If you're so keen on helping others, why don't you faggots go out and actually help others? In my experience...

If you're so keen on helping others, why don't you faggots go out and actually help others? In my experience, leftists are hardly the most altruistic people on earth, they just cry the loudest about it by far.

Other urls found in this thread:

theanarchistlibrary.org/library/oscar-wilde-the-soul-of-man-under-socialism
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

if you're so keen on freedom, why don't you actually support freedom? In my experience ancaps are hardly the most libertyloving people on earth, they always turn to support cryptofascists when it suits them

...

Not an argument.

Why would I bother engaging your childish conjecture?
fuck off tbh

Is being a greedy, selfish bastard a tenet of marxism? Did I misss something?

As members of the working class we act in our own self-interest to achieve socialism, just as porky acts in their own self-interest to resist this.

We don't do or care for charity, now fuck off retard.

We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical. On the other hand, it is clear that we are not archists either: we do not believe in establishing a tyrannical central authority that will coerce the noninvasive as well as the invasive. Perhaps, then, we could call ourselves by a new name: nonarchist. Then, when, in the jousting of debate, the inevitable challenge "are you an anarchist?" is heard, we can, for perhaps the first and last time, find ourselves in the luxury of the "middle of the road" and say, "Sir, I am neither an anarchist nor an archist, but am squarely down the nonarchic middle of the road."
Are Libertarians 'Anarchists'? by Murray N. Rothbard

… They find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man’s intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought. Accordingly, with admirable, though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.

They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it, so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life – educated men who live in the East End – coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property. It is both immoral and unfair.
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/oscar-wilde-the-soul-of-man-under-socialism

Kek, I bet most of you haven't held a factory job for a week.

So, would you admit that libertarians are less egocentric than you?

Exactly what I'm saying, yet you're a bunch of moralizing faggots about it when it suits you.


Cry harder about how we supposedly steal your terms, faggot.

...

We don't care for charity because it is a capitalist tool to placate the shortcomings of the system.
Charity won't solve anything, restructuring society on a fundamental level so that exploitation of labour is no longer an issue will.

Keeping alive the patient whose life is now nothing but unbearable pain is not helping. You have to cure them.

Holla Forums, for fuck's sake

No. Socialism is in the self interest of the majority of people on the planet. Mortality has nothing to do with it.

Tell that to the people who die from hunger while you wait for your global revolution. Or the people who are lonely and miserable and may or may not end up offing themselves or landing in prison, which could've been avoided had someone been there to help them.


You speak like someone who has never met an actual person in need.


Keep telling that to yourself, faggot.

Well, then you can stop being moralfags now. Not you personally, but the socialists who can't shut up about how selfishness is oh so bad, of which there are plenty.

sage. report. hide.

My apologies, I didn't know shitposting on your board is forbidden when you're an ebul crapitalist.

I've met lots and I try to help, but I know that it is futile.

Are you one of those faggots that thinks being proletarian means being a manual laborer in the bottom 20% income bracket?

What cha going to do break the nap and get a heli?

stop fucking replying

It's pointless to burn out in activism that doesn't have lasting effects. Our priority should be developing strategy against the capitalist system instead of trying to make the same system bearable and thus helping it function.

What do you guys think of left wing market anarchism?

Anarcho-Capitalism has been worked into a leftist framework via ideas like Agorism and left wing market anarchism (C4SS types). Perhaps it would be fruitful to push ancaps towards these ideas.

Might address some of this in more detail later.


Congrats, you're better than most leftists I've met. No, really, kudos to you.


I think the class-dichotomy is and always has been bullshit. Even when it was ostensibly most glaring, it was a shitty concept, because the underlying theory was shit, relying on bullshit like historical determinism (empirically disproved) and objective value (shit-tier economics).


That gif was fucking saved.


It has a lasting effect on those it helps.


I can get along with them. In fact, I consider agorists to be ancaps, and I'd support their efforts any time.

Oh, so you were talking about Marxists? OK then: we don't give a shit, and yes.

wew

You've gone from claiming being working class only means being a factory worker, to claiming class doesn't exist. I think you might have moved the goalposts slightly.

You mean capitalism?

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

I don't help anyone. I care only for myself and what is mine.


The key tenet of Marxism is "do what you like"


Egocentric is not being selfish. A charitable man may be extremely egocentric. If you talk about being charitable, well, you sure are more than me.


Tell that charity works to whose that don't receive any. Tell that charity works when you are the reason they are starving. It's ridiculous to help the very same people you exploit while maintaining the exploitation that keeps them miserable.

Is in everyone interest to enjoy life, be fully compensated for their own labour and do whatever you want.

There are people that own means of production and people that don't. It's a pretty sharp distinction.

Yes, people that have eaten today don't need to again anymore.

Hey OP, you know what that sounds like?

I believe I didn't, but maybe it came across that way. I admit, that was sloppy of me.

When I talk of the working-class, I mean manual laborers. You could put include politicans and the super-elite in one class, all other business owners in another, and so on. I don't ordinarily think among these lines, but the model is acceptable, to me.

When leftists talk about classes, what they have in mind is usually a distinction between proletariat (often called workers) and the bourgeiousie holy shit I hate writing that word out, based on who owns the means of production. I find this distinciton to be misleading and ultimately harmful.

Like I said, I was a bit sloppy, and may have conflated the two concepts there. I hope that's cleared out now, though.


(Anarcho-)Capitalism permits being greedy and selfish, as long as you accept the restraint of foreign property rights, including the self-ownership of others. It doesn't require you to be either, though. In fact, it isn't even necessary for your own survival. Not even Rand (not an ancap, but a right-libertarian) thought it would be, as much as she praised selfishness.


So if I own a 3d-printer, I'm part of the bourgeoisie?

I never said so, and I don't see how you can misunderstand a simple sentence so hard. If you help someone make it through a bad time, then that person will be able to help himself during better times. Best case scenario, he'll immediately be able to alleviate his own situation. Give someone a fish, you feed him for a day… that ring a bell?


Are you one of the niggers who's shitting up /liberty/?

You're posting a a leftist board, the terms proletariat and working class are used interchangeably here.

No more than owning a car makes you bourgeosie. Class is a social relation not a relation between things. Owning a 3d printer and using it for creating things for yourself doesn't qualify as capitalist activity. On the other hand employing someone to use that 3d printer and then selling what is produced would qualify.

That makes more sense, but I don't see why this distinction is so important. The power disparity between employer and employee is present, employees are far from their slaves. Contrary to what some leftists say, you won't immediately starve to death after you've been fired. You can find a new job and live on, especially when there's no government getting in your way.

As for the employers (or bourgeoisie) being parasites, that notion is based on the objective value theory, which does a piss poor job modeling reality and is arbitrary as fuck.

Less than half an hour after I made this post, you niggas started to raid my home-board. This is why no one likes you, you filthy pack of cunts.

Your argument is like telling a banker in pre-revolution France that if taxes are too high he should just reimburse the merchants and not blame the King.
This has nothing to do with altruism. The Capitalist productive system is exploitative and needs to be overturned.

How?

The Comparative Study of Juvenile Delinquents in Tübingen completely demolished this truism.