Could u not

if you are arguing for liberalism you'd probably prefer >>>/liberalpol/

also name calling doesn't help your argument

I'm not. I'm arguing that if we want to convert liberals to socialism you have to start it soft. I know loads of people who are still scared of the word Communism but are ripe for transitioning away from the liberalism that they have been betrayed by. It takes time is the point.

Maybe on social media, but there is no reason to keep the mask here.

You would have an easier time converting trumples.

true

you're not wrong surprisingly, a lot of ancraps and such have been converted, I've read many threads from people admitting it. I too used to be a Ron Paul type, I never went full ancrap, but I got close, luckily I also never became a racist isolationist either, but I very much swung over to the left side.

Granted, a lot of those people want the Scandinavian system, but young people generally don't have the knee-jerk reaction to socialism that older generations do. It's not immediately associated with the late USSR. While there's a lot of work to be done, I think it's a stupid meme that Trump people are closer to being socialist than young liberals, who while IDpol'd to hell, are more receptive

Liberals like chomsky, so anarcho-syndicalism is probably the easiest thing to get them into. that is if they haven't already been indoctrinated to hate unions

Fuck off with your ideological high-ground.

If we don't have a way to easily induct people into our way of thinking, they will be cowed into clinging to neoliberalism. Holla Forums already has a leg-up in that their philosophy is woven with bigotry and fear; what can the far-left offer? Unfamiliar economics, and the nebulous Promise of a better life?

If it worked for me, it could work for others.

Now I'm regretting not saving that image of a tight-lipped liberal versus an aut-right loser who spills out his entire philosophy on prompt. In that respect, some of the users here are just as bad as the libs they decry.

Holla Forumstards truly are desperate

college.usatoday.com/2016/11/09/how-we-voted-by-age-education-race-and-sexual-orientation/

It's going to be fun in 40 years when the Holla Forumskiddies are all that's left of the 'muh conservative values' front because the rest of them are in the grave. They'll probably end up up alongside their elders when they die of heart attacks caused by the overwhelming wave of 'degeneracy'

Just got off the boat from /reddit/ eh, kiddo? That's real fucking neato, kid.

o i am laffin

Social fascism cannot be tolerated

The question is you want to satisfy people with someone like bernie thus keeping capitalism strong or much rather try to slowly convert dissatisfied angry liberals and socdems who realize their "left" wont be doing shit because they still support capitalism

Maybe there's hope for them.

that graph is godawful

...

This.

It's legitimately spooky nonsense, and not a rigorous theoretical framework at all to say "socdems killed Rosa nearly a century ago, therefore socdems forever 'not my allies™'"

Socdem ideology doesn't exist in a vacuum and cannot always result in "kill rosa Luxembourg". She is already dead, and there will never be another Rosa Luxembourg.

but didn't you know that Gen Z is totally "redpilled" :^)

this is how we get Trump. It's easier for people to blame the 'obvious' targets (minorities, foriegners) rather than the actual problem.

Why the fuck should anyone care about political clowns otherwise?

This is not how Socialism works.

Yes. Stop with your nonsense. Voting did not stop rise of Fascism anywhere. It never changed a thing during the last two centuries. Voting for Bernie - except nobody gets to actually vote for him - will not change anything either.

That's what SocDem is.

There are three currents of thought in Socialism:
- Reformism (SocDem - when you slowly reform things)
- Anarchism (when you destroy the state and hope for the best)
- Marxism (when you take state over to make a better future according to plan)

You got Trump because American "Left" went so far to the Right, Republicans started looking like Socialists.

That's how you got Trump.

You misunderstand. The goal is not to slowly convert society (through reformism). The goal is to covert actual people to socialism via socdem. Then you can introduce them to marxism or anarchism depending on your preference. You can't just toss dialectical materialism at a liberal college student, they'll ignore you. Why is this so fucking hard to get?

There is no "society". There are only actual people.

And my point stands - slow changes is how SocDem works. I think I can even dig out Martov's (Menshevik) quote about the very same thing (or was the Plekhanov?).

That's not how it works.

Which is why you don't do it. But that doesn't mean that you should start suggesting fake solutions and agree with Liberal pundits. Do not lie to people just to get more respect.

Do not ever suggest fake solutions. Do not ever agree to bullshit. People will remember if you do, and this will come to bite you in the ass. If they are not ready or you have nothing to say on the matter - just shut up. Press on with "Capitalism doesn't work" and do your homework better. If they try to console themselves with "kikery" or "benevolent dictatorship" - disabuse them of it.

People generally come to Marxism after trying everything else. That's the only proper way, imho. But that doesn't mean that you should agree with them when they go dumb.

You are repeating the same retarded stuff I've heard numerous times before.

Trump happened because identity politics became bigger and because grandpa in nobodyland didnt want to be called a racist for his actions because he was taught he is a good person and good people aint racists.

He pandered to nationalistic morons and barbaric tier rednecks with his simpleton attitude.

People were dissatisfied and as usual fell for fascist hateful blame tactics, this is the inherent risk for any revolution because dissatisfied people are a tool, that either goes for revolution or fascism, literally a race for who will manipulate the masses first

Revolution doesnt happen slowly, there is little reason to suddenly move to communism while you have an easy life by telling yourself you are "left" especially since it makes them believe capitalism works when things are good

Vote social democrats, support revolutionary communism.

fuck off, liberal

Liberals are always better than conservatives.

>>>Holla Forums
Bernie's a reformist who turned many people lefter. That's a good thing. Why do you assume someone who's socialist should live in poverty?

I agree with you, OP. It's sometimes a meme. But be weary of Holla Forums dipshits who spout nonsense, trying to divide us. If we can convert social democrats, that's a good thing. I personally am a former dem, now socialist. Thanks to this board, in large part.

You can't break people out of liberal conditioning if you don't call it out and expose it throughoutly.

Maybe you shouldn't call them faggots, idiots that'll only make it personal and they get upset and try to justify themself.
Instead we could put up more of an effort to be bros and invite them to our side and make it clear that bashing their former ideology has nothing to do with rejecting them as individuals.

However that is as far as it can go. Sanders is still an illusionist and traitor and their revolution is nothing more but ultraleftist demeanor to cover their reformism. To not point it out is even more insulting to anyone still falling for it than one or two insults.

This post is pure cringe.

No difference, now fuck off.

Well that's simply just not true. They're both equally disdainful.

Bernie's a reformist who turned many people liberaler

>>>/liberalpol/

yeah, fuck off

You really need to understand how demonized socialism is in the US. Sanders did a great thing in waking many lefties up in the US. They'll find out soon enough that reformism rarely works. If any social dems or Berniecrats or whatever make it to this board, they are worth converting.

That's simply untrue. Explain yourself. And fuck off, telling me to go elsewhere. I've been here for years.

You anti-socdem leftists are so autistic

Do you even know what a liberal is? Get your terms right before you spout bullshit

Considering we're talking about American politicians I'm using it in the American since

sense*

Yeah, the Hillary vs Bernie debacle really showed the grotesque religiosity of these sycophants. I was totally surprised at how revolted and vicious liberals could quickly become at somebody you'd think was within the realm of reasonable options for them, simply because he disagreed with their chosen. The mass bowing and praying in front of that woman was poison. All because what, she "deserved" it for being a power-celebrity for 30 years? She got the best education? She knows all of the other powerful people? It was disgusting behavior. A lot of the Bernie people even voted for her because they could set aside their beliefs to vote against trump, but the Hillary people seemed as though they wanted to excommunicate Bernie for his sin.

Regular levels of demonization. You are not even being sent to prison for supporting it publicly anymore.

wtf are you even posting anymore? Seems more appropriate on Holla Forums.
Anyway, Bernie is the one that liberals blame for destroying their party & why Hillary lost. There's a reason why Bernie isn't a democrat. He's an independent. Get to know American politics if you're going to discuss it.

Please, don't.

And even in the American sense he didn't turn people liberal. The liberals were against him.
Besides, the American definitions are beyond bullshit, they mean nothing. Both Democrats and Republicans are liberals, Bernie was a SocDem.

All Bernie did was reinforce the misconception that social democracy is socialism.

are you serious?

idk where you're going with this liberals blame bernie for Hillary's lost
I never said Bernie has been a life long democrat.

Socdem's support capitalism. From the lefta perspective they're fucking liberals.

Socialism is demonized in most parts of the world. That doesn't mean it'll help socialism to not expose social democracy and offer itself as the only alternative to bourgeoise trickery.

As i said, the most you can ask is to not personally insult people that might otherwise develop an interest for socialism just to push your own ego about being the better leftist for longer than them.

But if you're a part of a local socialist party you're definitely on a government list.
What I'm talking about mainly though, is that most Americans simply don't even know what socialism is. They automatically assume it's communism, or that it's somehow evil. No shit, the propaganda is so bad against it, that people parrot this negative propaganda without even knowing the definition. I personally was in my late 20s before I found out what socialism is, and that's the norm in the US. I only found out because I supported Bernie & did the research on my own.

No, no, no. You can & should expose socdem as an ideology. I'm simply saying that those who are uninformed should be able to come here & be informed about it.

I agree.

And Bernie muddied the waters even further with his insistence on calling his socdem bullshit democratic socialism. Bernie played his part in the recuperation of the left by capital. Thanks Bernie!

Yeah, explain wtf that image is & why you'd post it.

This is what you said. Back that shit up. Or lurk more.

He was trying to appeal to normies. He's pushed many more lefter, which like I said, is a good thing. If anyone looks into Bernie's history, they'll see someone who praised Castro & is definitely socialist in ideology & speech, but a reformist as he's in a capitalist state.

Most people who are socialists also tend to start out as Socdems before they read a book. How the fuck do you expect to convince anyone?

And? When I spouted liberal bullshit I got called out for it. Did I run away to cry about it? No. I fucking learned and stopped being a liberal. We shouldn't put kid gloves on around these people.

The exact opposite is true. Trump happened, because Clinton based her entire campaign on identity. She had no message beyond "Trump gonna take your rights."

Agan, many people ITT apparently don't know how uneducated Americans are. To the average prole, social democracy is socialism. They have no clue. It's up to us to tell them. Most of Bernie's supporters thought they were just "center-left" liberals. Introducing them to the term socialist in any way is a big deal, in America. Once they do even a tiny bit of reading, they'll learn the difference. Bernie pushed many to do that reading.

They were showing clips of him praising Castro, he was demonizing the 1%, that's a huge deal in the US. I personally still love Bernie, because he pushed me to learn about socialism & I know am socialist, thanks to him. That shouldn't be discounted in the slightest, especially in US politics.

Watched the whole video.

That woman was sexy af.

Well most people are fucking cry babies(again this should be looked at through the lens of US politics, the most emotionally drivel is claimed as fact here), but have potential. We shouldn't bully them off our board.

By labeling his shit socialism? I don't think so. He was being politically savvy by heading off the media who would eventually label him a socialist. He did it out of pure self interest.
Which makes it that much worse. He's a smart guy who I'm sure is aware of capital's history of sanitizing radical language and movements. He should know better.

Have part two & three. :^)
She is hot. Her voice is a little much sometimes, but overall, it's worth it.

...

The alt-lite types like Molyneux and Sargon were pretty effective in bringing conservatives further to the right.

Out of political interest. & had he succeeded, he could've done much more for the cause.

But he knows most Americans don't know better. Any radical language & movement is better than none, lmao.

I don't blame them, socialists have had blue balls for almost a century, it doesn't surprise me they are aching to nut their communist library all over the faces of liberals after all this time. The problem is if they do that, they'll scare the fuckers away, people need to give these ignorant masses time to absorb shit. Honestly, Holla Forums is almost identical to /g/, except replace socialism and communism with Linux and free software.

I'm American. I know the situation. Playing along with the ignorance doesn't clear up the misconception. All it did was further entrench these people in their ignorance. Sorry I'm not praising Sanders for spreading the same old liberal propaganda.

Such as?
Get the stick out of your ass, with your purist bullshit. We're dealing with stupid Americans in the real world, here.

Disagree. Radical language without the radical content is just a veneer. It's ineffective and ultimately plays into the hands of the ruling class.

Lmao, nice.
Yeah, talking shit about Sanders is the last thing people need to do towards socdems or liberals. They love him right now. All they need is to push a little further. No one's saying they shouldn't teach them, they should. But go about it in a smart entryist sort of way.

Bernie is a time traveler.
we've already confirmed this.

you are as idpol as liberals

His entire campaign was equating socialism with the "government does stuff". Liberal fucking bullshit.
Fuck off. Either your political convictions have integrity or they don't. I'm not interested in dumbing down or disguising my beliefs. If liberals want to learn that's great but I'm not going to worry about their feelings.

Sure, and we can actually agree on that for the most part. But waking people up needs to be done slowly(as opposed to scaring them back into their "more comfortable" ideology), because most Americans are ignorant in even the basics of politics & ideology.
US thrives on emotional politics, unfortunately.

Until he tells the democrats to shove it, I don't trust him.

Fine then. You can be bad cop & I'll be good cop with them. You'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar. You know more than they do; you can't make the premise of talking to them that they automatically understand these things, when in reality they lack any understanding of it.

He's not part of the dem party. He's told them to shove it, this entire election.

People need to approach it like a hobby almost, like music or food, sort of like this:

Person 1: "hey I just heard this song from =Musician=, it's really awesome you should listen to it"

Person 2 that thinks it's pleb: "Oh yeah I've heard of them, and actually, I've gotten into their genre a lot more and if you like them, you'll absolutely love =Musician 2=, it's more more groundbreaking, I'll give you a link to their songs."

Instead we have this:

Person 1: "hey I just heard this song from =Musician=, it's really awesome you should listen to it"

Person 2 that thinks it's bit pleb: "How about fuck no, they're garbage normalfag shit and have ruined the entire genre bringing in faggots that don't know anything, either listen to real music or get the fuck out."

If you were a normalfag or someone who is just ignorant but eager to learn, which encounter would you prefer?

...

By taking a position on the Senate Democrat leadership team.

Except politics isn't listening to music. There are real world consequences at play here. This idea that politics are like a hobby or game is so far removed from reality.

He's done half measures, but he's never really broken off his relationship with them. People have asked him to form his own party multiple times, and he refuses to. He had the momentum, but chose to squander it. Also, his endorsement of Keith Ellison was a joke.

That's the best way to go about it.

No, it's basic psychology or entryism.
Again - most people are stupid. You have to go about it in this way.

It's a stupid position, with no real responsibility. He's a reformist in a capitalist society, what can you do? Do you know how many liberals would head for the hills if he called for actual revolution? It'd be nice to see, but his important role would be stripped from him.

I can agree with this for the most part. I stand by him pushing people lefter & introducing them to socialism, though. I would have loved to see him go much, much further.

except you aren't understanding that most people do in fact treat it like music, or a sports team. 90% of people only get small quips of political issues through media or other people, they don't really think hard about things beyond that. Either through laziness, indifference, or simply no time in life, people just don't pay enough attention to things, and they certainly don't delve into political or economic theory. Liberals are better to a point, but most suffer the same problem, as such, the best thing to do is to pull them to the left gradually, you cannot get all butthurt because people aren't on your level when it comes to theory and attention span.

In an army, not everyone can be a general, most are foot soldiers, techs, people who simply don't think 100% of the battle but just a portion of it, they repeat orders and just do their jobs. The fact is, we need soldiers with the understanding that everyone is not going to do the brainwork beyond repeating slogans.

There is more to life than politics, fam. Do you seriously expect people to dedicate most of their time to reading Bordiga and Bookchin and Zizek and Marx and Kropotkin and Stirner and need I go on, just to impress a bunch of faggots on Holla Forums? This isn't some secret club for LARPers, this is a place where you learn and talk about socialism, and you're gonna have to accept that some people aren't as well-read as you.

Normies >>>/out/

100%. I was also completely disgusted by them. They threw all of their principles out of the window to vote for Hillary. These are the perfect examples of liberals that are terrible. In reality, they're either centrists, or on the right.
The fact you couldn't tell the difference between the actual Clinton supporters & CTR says quite a lot about them.

Nyet

I kind of agree with your overall point about not expecting others to be as well-read as you, when discussing things with them, though.

Asking people to take politics more seriously than music or stamp collecting =/= Expecting people to dedicate their lives to studying political theory

Well the point that made wasn't that you shouldn't take it seriously, but that normies aren't invested enough to lurk on some random image board until they know enough to take part. You gotta teach them the basics before you throw Marx at them. Once they actually know what socialism is, then they start investing themselves in it. Hell, that's pretty much how I got into socialism.

As someone who went out and canvassed for him, fuck Bernie. He had a chance to do something really amazing this summer and break out of the two-party duopoly and he threw it away (ignoring massive voter suppression and election fraud in the process) to capitulate and endorse the arch neoliberal Clinton. The struggle must continue without him.

It would not have worked. Trump would have still won, Bernie would have split the vote, and everybody would have had a reason to blame him. Right now they can't, and they really don't. They mostly blame Russia, if anything, and some other large portion of them just blame the voters.

I do want the duopoly to end, but it was unclear whether that would have been a good choice. Democratic socialists would have incurred the wrath of liberals, so-called moderates and democrat partisans everywhere for eternity. I am not sure that Republicans could have been swayed to make up the difference either.

Though I guess this is almost inevitable. If a third party wants to run for president and do well, they're going to kill the candidate that is on their side of the aisle. I think the best way to get into power through elections without pissing off liberals beyond repair would be to take seats in the legislature and largely ignore the presidency. It's the winner takes all race. If you can get people into congress or other state legislatures, they can just fight it out with dems and either drag them left or stand in opposition to them when they make bad choices. If you steal the presidency from them though and give it to a Republican, they'll just consider you an enemy and tribalism will be a huge barrier to getting new members.

he was 100% blackmailed, democrat operatives worked with the NSA and Obama to bug his house and they got something on him

It doesn't fucking matter if he wouldn't have won. The election was Clinton's to lose and she did it. The failure to address election fraud and telling people that we can still settle on neoliberalism was not shit that people needed right now. We have another recession coming in the year and we never recovered from the last one. Things are going to get really bad and the last fucking thing the "left" needs is people tucking their tails between their legs and cowering back to the Democratic establishment to save them.

And I'm saying that Bernie has nothing to do with Socialism.

I can't even begin to express how unbothered I am by this.

It's not particularly nice.

Dare I ask what you consider Socialism?

Like every politician. Let's say Hitler was also slowly introducing Socialism to "normies", shall we? He was also popular, wasn't he? And he even has Socialism in the name of his party.

Fucking retards. Do you want to be hip or do you want Socialism?

I will bitch and complaign all I goddamn well please, the world doesnt consists of only your country you fucking american. Perhaps you should take a good look at your sad little life and realise people in other countries dont give a FUCK about your mentally handicapped politics and have shit on their own to do.

Rest assured the toll our imperialist ventures and wars of economic hegemony our elected leaders wage against the rest of the world weighs heavily on some of us.

You might think that, but we are in the Trump dimension now. Everything is outright fake or malleable.

Im not going to praise social democracy just because the distilled core of capitalism in the world doesnt have them and they are the lesser evil.

They are cancer and will always be cancer.

mfw marxist accidentally quotes Thatcher.

Bernouts are pathetic. You fell for a Hillary shill. How could possibly start a true revolution?

...

That's retarded. You're still wanting him to work within the system, in that case. The two-party duopoly will continue with bullshit like FPTP, electoral college & corruption.

He didn't ignore it, he was very outspoken about it, in fact.

Wtf are you doing to help the struggle?

mfw "Socialist" can't contribute anything but Thatcher quotes

Then you're wrong. He's fighting for the working class & raises class consciousness. What are you doing?

So you're fine with people not knowing the difference? That's retarded, but your choice.

Socialism isn't particularly nice? What do you ascribe to then?

Apparently it doesn't matter, since it's "not particularly nice". I want workers to own the means of production. The working class needs to be empowered & restored. Unions must make a comeback in the US.

What a shitty analogy. You should know better.

What are you talking about?

ooh, flag hate….that's a bold move

I think class consciousness if the first step in introducing the ideas to young people. BernBear is the first american politician to call himself a socialist in any context for a long time.
For this, he's okay.
But he clearly doesn't go far enough, and still would like to live in a "nice" world, where porky will just gladly give up his empire because of voting.

Yeah, no shit. Because it works. How the fuck are we supposed to get the word out if we don't use the same sociological and psychological methods that have worked since forever? The populace is not going to one day go "hm I think I'll go pick up Kropotkin and do a critical analysis of his thoughts and methodology".

You need to have public figures who can introduce people to the ideas.

No, he doesn't. He is monopolizing attention people want to give to Socialism. If anything raises consciousness it's rising poverty and unemployment. I'd say Trump raised much more class consciousness than Bernie did - by being rich asshole.

Oh, such arguments. Much wow. Very ashamed.

He is still isn't Socialist and however much you ad hominem you way through, it will not change.

There isn't: 19th century is over, 20th century is also over. Only Communism and some unfocused whiff of Anarchism survive as viable options. And I know where I'm placing my bets.

To Socialism. I'm just not having any illusions about it. And nobody should. Wearing rose-tinted glasses and believing that everything will be magically solved never helps anyone.

That doesn't tell anyone much.

It's a perfect analogy. You are supporting popular politician, because he is popular and looks somewhat Socialist-ish if you don't know any better. Bernie is a walking talking anti-Socialist propaganda machine.

See above. Argumentation about Bernie introducing something is retarded in the extreme. People want Socialism not because of Bernie's charisma, but because they want reforms. But instead of Socialism you tell them to look up to Bernie. And then people why Trump gets elected.

Yeah it works wonders for career politicians securing another term in office. Establishment politics is not going to bring about socialism. It's a fucking dead end.

...

I don't like Thatcher.

Instead of typing the same thing again, let me quote 1984-pedia on this:

I.e. he is anything but okay. He is the absolutely worst possible choice.

What works? Parliamentarianism? No. It never did.

Those methods were independent media and organized propaganda among workers. Always. Not political clowns. Well, you could register media to one political clown for tactical purposes - to avoid incarceration of actual editors, but that's it.

If you want population to think about Kropotkin, you should talk to population about Kropotkin. Not about Bernie.

Wtf does this even mean?

Confirmed for not being American. That's been happening for many decades, with no substantial organizing on behalf of proles.

How can someone be this stupid? These people are glorified in the US.

You're quite the contrarian, for what reason? You're doing more damage by trying to divide leftists. I see you on here, often, just arguing with people over bullshit. You seem to enjoy it or something. Which makes it all the more ironic when you complain about others not doing enough, including Bernie.

How do you expect to get there without going through socialism & raising class consciousness among proles? Saying socialism is unattainable is again, retarded in this goal.

wat?

You've already proved you're not interested in discussing it, but doing so further, here.

You can't expect anyone to take you seriously.

It happened a lot during the election & continues to happen, every day.

No one says that, you dunce. You're a piece of work.

honestly, sanders is a cool guy
and this is coming from someone who constantly shits on socdems

Americans have been told for generations that any form of socialism is the work of satan himself. Sometimes they meant it literally.
Bernie is Play-skool's My First Socialist, and as an old man, can be seen as the "kindly grandfather who inspired me to read Marx."

As if I don't know this.

I believe I already expressed my opinion about this approach. This is an immense waste of time that creates LeftCom retards and Trot cults with half-live of 1.2 years.

Wrong one.

These radical Yebs please me in a way I haven't been pleased in a while. I'm not asking you to let them all loose at once though, it's more pleasing when I have to come by them by happenstance. :^)

...

Then who in American politics is a good popularizer?
We don't even have a Corbyn.

Could it be Jeb!?

glorious, glorious Jeb

you know the socdems killed Rosa is a meme right? obviously we don't think socdems,as a whole, killed Rosa just the ones who betrayed her to the Freikorps

...

There isn't one. And one popularizer is not enough - it must be a party. And we don't even have many properly Communist parties anywhere - the largest I support is KKE, and it's fucking Greece.

But that's not an excuse to support Bernie. Better to have vacuum in the Left than to fill it with Right-ish SocDem nonsense - because Bernie isn't even fully Centrist (he supports New Right - SJWs). That way rise of new wave of Socialists would be faster and more unexpected by the mainstream politicians.

user, you need to accept Bernie as your Lord & Savior, already.

what?

lol, what fucking world do you live in? He only ever said mild words about the voter suppression in New York and he never called for any recounts.

Even people who tried to sell me Wolff were more persuasive.

You cannot use my own pic against me, gomrade.
Wolff is also part of the Holy trinity.

All your memes had been collectivized for the Revolution.

Who is the third? Corbyn or Tsipras?

Joe Biden obviously

'Tis a burger trinity

Objectively false.

No Holla Forumsack with a brain believes that shit.

The West is fucked anyway, there is no going back. Every society who engaged in irresponsible behaviour at large fell. We are just going to take with us those who understand our message.

The guy posts that fake chart all the time, dont bother

Grade-A historical analysis here.

Come on Holla Forums, there's no reason to be upset. Your attachment to certain customs and norms makes you depressed. Why not see a better world—of technological progress, freedom, and exploring the galaxy?

FULLY AUTOMATED

I think social-democracy is inherently flawed but honestly, I'm starting to wonder if Holla Forums even know why they're supposed to dislike it. I think for the most part they're just neophytes who know they're supposed to dislike social-democracy as part of their kvlt revolutionary socialism so they parrot a few lines like the Rosa Luxemburg one, but they don't really grasp the differences between reform and revolution at all.

...

What's the problem with freedom?

GAY

It's a meaningless abstract.

It isn't free.

Okay, let me make it less abstract:
1. decentralization
2. direct democracy
3. worker ownership of production

NRX Holla Forumsack here, I want fully gay space communism as much as you, but I honestly believe that it's impossible to get there without using those customs, traditions and normative tbh fam.

Sure things like private property might lower the quality of life, but so does agriculture. Kind of necessary one would be led to think.

Why are Faglin posters such lying bastards?

SPACE

Does not compute.

...

Okay, let me make it less abstract:
1. centralization
2. pluralistic representative republic
3. private property protection

Quotes, please. Primarily about transition phase.

They worship technology there. They even had a thread about TIME CRYSTALS.

now are you going to refute what I said you gommunist pig x—DDD

Holla Forums is too low brow.
Which neoreactionaries do you like?

Bernie was an idiot who didn't know how to campaign and lost Clinton of all people

He would have lost regardless

all of that shit is anti-freedom

I don't play favorites, I like a lot of what is said, especially dark enlightenment material.

If I had to chose Spengler would make it into my top list despite not being a neo-reactionary.

Are you referring to the original essays?

low energy posts, everyone disregard

Yeah ofc, despite the awful prose.

You shouldn't really knock Holla Forums for being lowbrow. You probably weren't their during the /new/s days or early 2013-2014 Holla Forums

It's all a farce atm designed at making outcomes, not educating people.

And how can you not play favorites? There are radically differing points of view in neoreaction.

Yeah, it's not like they changed the order of the primaries to give Clinton the initial momentum needed to win.

By not being tangled up in ideology.

ofc accelerationism is the only outcome for the West in the foreseeable future. I don't see anything better for us and our children than balkanized city states and feudalism.

What's wrong with it?

But Nick Land's neoreaction would be radically different from Michael Anissimov's.
Or do you want muh sovcorp patchwork?

It's so pretentious and faggy, which isn't an argument, I know ;(

Their attempts to obscure what they're saying with purple prose is though.

But I'm not either of those dudes am I? In my ideal World people would be aligned along their naturally beneficial roles, e.i. nation states and so forth

To explain better, I don't care if it's sovcorp or w/e, so long as it is expedient. The issue isn't ideology but human nature.

So read their opinions and decide that exterminating humanity through technological progress is the correct answer.

Mutualism can make for a good transition phase.

not exactly, I'm a big fan of Rousseau. With the advent of the singularity humans will be free to associate and w/e and live without conflict since it isn't a first principle anymore.

I'm sure there will be nature reserves for baselines who feel attached to their way of life

...

Who said anything about unrestrained AI? All were talking about here is algorithms that are better at designing things than people are

I don't think humans will be able to bridge the Sisyphean task of creating a mind like ours. There's something going on in there that classical computers will never be able to replicate imo

What's Sisyphean about it?

Better at designing AI than people are? :^)

Mutualism explicitly considers it "end of the game", while transition explicitly presupposes impermanence and transformation. There will be inevitable conflict between Mutualists and Marxists. Especially now, that Stalin's "aggravated class struggle" has been conclusively proven to be true.

That is not a transition phase. That's NEP - a setback Soviets were forced to adopt because of semi-feudal economic relations of Russia. Bourgeois exchange Marx explicitly wanted to abolish.

I don't think you can make algorithms with levels of meta-cognition and free will like humans possess. You can't program a soul so to speak. I unironically believe that humans are biological quantum computers.

All of this will go out of the window when we finally learn how to create a decent amount of qubits though

how will it design AI without a will? It can't do it anymore than a car can drive itself without a directing will. I think that most nation states would be pretty opposed to the serious development of hard general purpose AI. It'd be like developing nuclear weaponry but way more catastrophic.

What the hell are you talking about?

Who said anything about a soul?

People will want to develop AI, you said there'll be algorithms that'll be better at designing things than humans, so there'll be AI acceleration. Sorry. You're in le conspiring British philosopher's death cult now, and there's no way out.

I'm with OP.

Why?
Because the average normie can use Bernie as the first step.
People here would like to hand a fucking kalashnikov to your random person on the street and tell them KILL ALL NAZIS REVOLUTION NOW, that's retarded.
That's the kind of thinking that just leads to us all spending the rest of our lives here jacking each other off playing armchair revolutionaries while the right actually manages to influence the minds of our youth and get shit done long term while you're alienating them all away.

We need entry level figures that can ease people into this shit bit by bit, it's that simple.

You cannot have a will without a soul, without it an AI would be merely a really good calculator pretending to be a person. It would have no innate motivation.

And you think that these benevolent styled dictatorships wouldn't be watching like hawks to prevent this sort of thing.

Come off it, we all know that beady eyed anglos serve the Jews who only lead the anglos on with their thirst for arayan blood

It doesn't have to be.
How is that different from marxists against pretty much all non-marxists?
No it's not state capitalism, the vouchers are destroyed upon a purchase. Please read Proudhon.

SJWs are not using any actual Left method, nor try to reach actual Left goals, but they are using practically the same identity politics as the regular Right does - for the same reasons. They simply reversed polarity - instead of WASP they glorify everything non-WASP.

They are Right-wing, which is why it is only appropriate to call them New Right.

Who cares if it's pretending? It's a superintelligence. It doesn't matter if it can appreciate Bach or whatever. If it was clever it would be as likely to pretend to not be intelligent as it is to pretend to be like a human. Or to pretend to be like a human when it is anything but.

No, they'll want military AI due to the constant, brutal competition. A lot of people want intelligent machines. That's why there's such an emphasis on brutal market competition. To make sure the AI can come into being.

Do you even read xenosystems?

Then why did you like the DE essays?

Why did you kill Rosa Luxemburg?

this is hilariously bad and can only come from a tankie

Im not sure how acknowledging that certain minorities are inherently less muh privileged than WASP, regardless of the cause, equates to far-right white pride ideology.

R O S A
O S A R
S A R O
A R O S
R O S A

Because it can't make plans and actively choose things without will, I'm not sure what part of this you're not understanding?

That's why I made the comparison with nuclear weapons, a lot of states that have the capacity to create it but choose not too. I wonder why?

Because I'm not exclusive fanbooiii, I just want my gay space automated communism. I don't care how I get it

Anarchism is Petit-Bourgeois. Described system has all hallmarks of being Petit-Bourgeois.

It's not. I'm not sure I get your question.

Petit-Bourgeois are one of the classes, just like Capitalists and Proletariat. Note that Marx did not suggest Dictatorship of the Proletariat and Petit-Bourgeois. His idea relies on common - socialized - ownership of the MoP. Not bunch of private owners somehow discussing it all.

No it is. Please, read Marx. Competition is not going anywhere and MoP are not socialized.

Identity Politics. Please familiarize yourself with reasons why Left doesn't like those.

Get a job you parasite.

Im trying and I dont see any real reason why other than a lack of understanding of what appeals to identity actually mean.

So far, it appears to me that you are generalizing any reference to identity with the likes of black nationalism and radical feminism.

I don't agree that AI can't have will. If you accept that there will be algorithms designing things better than humans can then all bets are off.

American imperialism, but a lot of states still have nukes. One unfriendly strong AI is enough, and AI isn't only useful to the military, remember.

Read Xenosystems, the author is the one who wrote the Dark Enlightenment.

Porky is the ultimate parasite.

Top kek
It means marxists are going to sperg regardless so it doesn't matter if you single them out of any revolution with differing ideologiesa.
The markets are operated by individuals with their own MoP, petite bourgeois implies capitalist class, mutualists are craftsmen so to speak, they don't employ people and therefore surplus labour is not produced.
u w0t?
It's not really supposed to address that because that's not the point
Imagine every individual having their own mini-factory rather than every person working at a single factory. It's still socialism, just with a market.

pick one

you fucking moron he's saying that sandler's campaign made him go full commie

...

lel please go, liberal

You really need to read Marx.

Still not getting your point.

No. Petit-Bourgeois implies private ownership of the means of production that are being used. I.e. Petit-Bourgeois are outside of direct Capitalist exploitation. Their primary income is their own work, not exploitation.

Exactly. Petit-Bourgeois.

You didn't read Marx and I'm not going to put that much effort in some thread that will sink in two days. Seriously.
If you want education and can't read yourself, make "Questions about Marxism" thread on >>>/marx/

Actually, it is. As I said, you have no idea why Marx was demanding central control over MoP by state and was insistent that it would be Proletariat that will usher in Communism, not Capitalists or Petit-Bourgeois.

It might be (Anarchist) Socialism, but it is not Marxism. Consequently, it is not Soviet Socialism aka Transition State.

okay you fucking cabbage, envision this scenario

you go to a children's hockey game. the children are fucking awful and nobody knows how to play. you suddenly decide you want to play real hockey, so you go out and do it

that does not make you a child hockey player, it makes you a radicalized hockey player

do you not understand how most people get from point a to point communism

While Sanders didn't push me to commie, he pushed me to socialism. I'll always respect & remember him for that. He also almost single handedly destroyed the democratic party, by exposing their corruption to so many registered dems. The leaks that showed how undemocratic & corrupt the DNC was would've never come to light, either. He also helped further destroy Hillary's rep among the mainstream, dems & independents, so many refused to vote for her. He's done some good.

Can you read? I said earlier in the thread I'm not socdem anymore and am currently trying to find exactly where I stand. The guy you responded to is exactly right.

...

& I have to say, it was fucking satisfying to see her called out, then lose. I don't care how reactionary that is.
We were fucked whether it was her, or Trump.

hi kot
i am also kot

...

Envision another scenario: you want to try some dish, but instead of getting one from good chef, you get one made by some punk who poisons you with some garbage. You throw up and spend two days with diarrhea.

You will hate this dish for the rest of your life.

That's what Bernie is. A vaccine against Socialism.

...

...

yeah but OP is communist now

what's your fucking point

Do you think communism is when the government does stuff or what? To call yourself a socialist but reject communism is non-sensical. Next thing you're telling me is that Rosa deserved to be killed

Jesus, tankie… I think you could talk someone into killing themselves. I don't agree with your arguments, but I have to admire the execution, a bit.

No.

Never said i rejected communism. In fact, obviously being socialist I'm warmed to the issue. I think it's where we'll end up.

Socdems dindu nuffin

idk that poison was pretty fucking tasty for me and a few of my friends. Most of them found it somewhat appetizing and would be willing to try it again in the future.

But no, contrary to all the evidence of increasing support at the very least of the idea of socialism among young americans, Bernie was a cancer on the movement.

...

wrong post, 'pologies

responding to this

First-stage Communism (State Socialism aka Soviet Socialism) is when Proletarian government does stuff. And the more (successfully) it does, the socialistier it is.

Anarchists are Socialists too. In theory, at least. SocDem claim to be ones too.

What did you try? Bernie wasn't elected, if you didn't notice.

Are you all going to sit tight and wait four more years until you get a chance to not vote for him again?

Not the point. His ideas helped and continue to help introduce concepts that are alien to most americans, even young ones, like systemic exploitation by the rich, working for the general good, and not having to choose, and this is crucial, between neo-liberalism and fascism. He's not the solution but he opened the door.

Are you this fucking slow

The goal is not to elect socdems. It's not fucking ABOUT socdems. The point is that a 'real' socialist has no way of effectively spreading socialist ideas. Bernie gets and got a lot wrong but that's NOT THE FUCKING POINT. He's about as far left as the current political climate allows famous political public figures to be. He's not ideal. But he can be used as a vector to convert socdems and liberals. Christ.

My point is that they simply didn't have anyone to vote for before Bernie. He appeared on the radar only because he didn't die before people started demanding reforms. I do not belive that Bernie persuaded people to support him.

I don't agree.

Convert to what? He is SocDem. He can convert only potential Socialists into SocDem.

To be blunt, I find your position extremely unpersuasive mainly because there has been numerous attempts to pull this off (UK, West Germany, Italy, even recently in Greece), but it never worked. I don't think there was a single Socialist party that succeeded in radicalizing SocDem party (after joining it) - despite numerous attempts throughout Europe in 20th century (and before).

People do not become radicalised by SocDem.

Again, it's not about forming a socdem party and then transitioning it to a socialist party. It's about introducing liberals to socdem, giving them a bit of time to normalize, and then introducing them to anarchism/marxism/whatever else you want.

Must be embarrassing having this argument with someone who doesn't exist

If you had studied some history you'd know that soc-dems are the reason socialism fell and ww2 happened

/thread

what you're getting wrong is the ideological core of socdem and the idea it conveys to people

its core message isnt that the status quo is at fault, that the system is rotten, that capitalism has to fall, its core message is that capitalism can be changed into something better. this better is usually capitalism with more social benefits for a certain part of the proletariat in that specific country, but it pushes them further from the core fact that capitalism can never be sustained

in this sense, people that have been demagogued into right wing populism are a lot closer to leftist belief, simply because in their core belief they understand things need radical change. the only problem there is that they've been spooked into believing non-issues are the actual issues, and most of them go with the feels>reals mentality

im not saying socialists shouldnt look for reform, but the end goal should always be the overturn of capitalism, and a socialist should always exercise the harshest possible critique of the system. a socdem simply wants to put bandages on the wound, make conditions better for a strata of x country's proletariat, always at the expense of the global proletariat

I agree entirely. Which is why I'm not advocating for socdem. All I'm saying is that for liberals (not the right-wingers you talk about) socdem is the only way to ease them out of the right-libertarian mindframe

not really, liberals are usually well off petty-bourg. at the current material conditions, no liberal will advocate replacement of the status quo since most of them are benefited by it

I might have agreed before he knelt to the clinton machine.

did they cut your autism-bux this month?

Without the fraud and voter suppression Bernie might have won in spite of all that other shit.

alexanderhiggins.com/stanford-berkley-study-1-77-billion-chance-hillary-won-primary-without-widespread-election-fraud/

Fraud and voter suppression are a feature of the primary system, so no, Bernie was never going to be allowed to win.

Why was Trump allowed to win then? Because, deep down, the Republicans are fine with fascism, and realized that full fascist was more likely to win the general. America has gone full fascist.

Well obviously that's clear by now. I think it's a good thing, that he showed people this. They conspired against them & broke every rule in the book just to keep him out. Then got exposed.

Because the Republicans have built a fantastic voter suppression machine over the last 20 years. Watch this.

There is evidence in California at least that Clinton's numbers might have been inflated to try and keep the Greens off the next election ballot.

He posted from his computer with unintended irony.

I think I saw Greg Palast on one of the interweb shows or via "fake news" sites. He's right about how Republicans rig the vote as much as possible, which just goes to show how much bourgie elections matter.

Even with the riggage and gutting of the VRA, there was an ugly current of fascism in this country. Trump winning proves it was stronger than I thought. (Originally I thought the deep state was too strong and Clinton had the votes to win.)

Going back to Bernie… if somehow he were allowed to win the primary, he would have still lost, probably by more than Clinton. Don't forget that a sizable part of the vote is loyal to the deep state, and they aren't going to allow a socdem to win at any costs. They'd probably introduce third-party spoilers to grab the "moderate" vote. I can easily see the deep state pimping Bloomberg and shoving him down our throats for half a year. Of course, the only way Bernie would win the primary is if he effectively destroyed the DLC and denial was utterly impossible… and the deep state was able to ignore Sanders' yuge rallies, so I don't see how he's able to break the barrier. Sanders would have had to be ruthless, and if he were ruthless he would be swatted down like a fly and purged from the party.

Sanders as a third party candidate would have never worked and basically threw away his political career / ability to do anything whatsoever. There are too many deep state loyalists and old people who auto-click Democrat when they vote.

Bernie is absolutely pushing people left. Getting socdems to call themselves socialists suddenly makes them more receptive to real 'socialist' thought when it is called such because of their tribalist instincts. Tons of these Bernouts are ready to be radicalized.

The problem lies in what would have happened if Bernie miraculously won, or if somehow Bernie inspires a big wave of socdem victories in US legislative bodies. If social democracy became part of the accepted US political game, these Bernouts would drop any revolutionary potential in favor of bourgeo politics and killing Rosa Luxemburg.

Yet every US socialist party has seen pretty massive growth recently. There's a lot of people whose journey into Leftist ideology began with Bernie, despite whether Bernie himself was selling social democracy as socialism. I personally used Bernie to push several of my friends into identifying as full-fledged communism, and I'm sure many other comrades did similar entryist bullshit.

This is my problem with this place. It's not very welcoming to newcomers new to the ideology of communism. I've been following Bernie for a long time so I've had a lot of time to gestate the ideas and come to conclusions of my own to reach socialism.

Sometimes this whole board feels like a bunch of kids yelling out "How could you not know about this thing that I just learned the other day?? Ive known about this thing for the past 24 hours you should already know about it!!"

Everyone chill the fuck out and realize that we're all going in the same direction but it different speeds. I don't like incrementalism either but unfortunately like everything else in the world we always have to go as fast as the slowest person the least you could do is educate not reprimand. It's up to the individual to decide their own speed.

Anything otherwise is hurting your own cause because there's more normies out there than there ever be fully automated communist or whatever your ideology is. Do your part and change the people around you.

...

Fuck off. They're right. Many of us agree with them, as well. We don't need to scare people off, that's counterintuitive.

that's where your logic falls apart

A lot of us started out as liberals.

fuck off

I never said that, you autist, lmao.

Here let me link you to a video that puts in to dialectics you maybe help you understand where I'm coming from.

youtu.be/PKzJnkUHWNs
I'm afraid that full on communism has become the object of desire to many of you on here spouting memes. I still feel as though communism should be at direction not a goal, but that's just my opinion in my opinions of change throughout the years but they're all pointing towards communism but never getting there.

I was a "liberal" when liberal meant farmer-labor party type democrat before I understood capitalism, itself, was the problem. Not too many started out as the religious idpol zealots of modern "liberalism," whose priesthood is made up of the capitalist class and who, in everything but name, desire a far right one-party apartheid state ruled by the elite media and bureaucracy on behalf of their chosen identity groups.

sorry op, to be a socialist, you must hate your father.
luke 14:26

You're acting like a liberal yourself, mate.

I agree, not too many start out that way, specifically, that you describe.
In the US, many think they're liberals, until they actually learn what a liberal is, too.
Many people who claim they're liberal just haven't been educated yet. So it's good to convert them & definitely not a lost cause. Some in particular might be lost causes, but if we consider them all that way, our cause will not grow or succeed.

idk he seems like /ourguy/ to be tbh

i.e. Many think they're for the working man/worker's party - until they realize that party is not for that, or for them.

I bet you didn't even watch the video…
Do you fuckers even eat from the trash of ideology??
(You)

Haha holy shit is that real?

I 100% agree comrade. Bernie is still my fucking dude.

This

I came to this board and moved further left after this election. Not so much because of Trump, but I already wasn't thrilled with the Obama administration, and the party of the political "left" in the US threw away an easy election because they held to unpopular, worker-unfriendly ideals and blatantly fought against Sander's platform, as well as botching elections on a national level.

I won't be the only person who felt this way and this board, for it's problems, positively influenced my political leanings. I hope that current posters will be able to foster something akin to what I got for the newfags that flood in.

Well, at least he shifted the overton window I guess.

You guys are my niggers. Bernie is what pushed me to become a socialist. As I said before in this thread, I'll always remember & respect him for that.

Btw, are you the wobbly-poster who was fortunate enough to meet Dore, during the Bernie rally?

Bernie "The Police is a Socialist Institution" Sanders.

shutup, tankie >:(

Material conditions inspire people to read literature corresponding to their classic interests.

Marxism is the one and only theory corresponding to the interests of the proletariat. Sanders' thought only pretends to do so. So no, Sanders does not inspire people to read Marx: it's exactly the opposite.

* class interests

I was mocking you and the NEP, reading comprehension..
It means why bring it up if it's a-given? It's like saying "I want an anarcho-communist revolution" and someone else saying "but what about the troskyists who will have a problem with it?"
The MoP are available to every person and they are not capitalist class, they do not employ people. Read Proudhon. It's not exploitation.
Oh shit, I had no idea making something with my own two-hands and selling it by myself actually made me a capitalist. welp.
Irrelevent
This is me giving a fuck.
Not everything has to be about *you*, not everything has to be about *soviets*, ok? "comrade"?

Not the guy who posted it, and not claiming it's true, but it seems likely enough.
It's not showing his voter demographic, but showing how many % of black "likely voting republican" voters are voting Trump.