Itt weird ideologies

I consider myself a jeffersonian socalist.
(It mixes georgism, market socialism and jeffersonian democracy into one autistic synthesis.)

Im a democratic free market socialist with many technocrat characteristics. The basic idear is, that their are certain sets of requirements for positions. In germany for example, the current secretary of defense was fanily minister before and has absolutely no knowledge nor milityry expertese or even basic understading of logistics. She was only placed there so she was out of merkels way. Things like that make democracys so inefficient. I dont like full technocracy because I dont want a dystopian nightmare, but evidence-based polecy making and governing sounds like it has potential. I also think that an energy backed currency whould solve many problems, since it whould force porky to be atleast somewhat more ecological. Im not entirely shure about the free-market thing and I also know that this idearr whould be difficuld to achive for hundrets of reasons.

read communization theory nobookz

Posting those kind of memes don't make you look smarter at all, your retarded ideology is based on pure orthodox, fundamentalist pseudoscience.
Being against law of value is stupid.

The point is that leftcoms have dealt with deindustrialization more comprehensively than anyone else on the left, and you haven't done the reading to participate in the discourse.
Take it up with Marx.

AnCom Posadist-Hoxhaist NazBol with occultist DemCon characteristics.

Nope, you are just edgy fetichist motherfuckers who thinks labour vouchers are capitalist and that people will work for free, or that revolution will happen when every undesirable job were made by robots.
Law of value rocks, lazy neets sucks

National-Posadism.

what happened to abolishing the law of value and production for exchange?

Anyways, I'm an ancom with leftcom characteristics. Basically communization.

gayist here

Labor vouchers aren't a market, markets imply a circulation of capital and reinvestment. It isn't money, its simply a token that denotes your share of the social surplus. Just as a movie ticket is exchanged for admission to a movie

Servant of Zucc. I believe Zuckerberg represents the true fulfillment of Left Communist theory.

There is still production for exchange under a labour voucher system

...

feels good to be gangsta

That's amazing! But how did you do that without getting out of your armchair?

They don't have many armchairs in factories, but they have tons of them in the service-sector. Obviously.

Not that difficult TBH.

...

No there isn't, thats what im saying. You produce and the labor vouchers are just to keep allocate how much each person can consume, you can't have people just freely consuming. Even under communism the use of natural resources, etc. will be metered for environmental purposes, etc. The whole idea of venus project unlimited cornucopia of commodities is an idea of kruschevs. FALC people and leftcoms are still spooked by official soviet ideology of the 50s and 60s, we live on a finite planet with finite resources, using labor tokens to allocate resources isnt really the same as a market, read cockshott

memes aren't arguments user leftcoms have proven time and time again that they have read something but do not truly understand what any of it means

...

It's pretty much the definition of labour vouchers

They aren't.

But there's legitimate criticism of left communism and instead of adressing it, you people just keep posting the ironic armchair maymay xD.

Socialism is a necesary step to achieve communism

Watch kapitalism101's vidoes on the matter

Hereditary jingoistic monarchism with collectivist characteristics

Anarcho-Traditionalist-Nihilstic-Monarchist-Stalinist
But I'm a classic liberal on most days lol

I'm a Maoist Leftcom.
Total Peoples War Against Capital
Red Guard Communization
defeat the spectacle through GPCR 2.0

Leftcom maoism = trotskyism tbh

Too busy right now, can you explain it to me? I support labour vouchers by the way

I'm a Marxist-Leninist-Cockshottist with Leftcom characteristics and FALC tendencies

Libertarian Ultraleft Maoism was actually a thing in post 68 europe. They went by Maoist-Spontaneists or Mao-Spontex

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao-Spontex

Social Democratic Hoxhaist

Social Democratic Leftcom

So just a Hoxhaist. Gotcha.

You sound like you'd like this: criticallegalthinking.com/2013/05/14/accelerate-manifesto-for-an-accelerationist-politics/
They're not actually accelerationists by my definition (too Marxist, artificial divide between technological acceleration and capitalism's existence), but they're a thing.

Monarcho communism

Ancom with anprim characteristics

So Juche?

...

republican collectivist reporting

what is tankie?

Anarcocarlismo

You all know what anarchism is.
Carlismo was began as a monarchist movement which wanted Ferdinand VII's brother Carlos as absolute monarch instead of Ferdinand's daughter Isabel. This conflict then led to three Carlist wars.
The carlists would then support Franco during the Spanish Civil War. In fact the carlists (Comunión Tradicionalista) were joined with the fascists (Falange Española de las JONS) and formed the Falange Tradicionalista Española y de las JONS (Only legal party in Spain during the years of franquismo).

mixed economy mutualist with post-left tendencies

note: severe autism ahead, you might want to skip this post

I've been reading a lot of political shit from both the left and right, and I have come to my own conclusion about politics, diplomacy, economy, military, law, and all other such things
first of all, as my main thing, i study a hard science (a mix of physics and chemistry) and so i always try to find the most fundamental things, the.. 'truest' truths, the most solid, first principles that have no contradictions
because if you want to make meaningful, non-trivial, useful predictions, if you want to predict the future at all, at any scale, if you want 100% repeatability and 100% reliability, if you want the success of science, you gotta do things the way science does things
so anyway let me get back to politics
i sincerely believe that what numbers are to math, and what atoms are to chemistry, force is to politics
now it is tricky to define what force is, or who the strongest entity is, but basically might does make right, and this is a fundamental truth that has no counters, and this is something that you can always rely on
therefore it is in your highest individual and collective and societal and economic and all other interests, to simply become the most powerful
whatever regime or ideology or whatever offers you the most power, that's the most desirable one

idk what to call it, but essentially its warlordism, its how politics work
imagine conan the barbarian, but in a labcoat
imagine a modern day scientist with a mindset of a protagonist from a heroic mythical story
that's it
this answers all the questions for me
now i realize just how silly and simplistic this is but to spread it out into a serious question by question thing would take me… whole books, and nobody has time to read that crap lol
but basically that's it for me, i am extremely happy to put that one to bed, now i can go back to studying interactions between molecules while they are still letting me lol, its a fun way to earn bread..

in case anyone wants to talk about anything in particular, i guess i can try telling how i see it

I haven't quite understood your view on politics.
t. Chemistry student

well i honestly believe that force, or might, or strength (tricky to define, but basically what happens, happens) is all that matters

what is just? just is whatever happens, that is everything is justice, that is there is no justice, there is no justice quark, there is no justice atom, there is no objective, measurable way to do anything with justice
therefore everything that happens, is just

society: what sort of society should we have, which one is the most desirable, communism, socialism, anarchy, feudalism, fascism, monarchy, capitalism……
which ever one you can enforce
again, there is no difference between them, as long as you can enforce them, if you have enough guns or muscle or steel or whatever to enforce x or y or z, it makes absolutely no difference to me

economy: what sort of economy are we going to have? again, as long as you can physically redistribute or profit or seize or nationalize or privatize or unionize or incorporate or what ever the fuck, it doesnt matter, it's all the same, as long as you can physically make it happen, and keep it happening, that's all that matters

who should be in the prison? well, lets see.. do killers go to prison? well, no, there are killers that arent in prisons
thieves then? again, no, not everyone in the prison is a thief, that definition breaks apart
what about everyone who got caught? now this is a true exact definition of a criminal, the one who got caught, it's the only one that is non-trivial and without contradictions, people who get caught are the ones who are in the prison

and so on

two prisoners are in a cell, which one is going to sodomize the other? well the stronger is going to sodomize the weaker, it's just that its tricky to define stronger.. what is strenght? a shank? a weapon? muscle? i dont know, but it doesnt effect the outcome
which country is going to sodomize some other country? exactly the same fundamental things apply, doesnt matter if instead of biceps and shanks we have supply routes and nukes, etc

tfw evolian individualist anarcho communist nihilist egoist neetist with not radical libertarian left characteristics found in marxist leninism.

Babby's first egoism.

is this a good or a bad thing? should i read stirner?

queer post-left primitivist egoist communist accelerationist feminist

Kabbalistic Jungian Marxism

Are you memeing or is this legit? Let me guess, you expect capital to destroy itself along civilization and that's a good thing? If so there's a method to your madness.

...

Imperial reactionary revolutionary vanguard socialism

Market Syndicalist/Democratic Confederalist synthesis with Marxist characteristics.

It's only part of my ideology but, although right wingers like Holla Forums don't know what they're talking about when it's brought up, I unironically support the idea of genuine, true Cultural Marxism: I believe it's been long enough that the right wing/conservatives have had a monopoly on culture (at least "old" culture) and that we should actually seize it and appropriate it for leftism. However, I do not support the idea of something as evil as rewriting history; I think we should always know what things were and why they were done, but in spite of that we should openly and consciously appropriate something-of-interest

For example: I love Landsknechte and Landsknecht aesthetics, but I am fully aware that they were, for all intents and purposes, class traitors. I believe they, along with many other things, should be seized and turned into something like "Lefty-Landsknechte" (it's silly, I know), that act like Robin Hood, even though we are aware that the real Landsknechte were amoral mercenaries.

I also think we seriously need to reclaim stolen aesthetics like armbands and so on and so on

Bonapartist. That's it.

So what's the difference between labour vouchers and money

Evidence-based policy is based on a model of reality, and no known model is adequately accurate.

nah, start with defining what truth is and work from there

measures are fancy numbers. i propose Chuck Norris [CN] as the universal scale to quantify these pesky relations. 1000 Chuck Norris = 1 mega Chuck Norris

Power levels are bullshit

scratch that, we already have something like this. it's called USDollar

Libertarian Luxemburgism-Titoism

Also, forgot to change my shitposting flag

Libertarian-situationist-post-keynesian-smashie-communalist here,

you are like little babby

k

Confederate isolationist council communist with the ideals of bringing down the American Union Of States