD

there

>>150888841
>it's yet another thirdie nigger shitting on the system that built and upheld Western superiority throughout the 20th century, because his shithole country can't even properly support (((capitalism)))

>>150910961
>Ignores those people were already compensated

>>150910744
I mean you and I are having a conversation via infrastructure and communication devices developed by private companies but sure anon, I'm sure we'd still somehow still be in the stone age if the government didn't exist.

>>150912226
Well, not the same anon, but a lot of advancements in technology were due to the military. A lot. Especially due to the wars. WWII effectively advanced us further than the rate were going.

>>150912226
Yeah we would. Probably not literally. But we built the current world using governments, you'd be a dirt farmer and/or raped in the ass by your local warlord if we hadn't. You'd certainly not have the peace and infrastructure necessary for private development of the internet. If you think a capitalist anarchy would have brought us to the same position, maybe you can make a hypothetical case, the burden of that argument is on you, but we taxpaying "socialists" put this shit together and already have our money where our mouth is. You, personally, have benefited enormously from structures put in place before you were born. Your average Randist wants to keep using and benefiting from those without giving anything back.

>>150912226
>Infrastructure developed by private business

ARPANET would like to inform you how much of an ahistorical retard you are.

>>150912195
Were they? Did you compensate, say, your teacher, the police, the military? Yes you did, they were paid out of your taxes.