Advice for you guys

One of the issues is that we don't have the numbers. Holla Forums did its fair share of recruting but tbh our success is caused because of being the antithesis to Holla Forums.

top kek, I don't want to agitate and spread information among retards like you or your kind

I want you to precisely stay classcucked so I can take advantage from you, remember its a race issue, not a class issue, now consume this porduct I invested in

what would be the synthesis?

Goddammit you've become more annoying than you were when you were an Ancap

Well thank you m8, appreciate it

Female ancaps are qt as fuck. Can you tell me where to find them?

Race realism isn't real, stormcuck, try again

web.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/minorities.shtml

debunkingdenialism.com/2015/02/03/mailbag-fetishizing-richard-lewontin/

americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583

physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/

livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/race-reconciled-debunks-race/

I've literally never been an ancap dude, you are confusing me with another pirate

absolutely no reason why we should care for classcucked cunts, they can rot in hell while their idpol consume them

He's a stepping stone to shifting the discourse and a further spread of ideas. Western Countries right now are having a renaissance in the right and Trumps add to the narrative.

Now, about what you said about demographics: Yes, it is a problem and we're working hard on this issue.
Also, don't think this new demography or Democrats will be anything close to what you guys fight for either, they'll just be your average retarded liberal.

tell that to your nigger friends that will never work together with whites. oh, or get fucked by jews as they first pretend to help you and then jew you.

THIS

Genuine question: Aren't all pirates sort of lolberts? Like, every pirate I met was just a classic liberal spamming lolberg memes.

well idk dude

I just belive we should use all means in order to abolish work, not just thinking of socializing it or privatizing it

if exploting classcucks, forming co-ops or achieving central planning is the way to then you have my support

you deserved it for being a little angry cuckboi

What?

I don't think the Matrix or Total Recall are about that.

Alright. I guess there is a huge difference between prirates online and pirates irl

isnt that just post-left anarchism?

I agree desu. Shame I'm such an idealistic pacifist. I'm angry with the world but I don't have the appetite for bloody revolution.

fuck why did capitalism ever have to exist

because people don't like to work for themselves and would rather be slaves

oh ok

Read a fucking book already, OP.

Here's a good start.

well post-left anarchism is just the idea of separating anarchy from the left ideologies

I'm sorry but this post must be satire

Compared to the inside of the Matrix, Zion was primitive as fuck. Everything they had was built from scraps of the machine, and while there was a system of authority among the ship captains, there was none for the common person. You could say Morpheus was their leader, but along the same lines as Cyrus from The Warriors.

most of the people you accuse of being "neoliberals" are not neoliberals at all, theyre usually social democrats who concern themselves extremely with social progressivism combined with a welfare state with high taxes. from everyone's (aside from yours) perspective, they're moderate leftists. since you're far left, of course you'd see them as right wing

holy shit this amount of pure ideology.

I know that Liberalism is an economic theory, but in America, it's a social term associated with leftism. Also, Neo-Liberalism clearly have leftist ideas on it, even on its conception.

Basically the evolution from the Medieval model to the Modern Guild/Industrial got crushed by Big Banks and Monopolies who fixed the economy to work for them.

???

not all post-leftists want to ablosih labour, I just explained the most basic term

im sure they only reject the revolutionary left's method of achieving change

It's the word "post-leftist" alone that's making me cringe. So because porky outsourced wage slavery into the Third World we should just start to defend private property?

I'm not kidding, this is really important. You need to read if you want to have stimulating discussions on economics and politics.

Book too long for you? Start smaller then:

jacobinmag.com/2016/07/david-harvey-neoliberalism-capitalism-labor-crisis-resistance/

While I don't recommend it as a general rule of thumb, the Wikipedia description is fairly decent too. Please, you have to put some effort to learn in if you want these debates to go anywhere.

Yes, it was primitive but I don't think the ideological message the Wachowskis were trying to transmit with the Matrix was "primitivism".

They struck me more as cyberpunk anarchists. The movie is a pretty good anticapitalist antistate analogy. It's only the sequels that even show Zion.

what the fuck are you talking about?

this is exactly the type of shit why post-leftism exist

porky outsourced labour because both the left and the right have failed to defend the international proletariat

how do you come with the conlcusion of defending private property, of all the post-left anarchism texts I've read almost all of them are againts the idea of property, even in the transitional period of a mixed system with a market and an automated sector

yes, give me your teethbrush now

Neoliberalism is not a modification of "liberals" in the way that neoconservative relates to conservative. It is just another name for the sort of Randian, ancap, free market worship that arose in the '70s and is represented most strongly in the Republican party (the Democrats being the ones who sell out and go along with them). As an ancap you should be embarrassed as fuck to somehow be this confused about what it is.

isnt this just basically creating a label for a group of people that you dislike to separate them from you despite the fact that you and them agree on a lot of things? i think of neoliberals as both economically and socially liberal, but the type of liberals youre referring to are new liberals, many of whom are sympathetic towards social democracy

Stop assuming things about me. You don't know how much I know about economy and I have my, honestly, big fair share of knowledge in the matter.
And yes, Neo-Liberalism, both as an economic theory and social position is heavily leftist.

Now, see the problem with you guys: sometimes you look like Feminists, with 30 different factions, and what you consider Leftism is not what your fellow "Leftists" might consider.
This is just what I was talking about in the OP, you are not united, have no direction and created no metapolitical basis.

Also, much better books about economy are focused on meta-economics, not on models. For instance, learning "what is money", "how it's created", "how to use it" is far more interesting (Marx focused on this matter btw).

lol what? the people whom you accuse of being neoliberals are almost always social democrats who love high taxes and welfare

I happen to work alongside blacks, and they're just fine.

And you can whine about Jews, but it doesn't stop the fact that DT is in league with them either.

How does it feel to get constantly cucked by scientific fact, yet you're constantly whining about other people being cucked

Please user, just read. That's all you have to do to free yourself. Just actually read. Give reading a chance.

This board don't seem to have IDs (I'm on my phone) but just saying that, while you linked 2 posts thinking they were by the same guy, we're actually different people.

a white nationalist platform will never prevail in a country where whites are soon to be minorities. trump is too little too late, and he's already compromised a number of his controversial policies like deporting 11 million people and banning all muslims.

Advice for Holla Forums: you aren't winning either. You live in an echo chamber. Everyone on this website is a loser. Sorry.

To be fair, the Holla Forumsyp actually brings up a good point, tbh.

I think it's time we actually stopped reading Marx and engage with Richard Wolff

Would you do the same? I have a fairly light book for you to read, which is called "Web of Debt, by Ellen Brown".
I have 595 books in my collection and I've passed the economic phase - also, if your book focus on labour, I know what it's about.

An awfully convenient straw man, but wrong on all accounts unfortunately. The most that neoliberalism really has to do with social issues is that keeping workers divided with identity politics probably works in the interest of global capital. I don't accuse anybody of being neoliberals because it's primarily an economic ideology.

If you're going to expect one side to educate itself on your terminology perhaps you should educate yourself on theirs.

Objectivism is fundamentally incompatible with anarcho-capitalism. Ancap doesn't have a big sway in the Republican Party. Even Objectivism is only overlapping due to the free market stuff while rejecting everything else. Rand was an atheist who believed that the value of morality and values up to and including what architecture was good and what was bad was objective.

There's always been a liberal capitalist strain in the Republican Party. Rand influenced some conservatives, but not without heavy filtration.

It's more like the socialist influenced on the UK Labour Party. Doesn't make them Marxists except in the minds of loony bin right wing conspiracists.

By the same token, Neoliberalism is not an ideology which really had any initial advocates. It's largely a catch all smear term like statists only for the radical left. It's only very recently that certain people on the right started labeling themselves that way after being called it for decades, but there's no common agreement on it because the label was formed from the outside.

There are no common tenets to Neoliberalism other than not being an anticapitalist. Even Fascism is just "Thatcherism with death camps" rendering the label a pointless exercise in circle jerking by pseudo-intellectuals.

It's the left wing equivalent of le cultural marxism meme that's supposedly a coherent ideology underpinning everything they don't like.

i mean, jewish bankers, no, but jewish academics, yes (they're a pretty dynamic race, aren't they? they're at the top of the racial hierarchy for a reason!)

as for blacks, there's no reason they wouldn't support a leftist movement. we dont have a day of the rope planned.

Also.

Holla Forums, as a whole, is manifesting itself in all series of forms - essays, books, videos, memes, conferences and even awards recently - because we have a set goal, tactics and procedures.

No you don't. Holla Forums, and it's ilk, as a whole are lazy, disjointed, and very easily manipulated. There are people and groups within that who are focused and have set goals and procedures, but definitely as a whole it is the opposite.

The biggest difference (apart from ideological ones, obviously) for left and right movements are that the groundwork for the Holla Forums styled alt right has been laid out for the past decades, while the left has been destroyed and vilified. We both share favourable conditions right now with the continued crises of capitalism, but your answers are much easier to swallow and more what people are used to (blame gays, blacks, Jews, commies) and what they have been conditioned to accept, while our message is telling people a hard truth about the system they automatically accept as correct and just.

Tl;Dr we all need to update our tactics.

Pls stop.

Would you prefer the term "neoclassical" economics? "The Austrian school"? It's still the same horseshit. Neoliberalism is the revival of laissez faire economic ideas starting in the '70s with Milton Friedman and others. Your obfuscation of the term as some sort of smear on liberal Democrats is hilarious to anyone read up on it.

People often don't know about this, at first, paradoxical relation of Jews being both Big Banksters Capitalists and Leftist Academics.

It's fairly simple when you realize that the end goal is Power, Manipulation and Control.

Nobody embodied neoliberalism better than Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Are you going to say these have anything to do with American liberals? Jesus Christ get educated already.

Wrong poster.

I'm arguing you are making in your own mistakes in correcting the ancap poster. I'm going one level up in the pedantic contrarian scale.

Incidentally, this is why Holla Forums needs thread IDs. It cuts down on Holla Forumsyps trolling using both sides and allows better seriouz dicussionz.

Thread IDs are a threat to truly free debate and expression and go counter to everything that image boards stand for. Their effect on stifling expression is especially unwelcome on a politics board. Fuck off back to Reddit if you can't deal with it.

Holla Forums is basically a philosophy shitposting board at this point rather than an acitivism board.

One of the reason Holla Forums is able to spread its culture is because of better organization. Part of this is due to Holla Forums being full of nihilist retards, instead of paranoid retards like Holla Forums but the other part is that Holla Forums uses thread IDs to organize, and then sets out to raid twitter and the comment sections of major magazines, making 4000 shitposters have far more impact than they would have otherwise and spreading the alt-right across the internet.

Donald Trump would've been elected just from regular conservatives, but it says something when Hillary Clinton references the alt-right which came from the twitter trolls which came from the The Right Stuff, which came from 4/pol/.

Holla Forums needs more ops.

The full disclaimer is that I'm an edgy centrist misanthrope who wants both sides to be at their full power for the most epic clash while I munch popcorn, so from now on that means I help the left with hot tips. Take em or leave em.

More like a threat to shitposting. I see this board is run by Stirner fags instead of based Marxist-Leninists who can actually get things done. Getting things done is the best.

Thread IDs are a chan feature. You could tell me to go back to reddit if I wanted forced tripcodes or something. Otherwise you sound IGNORANT.

holy lel

You're right to a degree. Holla Forums doesn't have to be the vanguard of a new left, but we are failing as a meme factory. I think a lot of the posters want to feel like srs ppl, but the truth is memes are propaganda for a new era. Propaganda is needed to sway people who give more emotional responses.

Holla Forums existed for nearly a decade before its memes became well known. We just need to keep growing and memeing. Recognition will come. Forced memes will not win us anything.

Appreciate the olive branch m8.

At least you aren't libertarians.

And all of the cucservative magazines and then TRS and Daily Stormer started which meant thousands more users and now everywhere you go on youtube there are alt-right faggots. I see them posting on leftypol vids and jason unruhe vids too.

You know that Hillary named them in her alt-right speech, right? And various internet media have exposed Holla Forums as being behind things.

You can't really argue with a straight face that they don't have outsized influence compared to their size.

Unless you're just being butthurt you should want that too. You should want Huffington writing articles about how Holla Forums trolled bankers into committing suicide.

I guarantee this will make the radical left 1000 times more popular.

Seems about right

You can do both, easily.

Are there any Holla Forums spinoffs like TRS and Daily Stormtard?

I know you guys had a magazine for a while.

Some men aren't looking for anything ideological.

Some men just wanna watch the world burn.

Holla Forums is merely a vessel, not an active agent determining policy. It certainly had an impact in disseminating memes and leaks but it was all for Trump, not for anything approaching the neo-nazi utopia.

Sure, I want that, but Holla Forums didn't do any of that with its "propaganda." It just existed for a long-ass time and people found it and spread it. Its most successful memes aren't forced.

This is really true. I don't think there's much more of a succinct way to state your platform than trolling a banker to death.

It doesn't really support the idea that all of race A act like A, when you have people from race A acting like B.

Nigger I would love to engage in that sort of shit, but unlike those lumpen NEETsocs I am a fucking worker. I get home after ten hours at a time of selling my fucking life to some rich asshole I've never met and I have barely enough energy to make myself lunch for the next day.

No way can I contribute towards what you're describing. I simply don't have the time, energy, or autism for it.

The advice in the thread was good enough that I took screenshots

More proof the NEET lifestyles is superior and that "unttermensch" autists and disabled fatties will rule the future, whatever form it takes.

When your boss is sapping all your surplus labor, then of course your power is low.

Fuck NEETs don't even expend much uh labor to continue their existence (not sure what Marx calls this correct me pls) forget the surplus, and they get to take some of your surplus through taxes and spend it on hotpockets.

It's long been argued that people are too comfy for revolution, but I'd argue its the comfy who are best at agitation. You get to be a foot soldier when the time comes, wagecuckk.

In other words, Marx is probably wrong about lumpens not being revolutionary.

Socialism doesn't have to be proletarian. Hell FALC is lumpen and post-proletarian by definition. If everything's automated in the future, people will have nothing to do but plan revolution cause they'll all be welfare bums the bourgeoisie is waiting to kill off. Then you seize the means of production not to avoid exploitation but extermination.

Unless I'm wrong and people just eat hotpockets until the deathbots come. Oh well.

I'm just spinning bullshit theories out here.

You know who's been saying this forever?
Everyone. You're right tbh

You can't use autonomy to have control over people when it's the exact opposite of that.

lumpen hate is a ridiculous waste of tankie breath. NEETs are the future.

It's called tricking people and not doing the thing you say you'll do, but using the ideology to amass power into a single organization. I mean, you should know that being an ancom. You just don't blame it all on da joooooooz like a Holla Forumstard.

Of course Holla Forums is more popular. Complaining about da niggers and da jews and doing 'redpill raids' is far easier than reading 25,000 pages of Marx, Engels and Lenin.

imo Holla Forums should act as a platform to transition 25k pages of theory into funneh memes for mass consumption.

You're probably drawing the wrong conclusion from that in your eagerness to maintain intellectual pride.

Workers of the world unite… unless your Autism Level is below 120 or you have ADHD, in which case fuck off and join the fascists.

A really smart guy would find a way to convert Marx, Engels, and Lenin into a form more palatable for plebs.

Yeah but good luck to anyone trying to centralize all the anarchist power.

Holla Forums is basically the Holla Forums of the right wing spectrum now

So basically this.

I'm in no way smart enough to understand what the fuck this image means, and in no way am I going to read Hegel just so I can understand everything Marx wrote just so I can understand why I need to oppose capitalism.

But I can understand a more basic argument about why capitalists are just extracting work done by others purely through labor. So if you call them a bunch of fucking parasites I can understand that. Unless that offends your prissy aristocratic sensibilities or something.

Another problem is using 19th Century Marxian definitions of things.

Instead of explaining for the 500th time why when YOU say private property you only mean the means of production, why not just use normal people definitions of things instead. Like say you want to take businesses, and land from the capitalists. And say capitalist instead of waffling about the bourgeoisie like some frenchy ponce.

The problem is that Marxists are far more interested in being Marxists than socialists. The historical re-enactment society is strong.

...

k

Here's a number for you.

you Holla Forums wagecucks always confuse me. you all talk about the strength of the right-wing and the triumph of capitalism. you also claim to hate the jews for being greedy and hoarding wealth, which is literally the end goal of capitalism. so which is it? do you hate jews for being good capitalists or do you hate capitalism because some jews are successful at it?

was meant to quote

This helps, I think.

'hey thanks for my weekly allowance dad, I can't wait to inherit your hedge fund company. now off to the frontlines! shitposting on anime imageboards of course. euuurgh i can't believe how long this voting line is but i gotta stick it out for trump!!'
'hey i just organised a vanguard to rebel against overwhelming odds. the state has extreme military prowess that they will likely slaughter us all for this insurrection but what we did will echo throughout history.'

I have a question Holla Forums

at 2:15 he mentions that exchange is a zero sum game, as value is simply traded from one person to another

so let's say I buy something for $30 and sold it for $90 now, I simply created inflation right?, as I didn't generate any value, right?

PLS RESPOND

I've been reading a bout inflation and I've had yet to found a good asnwer for what really causes it

have some tiddies

People at Holla Forums are not capitalists at all.

Yeah, I've thought about this a bit lately. Our board lacks the kind of spirit and humour that would grant us any kind of popularity. I think we have things we could exemplify that would help this, but there is always an air of unearned snobbery. Oh well.

Centrists are the coolest of dudes.

It helps, but I noticed a flaw in the reasoning. It suggests no value is created by organization. It suggests that the workers could produce the same amount of stuff under any configuration which is obviously not true. It's not enough to have labor. You need to apply the labor correctly and coordinate labor on different jobs with each other.

This suggests that the manager or boss isn't merely always stripping off value that would produced in his absence but playing a specialize role in organizing the interaction of labor with those means of production and each other to optimize value production in that business.

This suggests that a single proprietorship in which the owner is also the manager wouldn't necessarily be exploitation. It could be, but there's no way of determining whether his organizational skills are increasing worker ability to create value or not, so there's no way of telling whether his cut is valid or not.

Unless you did some kind of scientific experiment where you threw random workers into factories, told them what to produce and see whether they did better without a boss or not.

Now, what the argument does show is that people who are doing no physical OR intellectual labor are very probably exploiting people since if I have shares in a factory I'm not even doing any managerial work that could possibly increase how much value labor could produce significantly, so (you'd need to actually work it out) but I'm very probably engaging in exploitation. It's possible that I'm increasing the efficiency of the economy as a whole by investing in one business versus another, but there's no way of working this out without doing experiments on isolated societies with some societies as control.

There's no simple formula to demonstrate exploitation. The simple formula described in that video only emerges from the assumption that the organization of labor doesn't increase the exchange value that labor can produce. If this is not the case, and a capitalist does increase it, then it makes sense that he might get take the surplus to pay for his organizational efforts that are increasing the amount of exchange value his workers can produce.

At best this argument suggests we should be skeptical of the amount of profit capitalists make, not just that profit is definitely always exploitation. You can't show this unless you believe managerial competence (managers) and the act of assigning resources to one factory to another (investors, non-managerial owners) does nothing to increase efficiency.

Even actually existing "socialist" regimes didn't believe this. If they did they wouldn't have assigned managers since the workers would have been able to organize it all through consensus, and they wouldn't have assigned resources and engaged in production quotas (like capitalist investors) because it would've defeated their own argument about exchange value purely stemming from the labor of workers and nothing else.

Anarchism at least takes it a step further and DOES say that workers should organize themselves immediately, but from the perspective I've outlined this should be less done because of exploitation, but to test whether exploitation is true or not. If anarchism really works consistently, then this would prove that bosses add nothing and thus don't get to take the surplus as the cut that they helped increase from what the workers would be doing without organization (potentially nothing).

he makes the disticntion that manager roles are necessary, but nowhere does he implie the propietor nor his authority is the bases for an economic system

you know your being delusional right?
trump isn't "your guy", he just said stuff a lot of conservatives already agreed with (illegal immigrants and jobs getting outsourced). Normally repubs aren't allowed to talk about outsourcing by the repub media (controlled by oligarchs)
PS Trump got less votes than romney

Now I think of it like this it sounds like a more intellectual and realistic version of THOSE HYPER-COMPETENT JOOZ ARE ONLY ON TOP BECAUSE CHEATING which isn't saying much.

I'm probably missing something, of course.

If manager roles are necessary it undercuts the argument that exploitation is going on because we don't know how much exchange value the workers could produce in the absence of the manager.

Saying managers are necessary is equivalent to saying that capitalists are necessary. There's a contradiction here alright.

Wrangling the spread of Critical Theory is the main goal. Trump is a start in the right direction. Red-pilled white man realised the threat of our decaying culture and thus are attempting to rescue it. We will see what happens. This isn't all about economy, western culture is very important, if not more so.

...

No, you would just have moved the extra 60 from the guy you ripped off to yourself. The total amount of currency in the system won't have changed. That's the point the video is making. The extra sixty you made means someone else has sixty less.

Surplus value is where profit comes from. It's the translation of labor power into a wage that money is "created", by exploiting the workers.

Holla Forums has the PPH of a smallish board on 4chan (think /m/ or /his/), while Holla Forums is the new Holla Forums, of course Holla Forums will have a bigger presence.
We have also been growing, last year we were behind boards like /furry/, now we are the third board
Not to say Holla Forums only became popular because of idpol and SJW, not because they are a super funny meme machine, for example without the Anita Sarkeesians and Kotakus Holla Forums would want nothing to do with Holla Forums
Holla Forums will probably start declining with SJWs (hopefully) fading out and a republican on the white house (so being right-wing isn't the edgy contrarian choice anymore)

Do you have no idea how ownership works?

Culture is influenced by material conditions. You ought to fix that before fixing your """culture""".

hes right

That's a poor analysis, comrade. The Matrix was primarily a movie about cognitive dissonance. Agent Smith is the literal manifestation of cognitive dissonance in the minds and bodies of the 'unplugged'. Only those who abolished their desire for and attachment to the material world of the matrix were able to overcome the dissonance, hence the obvious apathy displayed on the faces of the heroes while they romped around in the Matrix.

The Matrix was fundamentally Nietzschean. You want to escape the will-to-power, then there's a lot of stuff you have to stop caring about.

but we can know how much the manager would produce without workers

0
zero
nada
non

moreover, we can know how much the workers could produce without a manager, as such entities where the amanging position is distributed among the workers have existed in the past and have proived to work at the same level if not better

nope, the position of a manager being a fixed entity is bourgeoise, no reason why workers couldn't take turns to organize, or decide who is going to be the manager for a determined amount of time

the idea that a production cycle must meet goals does not prove the productive forces should be held on private hands

should read "the minds and bodies of those not yet 'unplugged', sorry

I'm not the best, but I can try.

I don't think you necessarily create inflation through exchange, rather what your doing is selling something above the socially necessary labor time. Scamming them basically. This usually happens in aftermarkets BTW.

Manager's wouldn't necessarily be out of the picture, but rather there would be a level of more decentralized control and less of a for profit motive. Worker co-ops basically. Of course some Marxists don't think their good enough. Also, I probably fucked up my argument, since I'm tired and a bit of a lamen.

Managers aren't the same as owners, also.

...

We dont need any advice from you. Left is trying to save the world while right is angry about immigrants and feminism.

sure, it wouldn't change at that moment, but what would happen later on, if all prices increase? the money supply is not enough to meet prices right?, meaning the goverment would need to print more money, increasing the money supply, devaluating the currency, as no extra value was created by the workers, just a higher price was set

absolutely understand that

alright, but if everyone started selling products above SNLT, then what happens to the money supply, the law of supply and demand tells us the demand for said prodcut would decrease, leading to a smaller supply, but that is not the case, as supply and demand is deeply flawed, moreover, in order to stop some sort of crash happening because of the lack of money supply and artificially created prices, the goverment would respond with an increase in currency right?

Not an argument.

Do you? There are various forms of ownership.

And the converse.

Which large scale industry works without managers? If it worked better it would have outcompeted industries that were wasting resources on managing when that apparently does nothing.

Yeah, I get that 3 guys could spontaneously make tea and crumpets without a boss, but that's not a recipe for a society wide economic system.

You're missing the point. The need for a manager at all is a concession and a massive contradiction in the exploitation argument.

If from among the workers an effective manager could be voted in, that's all well and good, but it still shows that specialized role is vital.

Less of a profit motive is already a concession since the original argument is that profit is exploitation inherently since surplus value is extracted by someone who contributed nothing towards it.

Why if you just want less profit, just be a progressive liberal. You've already conceded that Marx's explicit argument was wrong, even if he was close enough.

Sometimes they are, and in many small businesses that are single proprietorships this IS the case. But I also thought about the cases of ownership where management and ownership are detached such as large corporations. Even a shareholder board influences resources and management by appointing a CEO. These are still actions that could alter production.

I work software engineering at a company, we get along fine, sometimes we go out for beers every weekend or so.

Shame though, this board doesn't move fast enough to invoke repeating digits to invoke some diety built from confirmation bias.

Maybe invoke the ghost of Stirner, or say repeating digits are all spooks.

Does that include consolidating the fucking numerous amount of different views on what's "left" and what isn't?

Humanism.

We're not libruls. Read the stickies.

Hello Mr. Bimmler. Did Mr. Hilter win the local election?

I don't understand, the workers can very much engage in production of commodities, they've done that all their life

none, now, explain how the idea that managers are an important role inside an industry means the factory should be privately owned

a manager is not the owner of a scale industry

thenation.com/article/worker-cooperatives-are-more-productive-than-normal-companies/
theguardian.com/social-enterprise-network/2013/aug/21/co-operatives-success-and-breakdown
co-op.bc.ca/Studies-That-Suggest-Co-op-Students-Are-More-Employable
moreover, the bourgeoise law have stablished a system whichs makes it easier for propietors to be the sole owners of the productive forces

neither is the current one, as the current one does not account for externalities, workers rights and so on

moreover, you have still failed to prove that the necessity of a manager entails the propietor to claim ownership of the productive forces

no?
a manager manages production, the role of a manager exist to control data,logistics and so on, the way the data and logistics can absolutely be deicded by the workers, and the manager will make sure said numbers and conditions are met

now the need for managing production does not mean the managing role must be a fixed position, ideally if a manager fails to meet expectations workers can always change his role to someone more fit for the role

this reason brings me to my second point, if a propietor, aswell as the workers can decide to fire the manager of change his role inside a company, then the managing position is thereforte another cog in the labourer machine, a manager is NOT a propietor in this case

one way I have noticed is easy to understand this is a hospital, I'm sure you know how a hospital works in the current system so let me explain how a hospital would work in a co-op environment, because a hospital needs specialized labour, managing and simple labour which is absolutely necessary like cealning personel

under a co-op system the hospital would belong to the personel working in there, or would belong to a larger syndicate of medical workers, now since we understand that working as a brain surgeon demands more skill and labour than being part of the cleaning personel it makes sense that the surgeon would earn more, as the surgeon produces more value, however we also need cleaning personel, but we can have a surgery without cleaning personel

every now and then, people could swap roles, so the cleaning personel would be the surgeons, and so on

of course in the current system, you need a surplus supply of simple labour, to drive the cost of hiring cleaning personel low, while the medicine schools and the pharma industrial complex can keep getting massive profits

but all of this can be fixed, I would arguee that a hospital where every person is capable of performing surgery is a lot more qualified that one where the surgeons are in ewer numbers and there is a drive for profit to lower the costs of the surgery and charge me more

same with the role of a manager, the psoition of a manager is essential it means a lot more work, as you have to deal with logistics and data instead of working in a steel press, but this doesn't mean the manager position has to be centralized, it clearly doesn't happen otherwise because the ruling class wants to mantain their position of power

absolutely, but it doesn't show the productive forces should be held on private hands

We're not liberals, but I can't help but think that all this good theory is going to waste if we're here just circle jerking eternally.

The Dems just got "btfo'd" as the dudes at Holla Forums would say. While it undergoes a restructuring, this is a chance we can't let slip by, especially with a lot of millennials turning their back on old capitalist systems.

By being organized under a manager.

>thenation.com/article/worker-cooperatives-are-more-productive-than-normal-companies/
>theguardian.com/social-enterprise-network/2013/aug/21/co-operatives-success-and-breakdown
>co-op.bc.ca/Studies-That-Suggest-Co-op-Students-Are-More-Employable

Only the first article is even about what I'm talking about and actually co-ops get various tax breaks, and are co-ops in name only. You also didn't link me to Virgine Perontin's paper, which I will find (it's probably behind a pay wall), but the fact that you linked me to a left wing rag suggests you live in an echochamber.

You might as well prove immigrants commit more crime by linking to a "study" mentioned briefly in a Breitbart article.

The fact remains that co-ops are hardly suppressed, and if they really produced more at a lower price, they'd outcompete traditional businesses and the bourgeoisie would be outright forced to ban them, and yet instead things like Mondragon in Spain get tax breaks. Hmmm.

Why would I argue for something I'm not arguing for to begin with? Maybe it shouldn't be privately owned. Still doesn't mean profit necessarily equals exploitation.

Not an argument for profits = exploitation. It just shows that you'd need to calculate the damages of externalities and have a tax.

Workers rights are vague and non-mathematical. You're retreating from the element of Marxism I'm actually arguing against. I'm not arguing against socialism here. I'm just saying that socialism isn't justified by this argument.

Because I'm not making that argument. I'm arguing that you can't show that the proprietor doesn't increase exchange value over what would. Stick to the point instead of arguing a totally different imaginary thing you think I've said.

Yes.

No, but if its too fluid then inefficiency will increase, for the obvious reason that the previous manager has to coordinate with the upcoming manager over the data and logistics he's going to be taking over.

You're assuming knowledge is symmetrical in this situation and that specialization is of limited importance.

The point is that the manager CAN be the proprietor, and if his management increases exchange value produced by workers, as compared to his absence, then his taking of some of the surplus value would be justified, because otherwise he wouldn't be compensated at all, and this holds regardless of how fluid the managerial position is.

As soon as you admit a manager is at all necessary, the workers have to give up surplus to pay the manager. (surplus is also useful so that the firm has savings too).

There goes exploitation out the window. You're just saying that you'd like the guy exploiting to be changed based on what the workers think (which has its own flaws but not insurmountable), which is not the same as the initial argument of profit = exploitation. The taking of surplus should be inherently exploitative and yet you NEED to do it as soon as you concede to a manager at all, so it's a terrible argument against capitalism, and you need better ones.

Um… okay.

You're REALLY underestimating the necessity of specialization. I seriously hope you don't think that its better to train everyone to be a surgeon, so that they can swap because reasons, then to just have the people you need focus on being surgeons while low skilled people get to be floor cleaners. Otherwise you have to train way more surgeons just so you can swap which would waste time and resources. You'd have a shitty economy.

That's not why. It's because the alternative is fucking insane.

They'll be charging you more to pay for all those years of medical school on top of everything else they have to do. You haven't changed anything except you're going charged more for stupid reasons.

You clearly have no understanding of why specialization is a good idea, and training everyone to do everything is a fucking terrible idea, especially with high skilled professions.

Now THIS is why I love leftypol! Get to have intellectual conversations for a change.

I thought race was a spook?

But we are, buddy. We are winning, and you are going down.

sure, but the necesity of a manager does not mean the productive forces must be private property

boy you sure rev'd up projection pretty quickly

there has been a strong movemment againts workers unions, america, which one had some of the biggest unions have now banned the implementation of them in several states

yes, the bourgys are banning, hence why only "co-ops in name only" are the rule, as you mentioned

what? what the fuck?

I already explained to you, the ncesessity of the manager excist, but this doesn't prove the necessity of private property, meaning the idea of private property is in itself exploitation, and it serves the propietor to extract more value from the workers, moreover, the idea that a manager would get higher wages exist because the managing role demands higher knwoledge and experience, not because the manager is the owner of the productive forces, which you strictly implied as I just quoted

profit from someonese else's labout IS exploitation, a propietor is exploting both the worker and the manager, in case the manager is not the owner

that was not the issue I quoted when I wrote what I wrote,
profit = exploitation because profit = keeping someone's value generated by their labour, private property exists to defend this mode of exploitation

not anymore than property rights

I haven't been following your gay ass discussion and I'm probably not going to read the posts above the one I'm replying to but

indicates that you might have a bit of a wonky understanding of exploitation of surplus value. The presence of a manager makes absolutely no difference to the question of whether wage labour is exploitative.

Surplus value profit isn't when someone receives the product of someone else's labour. If we went by that ass-retarded idea, then breastfeeding would be exploitation, prostitution would be exploitation (of the john - whose surplus value the whore is exploiting), birthday presents would be exploitation, and so on and so on (sniff.)

Wage labour is exploitative because it separates the producers of value from their product. The producers choosing to voluntarily obtain the services of someone who can coordinate is not exploitative because those who produce value can determine whether they'd like to invest it back into production (whether in buying a new assembly robot or contributing some of their product to keep an accountant on staff.)

This is no more exploitative than giving your kids birthday presents.

A wall of text doesn't not an intellectual make.

Got you covered fam.

but you did, see

first exchange value is determined by the market
then the propietor doesn't add any value to the use values generated by the human labour using the means of labour

the means of labour and the object of value are privately owned, and this excuse using bourgeoise law is precisely the fallacy used to defend exploitation

the point was already discussed, the propietor doesn't add any value to the use values generated by the human labour, as continued to explain and exemplify why

very well, the worker that is taking care of said position should be paid accordingly, as his responsabilities increased accordingly

it is a muh privilege and a right every worker has to share said position, so the idea that a managing position must be fixed with the excuse of private property is flawed

that is, quite literally, not an argument, how are you deducting this?

only if the knowledge of the manager is not known by every single of the workers, which is precisely anti-democratic, hence recurrent in the bourgeoise system

moreover, the current manager wouldn't need to leave as the new one enters, they could work together for one month, and then the next worker would work by himself the next 5 months in case the workers determined the managing position will be swapped every 6

moreover, you are forgettingt wo very different things, the upcoming manager would have problems because the organization of the position follows a centralized model, were only the manager holds the information
in a distribuited model a manager would only follow the rules stablished by the workers, if the workers deice they only want to produce a limited amount of use values, then the manager has to do the accounting and logistics in order to find the demand for the product, the raw materials needed and so on

that is his job, his job as a manager would to manage the production of the workers, not to decide how much the workers must produce, as currently exist in the capitalist economy

because we are talking acording to a proper workers co-operative, I already explained why its not in the bourgy's interest to have a democratic ownership and control of the ownership of the productive forces

continued

sure, it can be, but property is theft

he wouldn't take any form of surplus value whatsoever, as you just claimed his management increased the exchange value of the commodities of the workers when traded in a market, didn't you?

IF the manager actually increases the quality, value, efficiency and so on of the system, then his position would have generated an extra exchange value, which would belong to him
IF he does not, and yet decides to takes in extra cash, using the "muh property" excuse, then yes, that is exploitation and the extra cash is not justified

moreover, everyone could take the role as a manager, claim ownership of the productive forces and exploit the workees, being the owner doesn't meanhe will be a good manager

he would be as you just claimed his presence increased the exchange value of the commodity

however, the use value of the commodity was still generated by the workers, as without the workers, his policies wouldn't have gotten anywhere

but you just implied the manager increased the exchange value of the use values, didn't you, why would he need to aproiate the workers surplus value, if the surplus value was generated by him is more than enough, or was the value generated by him minuscule, alsmot in the way of being completly irrelevant?, then he is not being a good manager, and by no means should get to keep the surplus value of the workers and again, doing it via property rights is theft, so he would not only be a shitty manager, but a thieve

it was his decision to follow X and not Y path, so yes, he generated extra value, no need to exploit workers at all, right?

yes, the amount of money saved will be decided by the whole company, and the manager will make sure said goals are met, it is his job after all, thats why he earns more

nope

he is not exploting anyone, as his job increased the exchange value of the commodity produced by the workers

don't worry I have explained this one already

actually, it is a perfect argument againts capitalism, because if the manager cannot increase the exchange value of the commodity sold at a market, then he is a shitty manager, no reason to defedn any sort of bourgy property law that helps him stay in that role

your own argument proved itself wrong, as a manager that has to keep surplus value of others, means he did not generated a surplus by himself, strictly showing the need for a more qualified manager to take his place, weather he is the "propietor" or not, as property is theft

why shouldn't workers on a hospital be aware of how medicine works?, what is the argument againts this other that:

you are aware that the people graduating from medicine schools would be the ones taking the role of the cleaning personel, nurses and so on, and not a lumpen who never got the education necessary

you are think we ought to educate the current cleaning personel, while that should be done, I am arguing in favour of removing the cleaning personel in place of surgeons and so on, that will swap roles as needed

absolutely nothing wrong with this, people should be suregons, quantum physicists, mathematicians, engineers and so on, the education system must guarantee people will be able to develop whatever technique they are solicited to
no

My entire point is that if management does any work increasing the productivity of labor and organizing it to produce more value than if it were poorly organized, then the value isn't solely generated by that workers labor, which destroy the profit 100% = exploitation argument completely.

When you can't apply that simple formula you need to actually prove that management doesn't do this, otherwise the bourgeoisie who are managers of their small businesses are not necessarily exploiting. Certainly not in the direct way this formula implies.

last part

you are thinking in a bourgy capitalist way that puts profit first before humans, which is why you see educating the masses as a burden and not as abenefit, and yet you dare to claim I live in an echocahmber

wew lad

Wrong, its a proveable fact that educated people lead to better societies

easy, abolish the money system and the credit system so that the school is socialized, like literally everywhere outside america

why would anyone charge more if the healthcare sector is socialized?

specialization is absolutely a good idea, specialization is precisely what we need in every sector of politics and economy, which is precisely while, unlike capitalism in which the people are limited to what they can achieve I am proposing a system where every single person working in a company will be specialized on every secotr of it

citation needed

its literally not because the logistics personel have a harder time doing their work if two sectors they have to interact with eachother have no idea what they are doing

the waiter in a restraurant knows precisel what the people in the kitchen do, what the cashier does and so on, the waiter is not isolated from the kitchesn and the better the waiter is informed the better his job at selling food to the customer will be

would you trsut a waiter that doesn't even know what "medium-rare" means?

check urself before u wreck urself cappie

No, you are transforming into moderate elephants just like your master. You're already praising the Jewish bankers he's nominating.

Large scale specialized highly mechanized production inherently does this, and you haven't even established that this is bad.

If they do this, they are subject to being outvoted. They don't choose anything. The collective pool of votes makes the choice, ruling over anyone who wanted a difference vote.

This is inherent to society, so you are essentially arguing to be almost totally meaningless instead of being totally meaningless, and probably for lowering production too, since if you tried to make everything as democratic as possible you' just get sclerosis and make everything really costly and inefficient.

You are going to have to elect a manager to defer your choice too, and that means on the day to day level before you vote him out, all his decisions are his, and not under your control, so you are still being exploited, until the workers choose to pick another guy who chooses for them, which means that separation between the producers of value and their product is maintained until it is briefly interrupted to select a different guy to maintain it.

This is exactly as pedantic as the ancaps who want to swap taxes for rent and the President for a CEO.

Just become a progressive liberal and vote for a strong welfare state and labor protection laws. You don't need to bring your shitty simplistic formula with you.

Alienation and exploitation are fucking retarded spooks.

You seem to think that profit is the reward for management. It is not.

no, as the "profit" generated by the manager, which in reality is just extra exchange value when the production cycle took place, cames from the idea that due to the management position, the value increased, this increase in value clearly was due to the management position, now the management position couldn't have done it by himself, as the management position is simply following what ach sector of the production forces told him to do

did he generated extra exchange value? yes?
no reason to keep the value generated by the worjkers, as his policies increased te exchange value

he didn't generate extra value? then he must exploit the workers by keeping his surplus value, using his bourgy hierarchical position and false property rights to coherce the workers into accepting less value in money form than what they created

I just did

1.- if A (management) increased the exchange value of X (commodity in the market), then the management role is justified, along with an extra portion of the extra exchange value generated by his policies

2.- if A didn't increase the exchange value of X, then the management role isn't justified,he doesn't get to keep any surplus value, as it was not generated by him

the increase of price, demand, efficiency is what generated the extra exchange value, not property rights

now, on a macro level, if the whole systems works as in number 1 they would reach a perfect equlibirum, if it work as in number 2, then a whole lot of problems arise:

-there is a necessity of property rights, which the bourgy has shown to defend; destroying society
-there is a lower demand, as workers get to keep less of their value, leading to economic crisis
-there is no motivation towards controlling externalities, as workers show no interest in the company
- an increase in debt and loans from the workers, as they need money to pay for commodities, leading to burst and bubbles, making the financial sectro very ineffective

a poorly organized company, continuing to work in the same inefficient way because "muh property" "muh its noth theft because muh capital investment" is flawed and has lead us to the current crisis we have experienced since the introduction of capitalism

No thanks, we like focusing on a shitty 18th century economist too much for anything like that.

muh mob rule

so are property rights and hierarchies

lrn how to stirner post

meant to quote

And who would that be?

History is going to crush you (again).

Neoliberals are tea market/libertarian economists and opposed to taxes, welfare and regulation.
READ A FUCKING BOOK

Property rights are spooks, but someone literally maintaining a position of control because guns is not. The property rights are pieces of paper which tell people that this is the case, not magic.

why would he need to mantain his position of control with guns, is the economic system he is controlling terrible for the rest of the population?

because idiots

I've been telling this to other leftists for years, but they just don't want to listen because they think actual battling is beneath them, so they just write moralistic articles.

no reason to have an economic system that let's idiots get to power then

THICC

like an elite technocracy?

You did nothing except for posting le maymay frogs.

No it doesn't. It's only because workers are paid wages and don't own what they produce. Mechanized production is the same as any other kind of production, so long as there's human labour involved. It doesn't matter if you're using hammers or robots, the result is the same - human labour produces value.

It's more of a choice than some guy deciding for you because he owns it and if you say otherwise he'll beat you to death.

You are wrong in saying it's inefficient. See the piece on worker co-ops that empirically demonstrates this. Furthermore, democratic running of the place of production is not necessarily because we are committed to the idea that democracy is always good and more democracy is always better, but it's simply the only way to govern a worker-owned workplace. Shareholders appoint boards of directors, but I don't see you saying that we should abolish private property because democracy is inefficient there.

Not necessarily, and even if you do elect a manager, you're not being exploited until you're paid less than the value you produce after reinvestment, taxes and so on.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter if one individual loses a vote and doesn't get to see his vision come to life. We don't argue for absolute monarchy because being on the losing side hurts voters' fee fees. This is retarded.

You are utterly and completely wrong. The difference is that when you have private property, the interest of the actor with final say in the running of the workplace is to pay workers as little as possible while accumulating as much value as possible for himself. This dialectical tension reverberates into wider society and causes a number of deleterious effects that are intensifying as we speak, such as the tendency for the rates of profit to fall, artificial scarcity, planned obsolescence and crisis of overproduction. As Marxists, we simply wish to resolve this antagonism and its negative effects by fire and fucking sword.

Welfare and labor protection aren't enough - as profits fall, the bourgeoisie (on whose behalf the bourgeois representative democracy goes to the trouble of ruling) will reverse these concessions in order to maintain the profitability of their firms as the rate of profit continues to fall. It is only by abolishing the bourgeoisie as a class, implementing social ownership of the MoP and by eventually abolishing production for profit that we can resolve the contradictions of capitalism. All these socdem measures are good for is breeding Hitlers.

Do all anfems have PMS?

Small genetic differences have a HUGE impact.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOPSYJ/TOPSYJ-3-9.pdf

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf

humanbiologicaldiversity.com/articles/Rushton, J. Philippe & Arthur R. Jensen. "The rise and fall of the Flynn Effect as a reason to expect a narrowing of the Black-White IQ gap." Intelligence 38 (2010).pdf

emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Is-the-Flynn-effect-on-g-A-meta-analysis.pdf

There is GREATER FST WITHIN CHIMPANZEE POPULATIONS THAN BETWEEN CHIMPANZEES AND HUMANS.

YET NO BIOLOGIST WOULD DENY THE SEPERATE SPECIES.

Black british Autism Level

THERE IS NO WESTER COUNTRY WHERE THERE ISN'T A SIGNKFICANT Autism Level GAP BETWEEN BLACLS AND WHITES. THIS GAP IS ALWAYS THE SMALLEST AT CHILDHOOD AND LARGEST AT ADULTHOOD AGAIN FITTING THE HEREDITARIAN HYPOTHESIS CORRECTLY

RISING Autism Level SCORES AMONGST BLACKS AS A RESULT OFBTHE FLYNN EFFECT DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO AN INCREASE IN GREATER INTELLIGENCE AKA THE G-FACTOR

newrepublic.com/article/115787/rising-iq-scores-dont-mean-greater-intelligence

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608013001556

EGALITARIANS BTFO

That's horseshit. The Matrix is the most Marxist movie Hollywood has ever produced. The Machines exploiting the energy of the human race while keeping them locked in a false reality is the most obvious metaphor for exploitation and the superstructure that I have ever seen in science fiction. Human beings obviously would not produce enough bio-energy to fuel the Machines, so the plot can't work as hard science fiction. It only works as a metaphor. The rebels are also not intent on destroying technology as such, only destroying the Machines that are exploiting the human race. There is zero anarcho-primitivism in those movies.

The right is better at this shit because most of them are acting in their perceived short-term self-interest and have no scruples about employing propaganda and other dishonest methods. Holla Forums does it all the time with their twitter false flags. The left (distinct from liberals) prioritizes the long-term interests of the human species and is enormously squeamish about employing propaganda or other unethical but effective strategies. This is why I respect Lenin enormously although I don't agree with all the decision he made. He was a fighter and was not afraid to play dirty.

Stop giving advice to lefties.

Traitor.

You're right. What we need is more memes. I mean, you guys literally memed a high-functioning retard into the highest office in the land.

OTOH, what are these "essays, books, videos, memes, conferences and even awards" you speak of?

Because the average Trump voter isn't reading about the fucking Dark Enlightenment or listening to some podcast that thinks the height of comedy is calling everyone "goy" and "cuck". At most, they're sharing r/the_donald basic bitch memes and will probably become very disillusioned with his presidency once he doesn't perform on his campaign promises. And you'll lose those people forever. This is pretty much the height of Holla Forums's power. Enjoy it, it's all downhill from here.

Small hand resting on phat ass. Yes please.

Your style of unfunny shit posting would be better suited for something awful or metafilter

There is a good chance he will end up with the popular vote

No he won't, you delusional retard. He's not making up a gap of 400,000 votes that has continued to widen since election day.

Wake up and realize that he won Texas by the same margin that he won Ohio, which was less than half of Romney's margin. Ohio is a historic swing state. It went for Obama twice. Republicans are on the brink of annihilation, and they are so fat on their unexpected victory that they won't even see it coming.

I'm convinced all AnFems are actually Holla Forumsyps who come here and choose that flag to shitpost because it's the memiest on the list

Enjoy watching the fed expand over the next eight years dumbasses.

In truth you're no better at shitposting than this board, you've just let the slight media attention get to your head.

Always the bridesmaid, and never the bride.

It requires people who've actually read it to distill the contents into memetic symbols, posters, or catchy catch phrases. In a way maybe we need to accept that information takes the least path of resistance in application.

And as much as we hate the memetic nodes, those screaming manchildren, they're the main ones that would defend the ideology to it's death on every channel available no matter how contrary to the actual philosophy it is (eg., le spooks)

KEK, you just read the title and thought:

Thank you for bumping this wonderful thread, this is precisely what we needed.

kek

Minnesota transracial adoption study. Pic related.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOPSYJ/TOPSYJ-3-9.pdf

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf

humanbiologicaldiversity.com/articles/Rushton, J. Philippe & Arthur R. Jensen. "The rise and fall of the Flynn Effect as a reason to expect a narrowing of the Black-White IQ gap." Intelligence 38 (2010).pdf
Flynn effect does not occur on g

emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Is-the-Flynn-effect-on-g-A-meta-analysis.pdf

Wouldn't this make Stirner a centrist?

There is greater genetic variation within the chimpanzee populations (fst) than betwen chimps and humans.

No biologist would say we are a different species. Small genetic differences have a HUGE impact.

Rising black scores due to flynn effect doee no correspond to a greater increase in general intelliegence aka the g factor.

newrepublic.com/article/115787/rising-iq-scores-dont-mean-greater-intelligence

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608013001556

Pic related. black british Autism Level.

There is no western country in the world where there is no significant black white Autism Level gap.

The gap is smallest at childhood but highest at adulthood. Again confirming the fact that genetic factors play the smallset during childhood while the biggest during adulthood.

Hotpockets will delete peer reviewed scientific studies as opposed to shitty blogposts.

the reason nobody goes for your thread IDs is because you come from a position that every voice that isn't yours is shitposting

it's the same reason clinton lost - your smug, self-righteous attitude turns everyone off to the idea before it's even implemented

and PS: it's not hard to get a fucking proxy in 2016

WEW lad

Also Arktos? Arent that the shit that is run by that one Swede who pissed off to Budapest and then got bakrolled by Russians to spread this shit around?
Well i guess then what Holla Forums woudl really need is a great power to bankroll it for its own means. how very heroic.

Black kids are doing better in school than they were before. The rising Autism Level may play into that.

apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/08/african-american-grades.aspx

independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/exclusive-must-do-better-black-pupils-did-with-best-improvement-in-exams-9563395.html

This is pretty much why I ditched out on Holla Forums and went full Holla Forums, I liked the idea of a radical leftist version of Holla Forums but after a while it just wasn't fun anymore. There's just nothing to DO here, pol is fun. The last few months have been non-stop podesta email, illuminati hunting, pedo-ring chasing, shitposting on a grand scale good times. What has Holla Forums been doing? They're still jerking off over a slightly different obscure set of marxist intellectuals. That's only fun for a very certain kind of person and only for a while, there's no broad appeal.

Jesus christ, look at this. I understand it's fun writing and arguing this kind of stuff but I read the entirety of fucking das kapital and I don't really want to read it again as rehashed by some 20 year old autist.

Nothing of consequence

Please, user, let it die.

...

Oh great, so we've got 90% retards and 10% spergs in the black community now, as opposed to 99% retards 1% spergs.

Kinda right honestly.

7/10

Socialists redpilling is like Malcolm X bleaching his skin

Your English is fine, OP. Thanks.

This isn't really true anymore honestly

This was not the original plot point, it was changed probably because the original one was far too confusing.

The machines don't use humans as a battery, they use them as processors, essentially. The machines conquered and assimilated humanity. The neural network formed by the humans is The Matrix itself.

When I say confusing I mean, it adds an extra mind blowing layer to the movie which already was blowing the fuck out of everyone's mind.

hahahahaha are you fucking retarded?

...

lol enjoy getting blasted the fuck out in 2020 by sanders2.0. Hillary was by far the worst candidate the Dems could ever come up with and Trump didn't even manage to win the pop vote against her.

Shut up

Advice for you

Get a job

Anyone who calls the alt right, and the far right American public, anything but theocratic and fascistic, is a liberal. People as such should not post here, do not have the rights to post here. They should be banned.

I'm serious. It'd solve the American far far right apologia we always have