There is something that I do not understand

There is something that I do not understand.
Under the egalitarianism, then a black brute bathroom cleaner should earn the same as an Asian engineer with the PHD.

This is the logic, under this system those who work more are penalized because those who are inferior or more lazy can not compete, then society is a society that penalizes hard work and encourages laziness and being a parasite.

That is pure logic, but if there is no egalitarianism, then those who are hyperarchievers and self concius (they are few, but they exist) would end up dominating everything again and controlling everything in a caste system that resembles capitalism.

Both situations contradict each other.

Other urls found in this thread:


then is not egalitarianism, because the natural diferences between race, gender because of biology will then end up giving unfair advantages to certain groups that showcase in race income diferences.


then people who are payed more end up with more economical power than people who are payed less.

I don't even support egalitarianism, but it really doesn't work that way.
If this critique is somehow leveled against Marxism or communism, please read up about socially necessary labor time. Also the whole point is to abolish production for exchange, and by extension wage labor.
There would be no need to 'pay' anyone. The Asian engineer would just spend his free time on the next big engineering project, while the 'black brute' would just tend to his own garden or something.


Read Engels

This inane liberalism has been dismissed time and time again.


Wealth is not power, ownership of the means of production is power.

Don't worry you can't fuck up any more than you already have for namefagging

how do you stop overworking males (males that overwork to death and are extremelly competitive and so on) from dominating the top of the hierarchy?

racial diferences in autism level make for races (blacks) from being unable to escape poverty.

what hierarchy?
dominate how?
you're talking in abstractions which have no relation to reality.

as expected :^)

Marx was against egalitarianism, for the record.

t. wikipedo

It’s called labor vouchers, boi

there's unfair biological advantages races have among each other.

even if you reshuffle society over and over again, jews and asians will end up having more wealth than blacks and spics.

male dominance hierarchy.

sexual biological dynamics.
women prefer to breed with the top 20% of males, making male sexual reproduction an arm race to get more money and power.

WHOLE bunch of [citation needed] here lad.

Wealth of what exactly are we talking about? Because currency is not going to exist

holy shit nazi no gf poster is back!

watch peterson videos.

how do you store excess of productivity (time)?
do you propose we return to a barter system?

I'm a polturd, but pol is so bad they rather discuss than engage in political discussion.

I'm at the oposite end of leftypol ideology, but other pols are retarded as fuck.

Labor vouchers aren’t currency

He needs a whole bunch of citations tho



they can be used as medium of store of work (time), so they can be used as currency in the black market.

What happens when you need something that the labour vouche don't explicit pay for?
you use the black market and use it as a form of currency.

people in russia used cigarretes or tobaco as currencies because of the limitations of their comunist system.

humans are not the only hypergamous specie though.

Someone that thinks HYSTERIA IS A LEGITIMATE DISEASE knows fuck all about biology: literally one step up from using leeches.

hysteria is a personality disorder that mostly affect women.

What you are describing isn’t currency, though. It’s straight up bartering. Currency isn’t everything that can be exchanged.

He doesn’t use biology, though. The nature of most of his arguments are feels>reels

No hysteria is the== internal wondering of the womb== that causes "emotional issues". Fucking hell someone failed GCSE biology…

currency is a way to store your excess productive capability for tomorrow (your working time).

people have used feathers, shells, even salt as a currency.

even internet memes are worth now billions (dogecoin).

he's a psychologist, so I trust a psychologist to talk about his field of expertise, unlike other retards who talk about fields they're not expert like Dawkins talking about teology or chomsky talking about politics.

I'm not an expert in psychology, but histeria is some kind of status that is not normal.


Lol no it’s not. Labor time has nothing to do with it. It’s the exchange value.

[citation needed]
Perhaps consider for a moment that social mobility is negatively correlated with poverty regardless of 'race', really: contemplate it for a moment.

You don't? Who cares. If you think most people here have a problem with certain people being smarter than others, then you're mistaken.
It's not the hierarchy of ability that's the problem, but rather production for exchange, which forces people into wage labor. Read Marx and Engels. PDFs related.

sasuga Holla Forumsyp-kun


No OP, a black engender with a PhD will earn the same as an Asian engineer with a PhD.

Get out of your mom's basement in your white suburbia and meet people faggot

But he isn’t known for even talking about his field of expertise, tho. Instead he rambles about Neitzche and embarrasses everyone in the room who has the slightest clue what he’s talking about.

money is a way to store value (time) for tomorrow, so you can use it later.

It has other properties, like it needs to be a comodity (no fiat garbage), it needs to have extraction and others.
But basically is what a comunity agrees as a common meme that this unit of store will be accepted by the other members of the comunity.

So yeah, labour vouches can be exchanged by extra goods like any other currency in the black market.

autism levels and conciusness personality traits are better indicators of adult level of incomes, more than whatever shit you were born into.
There's plenty of males who became rich coming from poverty.

pol are too retarded and underage thinking about kekistan to have serious discussions about politics or race issues or economics beyond memes.
I hate commies, but at least this place is willing to have a serious debate.

This is what I'm arguing.
racial diferences and personality diferences explain better the social inequality than some conspiracy from the jews to keep everyone down.

compare how many doctors and engineers are there in jews and asians compared to how many criminals and low paying janitors in blacks.
there's diferent outcomes because of racial diferences.

I'm not an expert, but I enjoy his videos.
Gotta give me some book about his topics that is better than his opinions?

For starters is hysteria, if you're gonna cite a bs diseases cocking spell it correctly. Secondly, the word is literally from the greek for uterus: hystera. Third, the western medical traditional treated hysteria up and through to the 1930s with vaginal related activities; including the vibrator. It is quack science developed because vaginas are spooky. Anyone who believes in hysteria is fundamentally and psychologically challenged by deep underlying gynophobia.


It doesn’t store the time you work, tho. It’s a reflection of the exchange value on the labor market. Christ, I could find you neoliberal economist that could explain this, even.

how do you not see the irony

Capitalist Realism, by Mark Fisher is an easy read and borrows from psychoanalytical thought

and he says Holla Forums is the one not interested in
having a debate

"A Pervert's Guide to Ideology" by Slavoj Zizek (it's a film btw).

give me some link to read then.

well, for once is true.
a smart person even if he was born poor will end up as a more qualified worker and will save.
dumber people has less foresign and they're stuck in middle class or poverty.
a smart person will read a lot and eventually he'll learn about investing.

I talk from personal experience coming from a working class family and watching how most of the working class is mentally retarded who don't read books by example.

money is a store of value, I call it time, but you're free to call what it store as other names.

most of pol is not willing to engage in debates beyond spouting memes.


pol never debates anything.
I got banned there for trying to discuss that blacks have history and they're not subhumans.

well, I get banned on cuckchan for trying to have a debate on politics, economics and other shit.
I still think nature has a bigger effect than nurture.


On what exactly?

whatever shit peterson spoke about freudian psychoanalisis by example.


whatever man, is a place where you store wathever you didn't consume in the harvest so you can exchange it later in the town for spices, cloth, medicine, etc.


I'm a spic in a thirld world shithole.

for some reason I have the same autist levels as MIT niggers even if I am brown.
and I have to deal with subhuman brown races in this shithole.

lenin already had a go at this arguement a long time ago


That’s not even true, since the value can fluctuate. It’s not inherently reliant on your exchange. Also, the market price of what you exchanged your harvest for could change. There is no stable value

If it stores value, it’s what its value is at that given time due to a myriad of market forces

prices didn't fluctuated so much under non fiat garbage systems.

definitely read the pdfs in
capitalism isn't meritocratic, any system with inequality by definition isn't. "Self-made billionaires" got to where they are via getting lucky, being around the right people in the right time, and exploitation, not super smart investment and stock market abilities. The very idea that capitalism is a perfect meritocratic system and that blacks, arabs, etc are in poverty because they are dumb and lazy is a mask designed to cover it's faults. The reason third world countries are poor and shitty is not because they have 1 digit I.Q. average and are full of blacks, but because they're exploited and kept down on purpose by other countries so that they can accumulate wealth.

Money =/= Any kind of wealth, ever
By that definition you could say that anything is money if you can trade it, which is simply false. Money is a specific kind of commodity.

i feel bad for you, you genuinly believe that your "personal experience" amounts to anything more than personal issues you take with others and mix it up with your views on society.
that's just sad.
Basically, Peterson points out the "dogmatism" of post-modernists (or Lacanians are Zizek calls them), and the argument coming from Zizek is that the very accusation of dogmatism is inherent to the ideology of those that follow Derrida (like Peterson).

It goes to show that Peterson is a very victim of the things he claims to be against, and he is also a shit tier philosopher.

germany was destroyed to ashes in WWII and korea was an african shithole 40 years ago.
In the same time they become developed nations africans stuck in poverty and commiting canibalism.

There's something geniuly wrong with blacks when even in first world countries they're always the poorest demographic.

Even among the richest black comunities they still score less than the poorest white comunities in SAT.

You literally need to be in a 200k family as a black kid to score the same SAT as a white kid in a poor rural redneck family.

In the same time they become developed nations africans stuck in poverty and commiting canibalism.

It's almost like some major imperialist power poured money into them for development…

why are Holla Forumsyp 'deductions' always the most surface level shit imaginable. Look at the economic history of those countries. Nothing is isolated from everything else and unaffected by external factors. Its like your view of the world is derived entirely from fantasy novels and vidya.

I concede that point, but there's plenty of other cases, even latinoamerica developed beyond starvation level.

Funny how most shitholes stopped being shitholes when they became capitalist and embraced globalization and moved away from socialism.

So have plenty of places in Sub-Saharan Africa, in fact there are those that achieved food independence then were targeted for destruction by the western military-industrial complex for that feat.

I concede there are economic hitmans.

One moment its niggers the next its commies :^)

So ask yourself, why are these states compounded by debt, starvation and dependence on others: is it due to some inherent flaw in their people or are there those that would wish to perpetrate their economic malaise? Since if a nation like Burkina Faso can gain self sufficiency in ONE YEAR; it shows there are other factors at play than some inherent flaw, no?

yfw one of the most successful projects for building african self-reliance was carried out by thomas sankara, a communist

Africa is best under whitey i.e. Rhodesia and South Africa.

It never gets better, heck, under worldwide's sanctions for stupid ass raysiss shit, Rhodesia and S. Africa during apartheid were still league better than its modern counterpart.

And the other, Ian Smith, a capitalist.

Ian Smith managed to actually provide a food deficit and exported food.

Both were "saved" by other countries for their benefit, while Africa still suffers heavily from the remnants of an history of imperialism, i don't see what your point is.
Being in a first world country does not mean you cannot be poor. What makes poor blacks different from poor gringos in your example?
Also [citation needed] for everything else you said.

Let me guess, you are an ancap from Brazil?

so you concede that shitholes have been able to escape poverty using the free market (free market doesn't imply capitalism).

do capitalists and socialists still engage in economic warfare?
I can't think of such things beyond venezuela today.