Tfw you first understood socialism

Impossible.
Force, simply, is energy being exerted. It's how force is harnessed that matters. We see force affect reality all the time in nature, thus we know force is compatible with reality.

All societies default to use of force. Your progressive utopia will be no different. See every Socialist utopia that has resorted to using force on its own people.

Here's your (you)

Who are our own people? Bourgeoisie? Who gives a fuck about them

bretty jpeg'd b8 there

What is it now? Things are the way they are because that's just how things are? Or maintain sutch thing is impossible? You are contradiction yourself…

So if we force capitalism away with forcing the state of not existing anymore we can have socialism because we used force in a revolution.

Like the Americans did with their fellow british people in the American war of Independece? Or the French did in their revolution?

Deep. I see you are a very enlightened individual.

There are many reasons why humans form and fall into groups. There is a mutual benefit in doing so. Whether it be your fellow citizens, your family, your circle of friends, or your football team, "your people" help assure your protection and your well-being. And yes, some might happen to be bourgeoisie.

Gratz OP.

Although why do people struggle to understand the basics? I figured it out in primary school.

Teacher:

11 year old me:

And that is how I became a marxist.

Why the fuck are you fucking autists talking about semantics such as whether force is compatible with reality? Jesus christ, anons.

Use force in your own self-interest if you need to - capitalism is against your self interest unless you're a porkie (or a fuckwit).

...

It is impossible to maintain progressive liberal society because it is incompatible with reality.
For a while, but socialism will inevitably fail because it is incompatible with reality.
The American Revolution did not impose socialism through their revolution. The French one attempted to and it failed.

Thanks for making sense, user. Not enough people here have any grasp on egoism.

The force of the police who enforce laws protect you from that.

*or mutualism, for that matter

...

Reminds me of people thinking immigrants take jobs
Even as a kid I understood that a growing population, by definition, create jobs
I mean, I'm not trying to make it about "left and right" or "liberal and conservative", it's common fucking sense

flag related

"b-buh the ruling class will never turn on me, their self-interest is my individual interest! R-right, user?"

You aren't being exploited if you apply for a job. You aren't forced to work for an evil capitalist, you know.

But they can take jobs though.

And even if they don't directly boot people out of a job, their labour enters the market, driving down or keeping low the wages for those jobs, which would be higher if there were less people willing to do it.

Sure man, I dont need to eat or anything, life is like an rpg.

You always have the option of suicide, if that's your argument. But why just let myself be sucked into three general choices; suicide, starvation or working for a capitalist? Pretty shitty choices, if you ask me. Why not change that, eh?

top kek famalam

tbh

I force you to suck dick if you keep complaining about our mental gymnastics.

This, the concept of being part of a collective can be flawwed.

Well it exists right now since the civil rights movement, so its pretty mutch a reality.
What is reality?

Mate we are talking about the use of force to change the status quo.

Also you are retarded for thinking it was socialism that they wanted to implement you doofus. Learn your history and the theory of the Jacobin, they were radical republicans just as the Americans were in the war of liberation. Only relation to socialism is that they were the predecessor of socialist theory wich got further defloped by owen and the uthopian socialists.

read up on some lit and never, ever trust any state - not even a marxist-leninist state, just can't centralize power ever

"What is reality?"

come on man, if you try to Socrates you ain't going to get very far with empirical reasoning - seems to be your goal here anyway

You could try starting your utopia in the woods without relying on Capitalists.

Well it exists right now since the civil rights movement, so its pretty mutch a reality.
The civil rights was an erosion of civil rights. Think of the right of free association. Doesn't exist anymore since the state forces business owners to serve people they don't want to serve. For example.
What is reality?
Good question, but if you want to know what happens when people choose to ignore reality, see Venezuela.

How will you change it? Or do you just want to change it for the sake of changing it? Did you ever think of the unforseen negative consequences that would come from such forced change? Most are totally fine with the status quo.

All leftism eventually becomes Stalinism.

Yeah, on supposed property the state claims a monopoly on violence over? Risk being fucking bombed to shit? No thanks, bub.

Guess who got in their way?

HMMMMMM UH HMMMMMMMMM WELL AH I MEAN LIKE HMMMMM I GUESS IT WAS THE SYSTEM OF SOCIALISM, R-RIGHT? NOT IMPERIALIST NATIONS INTENT ON WARMONGERING IN THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST, RIGHT user?

Also, the logic of a growing population increasing jobs depends on the level of automation in society and its in and export. There was a number for it which was something like [money invested into economy]:[new market in economy] or something. If that number is 1:morethan1 you should import more people to faster grow the economy, if its 1:lessthan1 you should't import people.

I hope I can convey what I mean.

Forrests here:
1. Dont exist in sufficient amounts
2. Are all privately owned by a company or the state
3. Hunting is now allowed

And I dont have money to buy gear and a plane ticket to go live in buttfuckistan.

Dont be so simplistic an-com, structuralism is dead and so i need to know what he means to properly address him. Or else there will only be a stupid conflict over misinterpretations over eachother. Thats when you get real mental gymnastics as that steven molonyoux guy who usses his *concrete* defintions and meanings to dismiss everything he disagree's with le not an argument hurr durr.

And you need resources/materials that are only available by transaction of money and to get money you need to aprticpate in the economy by wage labour of capitalism and there you are must keep particpating and following strict guidlines in the market deathmatch and in the work enviorment.

Still have no meaning of definition to work with here, the ability to direct feel the results of the supposed truth you set up. You set up an idea and that idea comes true and thus becomes a reality as you have applyd it? The diffrince between theory and practise and all that. (reality is based on our ideas of how we precieve it tho, materialism is a form of idealism.)

By Force.

No its because the current system restricts my ability to controle my own life by the laws of the state, social relations of society and the dynamics of the economy. (Wich leaves you to the power of market mechanics and scarcity to keep going in your job to get your basic needs by a wage)

Thats verry simplistic way of saying it, I dont really disagree but most communist movement's would go like that besides left-com's who have a regulating system of the inablity for power to be centralised wich is needed to prevent a state of appearing and asserting its command on all those who do not consent to its orders.

What does moji mean in that picture?

Why is she saying "letter"?

Ah yes, clearly it was an outside influence and not the core ideas being fundamentally insane.

These are legitimate concerns. You're probably aware that many on the right like the idea of a small government. You should also be aware that this creeping state control over property (and people) is a direct consequence of leftist/socialist policies (which always result in Stalinism).

Mate, it is capitalists that always go on about "tragedy of the commons". Their ideology literally discourages stretches of land that are "unowned" by people, so the small pieces of forrst owned by the government would just be privatized, barring me yet again from escaping capitalist enslavement.

Anarcho-capitalism is no different from normal capitalism, except that I as a worker lose the last bit of benefits left that my ancestors fought to get.

I think that idea is stupid as the idea of private property is still enforced by the state making private property still state property. I prever no state opposed for small state to prevent any police of fucking me up in the excuse of the un-realistic idea's in the constitution. I can still destroy free speech and all that bullshit with secret and hidden coercion on individuals without making it appear in public for the state to solve it. I prever that the people themselfs have the authority on commanding their own life then granting it to an external force of the state wich will be 15 minutes to late when you get raped.

...

...

Then you better buy up that bit of land before they do!

Sounds like those individuals might have a legitimate case in a court of law if they felt they were somehow cheated or deceived. That's typically what class-action suits deal with.
It's wise to be able to protect yourself, but without a kind of legal authority to maintain the general public order wouldn't things get a little chaotic?

Ah yes, because the USSR wasn't actively destabilizing and taking over the world, right? Surely it was just evil Capitalists trying to enslave the poor workers!

You literally have the inverse of the cold war

Wow you sure showed me. I guess I'll be a good Stalinist from now on! I hope to spend 18 hours a day in the gulag working hard for The People™!

It would get a litle chaotic and little less verry thightly organised as we are used to in today's society with the complete domination of the state and the economy in all factors of out lifes. Its chaotic in comparrison with our system of today, but not in a general community where you barely see barely any state intervention like some backdrop comfy town.

And thus you depend on others so solve the issue around yourself wich you yourself could have prevented if you hold your own authority over yourself.

Are you Libertarian/Classic Liberal btw?

I don't normally point them out, but reality sounds like it's become a spook for you.

...

...

I suppose CERTAIN COMMUNITIES would suffer more from the chaos, but the fear is this could lead to an erosion of the better areas.

I mean I suppose I could go shoot you to get my money back but that seems barbaric when you could just agree to give me a refund in court.
I don't think so. I don't believe equality exists in nature and I believe good leaders make for good societies. Since Trump is currently heading the GOP I guess that makes me a Republican.

Cool projection m8's

...

Shirley you can't be serious

>USSR was the only attempt at socialism ever, and it failed because of the glorious invisible hand of the free market stepping in and forcing them into giving them the freedom to voluntarily choose submission with nuclear arms and puppet dictatorships

And if i refuse and dont participate i will be kippnapped and maybe shot in the process by the Police.

These other certain communities do nothing wrong, there is nothing wrong with shooting cops.

And some socialists want this too but they are defined as you as batshit insane while they are just the other side of the coin of statism.

When I first "got" Socialism and Marxism I spent a week suddenly remembering some old, clichê left-wing slogan I had heard all my life and then finally understanding what it really meant and going "ooooohh"

lol you have the consciousness of a child bro, a child

Thats why he needs a vangaurd! all dumb fucks should be lead by the smart people like Comrade Muke.

Btw this short essy pretty mutch is on point on what i think of capitalism and the economy.

´´Economy — the domination of survival over life — is essential for the maintenance of all other forms of domination. Without the threat of scarcity, it would be difficult to coerce people into obedience to the daily routine of work and pay. We were born into an economized world. The social institution of property has made scarcity a daily threat. Property, whether private or communal, separates the individual from the world, creating a situation in which, rather than simply taking what one wants or needs, one is supposed to ask permission, a permission generally only granted in the form of economic exchange. In this way, different levels of poverty are guaranteed to everyone, even the rich, because under the rule of social property what one is not permitted to have far exceeds what one is permitted to have. The domination of survival over life is maintained.´´

´´Those of us who desire to create our lives as our own recognize that this domination, so essential to the maintainence of society, is an enemy we must attack and destroy. With this understanding, theft and squatting can take on significance as part of an insurgent life project. Welfare scamming, eating at charity feeds, dumpster diving and begging may allow one to survive without a regular job, but they do not in any way attack the economy; they are within the economy. Theft and squatting are also often merely survival tactics. Squatters who demand the “right to a home” or try to legalize their squats, thieves who work their “jobs” like any other worker, only in order to accumulate more worthless commodities — these people have no interest in destroying the economy…they merely want a fair share of its goods. But those who squat and steal as part of an insurgent life, do so in defiance of the logic of economic property. Refusing to accept the scarcity imposed by this logic or to bow to the demands of a world they did not create, such insurgents take what they desire without asking anyone’s permission whenever the possibility arises. In this defiance of society’s economic rule, one takes back the abundance of the world as one’s own — and this is an act of insurrection. In order to maintain social control, the lives of individuals have to be stolen away. In their place, we received economic survival, the tedious existence of work and pay. We cannot buy our lives back, nor can we beg them back. Our lives will only be our own when we steal them back — and that means taking what we want without asking permission. ´´
Steal back your life by Feral Faun
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/feral-faun-essays#toc19

Cool "not an argument" fam.

Well you could go in with guns and claim it as your own but you'd better be prepared for retaliation.

I see you're quite familiar with their narrative. Good for you, champ!

In your ideal society it sounds like you're gonna get shot by someone eventually anyway.

I agree with you. We should cede territory to New Africa and leave them alone. Let them be free to pursue their own destiny! Just make a strong, secure border.

They are insane because they will deny the existence of the state even though it clearly exists and they can feel it crushing them. I believe having a state is not only inevitable since without it Strongmen would inevitably rise and wreck your independent shit, but also desirable. It might be a mafia, but it can be a mafia that works for us, and that's why we grant it legitimacy.

But whta about muh NAP.

also thats exactly what socialism wants to do.

No they dont, ask them about the dictatorship of the proletariat and they will proudly brag that they succefully set it up. Any socialist who meme around that it wasnt a true socialism are mostly revisionists, liberal progresivists (never take these people seriouse) and Anarchists who are against all states.

le strongman doesnt apply anymore in post 19th century civilisation with the implication of arms. Do remember that a state is made out of people who assert their force upon those who are unable to assert force. The state is the centralisation of force and i prever the decentralisation of force where any attempt of centralisation would be met with instant reaction as it would contradict with everyone their interest. (But this can be influence by an idealogy wich lies that it is for the people or for god or for socialism or whatever justification to controle others.)

Do remind that violence is usually the final step you can take in a conflict, there is also an ability to talk it out cause sorely getting your will by shooting people will not go far as everybody is armed so everybody is a strong man

I hear North Korea is resisting the evil capitalists in their socialist paradise. You could always hop on a plane and go there.

Worst leaders in history if I'm honest.

Right. Gangs don't exist and fight over territory in the 20th and 21st century. Uh huh. People never commit violence for reasons other than to settle disputes. Ok. White communities in South Africa aren't raided and terrorized by looting bands of blacks. I'm listening. (not really)

Im actually planning to do that later in my life, they organise holidays to NK.

Remember to keep your Kim portraits perfectly level otherwise into the prison camp you and your extended family go!

Not really planning to take anything possibly incriminating with me to NK.

...

You are verry ignorant if you dont know the intend of sutch groups.

*people do that for the sake of asserting their power and not any other reason behind it that perhaps well maybe verry maybe is related to the resistrictions of commanding your life under the dynamics of the state and economy.
This aint a green text, my mistake.

Their intentions don't matter. They use violence against people. One role of the state enforcing laws is to prevent or minimize that from happening. Of course all individuals should take measures to defend and protect themselves, the state offers them a multilayered protection.

I'm gonna go. Capel tunnel is being a bastard.

Have fun then commie, at least in anarcho capitalism you won't starve

Fuck you mentally ill leftists are delusional

Kidna funny that you bring Ted in the conversation, i agree with almost all the things he says. His little essay on the crew on the ship is a great satire on the new left.

Its not really the intentional its more their actions are the result of violent lashing out in an alternative (illigal) way to get their material interests satisfyd as they are resistrcited of satisfying it by the normal way like perhaps the inability to get the job. The amount of criminals is more rampant around a state with its resistrictions asserted upon its population whereby some cant experience the grace of the state and have to fall back to alternative means to gain their material interest and living conditions.

And i prever not to use that state.

People who can't hold a job usually have deeper problems. You want us all to suffer because these troublesome individuals?

Granted, socialist policies have practically killed all our jobs, but that's because socialists are delusional and try to treat symptoms (people without jobs) instead of root causes (mental illness, antisocial or aggressive behavior, people not wanting to open up businesses in DA COMMOONIDDY because the high risk of being burned down or looted or burgled, etc)

They feel like they are born again ;_;

reborn

It doesnt mather if others suffer or if i aprove it somehow, i acknowledge that these acts are the by product of our current system and society (and the sub-society's (With a culture that approves and stimulates criminal acts) wich normalizes criminal acts).
Its actually mutch more complicated issue than being reduced to le morals or le white oppresion of the dominant culture.

I prever to reform the whole system instead of reforming those people to serve the interest of society.

It does fail in setting up a system of opportunity and stimulation to be a good citizen to transform thus individual to an usefull contributer to the system itself. (As compared to a top notch respectable gangter in ghetto sub-society)

Our Society wants to reduce the individual to serve its goal of being a productive citizen while their society wants to reduce the individual to serve the goal of being respectable and succefull in their own therms with being a top notch gangsta or whatever a collective sees as a succefull person.

What do you hope to achieve by reforming the system for the sake of those who are mentally ill, antisocial, or otherwise troubled? There was a reason that, until recent decades, those kinds of people were isolated from the general public in hospitals and prisons. There was a reason for the death penalty to deal with heinous offenders. Because the health of society as a whole was more important than the feelings of some crazy retarded degenerates who were harmful to functional sane people.

No i want to destroy it and have anarchy, no anarch(ism) but anarchy.

Jesus this is why we need foucault!

Dialectics is a spook.

The reason those people were isolated until recently was that we only recently developed effective antipsychotic medication that allowed for widespread deinstitutionalization, you illiterate fuck.

A strongman will rise and an aristocracy will inevitably form. I'm OK with this as long as the leadership is competent, but you're naive if you think Anarchy can exist on a permanent basis.

Ever notice how all those mass-shooters are on those amazing cure-alls? No? Besides, don't you know de-institutionalization was good for socialists since they rely on weaponizing crazy people?

All of those mass murderers were alienated young men, not psychotics. Can you even name one that was genuinely psychotic?

And no, deinstitutionalization was good for Neoliberals, since they were able to use it as a cover while they gutted the mental health system in favour of 'bersonal resbonsibilidy :DD'.

Why were they alienated in the first place?
So are you saying de-institutionalization wasn't a good thing? Me too! Let's lock those crazies back up! Or kill them.

Good luck against the worker militia's who are the counter to sutch a thing.
What even makes a strongman? What is a strong man? Its ganne be verry hard to be le strong man kingdom when everyone around your kingdom is armed and isnt keen on being forced to do stuff for your sake.

Also in comment with the supposed mentally ill

The rational system of violence not only perpetuates itself, but also evokes responses, often in the form of blind lashings out by enraged individuals, which the system then manipulates into justifications for its own continual existence, and occasionally in the form of consciously rebellious violence. The passionate violence that is suppressed turns in on the one feeling it, becoming the the slow-killing, underlying violence of stress and anxiety. It is evident in the millions of little pinpricks of humiliation that pass between people on the streets and in the public places of every city — looks of disgust and hostility between strangers, and the verbal battle of wits exchanging guilt and blame between supposed friends. This is the subtlest and most total form of rationalised violence; everyone conforms out of fear of each others’ disgust. This is the subtle form of violence practiced by pacifists.

Insurgent Ferocity: The Playful Violence of Rebellion by Feral Faun.

Cause they were deprived of their own managment of life and dependent on a society that rejected them for racism/wierdniss or whatever isnt approved by the group. Society has alienated them from experiencing society in positive sense so they lash out against society. Society CREATES the supposed mentally ill what you are ironcily doing is wanting to solve the symptoms of the problem instead of looking at the root of the problem wich is society itself.

He'd be one of the guys organizaing the worker militia since it's pretty obvious the majority of people won't do anything unless properly motivated and organized by a leader.

Woa that's scientology tier talk. Easy there John Travolta.

This was written by a neurotic mind.

Where does mental illnes come from? Genetics?

Yeah, we would all do nothing without a 'leader'

Dont you mean a heretic/un-man/person i disagree with therefore he is 'mentally ill''/jew/enemy/the negative
You are verry intellectual dishonest but what should i expect from a republican who is a supposed Trump supported who isnt even on par with the Republican party.

Some, yes. Though the neurosis of the modern mind is more complicated and typical in Leftists who identify with alleged victims due to themselves having a low self-esteem. That blurb of text you hurled was evidence of that neurosis.

Without proper leadership we begin fending for ourselves. Poorly managed groups are destined to fail. Bad bosses can wreck businesses. Bad presidents can lead to civil tensions and unrest. Leadership is the most important thing in any group.

No. I mean he's neurotic because he's neurotic. You seem neurotic too tbh. It's alright m8. I still love you. Perhaps you should start re-examining some of your unhealthy worldviews. You don't need to torture yourself with this nonsense anymore.

No, you retard, I'm saying that it had good and bad aspects. On one hand, conditions within institutions were almost universally hellish and inhumane and consigned to suffering and uselessness a great deal of people that could have been functional, contributing members of society if their illness was handled differently.

On the other, it coincided with a grand political project to destroy social services and gut social spending as part of a philosophy created to facilitate the accumulation of capital, which meant that neoliberal politicians were able to use the humanitarian mission of deinstitutionalization as cover for their ideological agenda. Deinstitutionalization is good, but mentally ill people still need care and services that the free market is in many cases unable or unwilling to provide.

you are literally retarded

Is there a free market or is there a regulated market? Think very carefully. I'll give you a hint. (Think Big Pharma. Think Government and Corporate collusion. Think No.)

More projection. Nice!

Were not talking about a muh conspiracy theory here.

The conditions society places on the individual that doesn't fit the norms are the root cause of mental illness. The expression of their genetics is valid and would flourish in a truly equal society.

youtube.com/watch?v=J0VSX2gSlUM

Yes, an individuals inability to cope with life might lead to psychological problems. This is called neurosis. But we also see mental illness in parents passed on to children. This genetic component can't be ignored.

I think what we're both trying to say is the same. That modern society is unbearable to live in. However, without examining why that is, throwing more Leftism onto the problems created by Leftism is only going to make things worse. Let's address the root causes, and there are a lot, instead of treating the symptoms.

You're right, I'm sure that once those pesky government regulations are removed the then really free market will happily provide quality care and help to penniless mentally ill persons out of the goodness of their free-wheeling entrepreneurial souls.

I prever remaining mentall ill and a [email protected]/* */

We are all slaves…

fuck me…

hey man that one still has a swastika on it.

I have the corrected one.

...

...

It's only a matter of time until you start regretting class consciousness

kek'd

Don't stop there, OP! There's so much more to realize!

READ THEORY EVERY DAY