Whose ideology will survive?

...

...

...

...

Here's a Trans-humanist one, matey! :)

The AnCap ones are usually the best by far.

...

...

if you don't run gentoo on your augments you're literally asking for it tbqh.

...

Meant for

...

my favorite hillary memeball

Anprims, some of you guys are alright. Don't go to shitpost tonight.

...

everyone gets one.

...

...

nnnnnnnnnnno one with a brain fucking cared about that thing with the dreads tbqhwyf

...

No, but consistently supporting the right wing in policy and otherwise, calling the centre right the left wing, and lumping in basically everything from social democracy to mutalism as "communism" betrays one's ideology pretty well.

...

I still can't believe that CNN fiasco happened. I half-expected them to put a bounty on the author's head, Shadowrun-style.

...

...

wut?

shit analysis

no salt. just memes.

It isn't salt, I am phrase confused by what the phrase "privatized Wal-Mart" means when Wal-Mart is already a private corporation. I mean, they could be privatized in the sense of the Waltons buying back all publically traded shares, that would be a privatization, but what does that have to do with ancaps?

You nazbol or something?

gulag

That second one makes we want to read something about that

This is a meme thread, not a place for autists to sperg at jokes. This is like trying to start a debate with a stand-up comedian about one of his political jokes. Get a sense of humor and post some memes.

oh wow, that fucking dA is incredible

Yeah I confess I never stopped to think of the teleology of capitalism. I think that's related to it being considered the "default" modern system, and like useful idiots will say, even the "natural" system for mankind, whereas socialism was "artificial or "imposed". In that way, it's not an ideology or even a process, but rather an event, and thus requires no ethos nor goal, and indeed not even human agency or a cause. It promises nothing, and yet it's perfectly moral when it delivers nothing, or even takes away''. Meanwhile, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a retard who says "oh yeah if ur socialist why u dont givee away all ur stuff HEH". It's Bizarro ethics, where the man who preaches nothing and does nothing (or less) is morally superior to one who preaches a lot but delivers a little.

We need a Stirner edit of the spooky ring.

Okay let me explain this slowly:
''1.) Sargon thinks communism is evil. (A is B)
2.) Sargon believes socialism leads to communism. (C becomes A)
3.) Therefore, according to Sargon, socialism leads to evil. (C becomes A, which is B)''
Sargon also believes:
''1.) Things that cause evil are also evil, if not bad.
2.) Socialism leads to communism
3.) Because communism is evil, and socialism leads to it, socialism must also be evil, if not bad.''
So far things are fair, but here's where things start to have problems.
''1.) Sargon has repeatedly shown that he believes socialism to be anything left of center, e.g. Sargon thinks Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn's policies are socialist.
2.) Sargon believes socialism is evil, if not bad
3.) Therefore, anything left of center is evil, if not bad. (It is reasonable to assume sargon would simply say such ideas are merely bad, so we can assume that from here on.)''
This causes problems when combined with two other ideas.
''1.) A leftist is someone who is inclined to support politics deemed left of the center.
2.) Sargon believes left of center politics to be bad.
3.) Therefore, according to Sargon, leftists support bad politics.''
This creates a problem when we take into account Sargons claims about himself.
''1.) Sargon claims he is left wing
2.) Sargon believes left wing ideas are bad
3.) Therefore…. Sargon believes his ideas are bad?''
So we need to either conclude that Sargon is either self-hating, or lying about something. Either he is lying about thinking leftism is bad, or he's lying about being a leftist. If it's the former Sargon is acting unreasonably, but on the latter, it's certainly less unreasonable, even strategic (even if he doesn't realize).

But then, if he's not a leftist, then there's only "the center" and the right wing. I don't think Sargon really likes Nazis too much, but this is enough to create a strong argument that, at the very least, Sargon isn't left wing.

Shit, I completely fucked up the tags, sorry.

I mean, isn't this our agenda as well? Except more bloodthirsty as instead of liquidating only the Jewish billionaire clique we're liquidating everyone in that inner circle?

Technically it isn't about killing them, so much as destroying the power structures they propagate. However, the bourgeoisie will never give up their power willingly, so it is likely that many members of the bourgeoisie and lumpenproletariat will have to die in order to change society meaningfully.

That is to say, we do not seek to kill, rather we are forced to kill, as opposed to Nazis.

Of course, the bourgeoisie pulls so much shit they make it easy to hate them

You don't have to kill them.
Practicality suggests it's likely to happen though.

...

That freanch part is only correct for north algerians.

no, im just not a neoliberal

...

Here's one I made last night

One of their bigwigs actually said that, can't remember which one.