Just want to watch anime about cute squid girl

anime studios are capitalist
anime publishers are capitalist
anime was born in capitalism and rooted in even worse capitalist (disney)
anime is capitalist

PROLE WITH CHAINSAW AND FUCK ANIME.jpg

I'm so glad anime won't exist under true communism and all you autists will be lined up the wall and shot for being counterrevolutionary. Anime is made and owned and born through by the worst kind of bourgeois and anything that does not require you to toil in a true proletarian utopia will get you sent straight to the gulags. If you have time to waste on idiotic capitalist drawings and propaganda through their pork producing media machines then you are not a true proletarian, just another harmful bourgeois element. Besides only fascists like Hitler can enjoy fucking cartoons because they are manchildren anyway and not true harden proletariat. You know what Hitler favourite movie was? Snow White! Fucking pathetic fashies and you do not want to be like them so grow up and grab a hammer and sickle.

Kill yourself. They are nothing more than capitalist distractions to keep the masses from being productive and start hunting for the pork that is rightfully theirs.

Only Holla Forumstards like anime.

Do you want to be a Holla Forumstard?

Yes

...

Sauce?

leftypol

Just as Che executed those who would dare listen to subversive capitalist music and wear their clothing so too will we purge those watch cartoons in our glourious utopia.

You don't need fun in a proletarian utopia, bourgeois manchild.

>>>/anime/ >>>/contraband/ >>>/gulag/

...

I'm calling off the revolution. Anime must be saved

Want the epitome of class-cuckery?

Watch Working!.

It's ok to pass the time by any other account.

youtube.com/watch?v=o4biOuKD76I

...

youtube.com/watch?v=_WTBkj8gFfI

wow
i don't even know what to say
but i really want a fucking burger now

i'd like to teach the world to fap version is much better

meanwhile, GDR 70s
youtube.com/watch?v=BmezVn5tl_4

Are you fucking serious?

They will only mislead you and waste your time and energy better spent on revolution.

...

...

isn't it illegal to bump threads before they moved far enough down through the pages?

Not like you can really own copyright any more.
We seized it all round 1999

bump, for the sake of bumping, not contributing, i mean.

it's a contribution, telling you that you're a moron

jesus christ delete this fucking thread already

it has nothing to actually do with politics and is counterrevolutionary

these crapitalist cartoons only seek to weaken and subvert the proletariat to action

Your revolution can't be very strong if it can subverted by kawaii

pirating anime is an insurrectionary act

Moe is good for the soul - getting rest and staying sane is essential for anyone struggling for our cause. Anime is crafted with love by workers. Let's seize the means of production so that the hardworking animators can afford to eat and shower!

...

mfw this board is a meme

kill self

Suicide is counterrevolutionary. This is starting to sound like kulak talk to me, bud.

Is this unironic?

Holy shit.

Some anime is objectively pro-fascist. For example, anything by Rei Kawahara.

In Venezuela, you finish 11th grade/5th year (end of high school) when you're 16/17. Why would anyone drop out that late?

why the fuck are the mods so fucking useless and stupid? all these slide and trash threads and fucking anime of all things? proof that our mods are fucking fascist COINTELPRO shills

Sauce?

The manga concludes with her breaking her entire workplace so she can have debt and use it as an excuse to stay in the human world for longer

[Pork intensifies]

Lemme keep it real for ya autists.
2D girls are meant to be fap material and that's it.
If you legitimately enjoy watching anime then you should rethink your life cause things are obviously going wrong with ya.
Man up and stop being a retard.

Oh come on, SAO's not THAT bad.

Are you trying to enforce the patriarchy on me fam?

Whats the name of the original show?

Aiura.

I wish I knew where all these commie subs for it came from, they're pretty great.

Thanks, comrade. As for the subs - I thought they were made by you guys?

...

Thanks for the (You), man, I've been really hard up lately. God bless.

This isn't 4chan.

S T O P

Naruto is a pretty cool guy eh achieves world peace through friendship and love and doesn't afraid of anything

It's time to stop!

Bourgeois decadence is the Stalinist version of muh fun stuff.

What are you talking about. Stalin loved musicals, and cats. Both of which are fun.

End of highschool in burgerland is 18.

Also, their educational system is fucked and they keep the smart and slow kids in the same classes until they are 18 instead of giving them appropriate education on their level.

Those are some well painted legs and lower belly holy damn that artist got talent. Too bad hes wasting it on shitty anime style because that skill doesnt belong together with flat faces.

reddit is calling you

↓

wow this really is redditchan, all I wanted was to talk about communism

Why do you keep bumping the thread then lol

because I'm too lazy to type sage and Holla Forums is shit beyond repair anyway

If you think that's classcucked, you haven't even watched NEW GAME.

mega.nz/#F!Eh0j1ZgY!95PFFFznNVTbgQr7Pmf4ew
You can download them here if you're interested.

You know, NEW GAME actually got me thinking quite a bit about the exploitation of labour vis-à-vis the game industry.

Specifically, how would you actually go about distributing profits fairly, when it's difficult if not impossible to gauge how much if any of a game's value was created by a specific labourer. If I spend five hundred hours modelling, UV mapping and texturing household items that littler the background of a $30 dollar game, to what share of the profit does that entitle me? What about QA, or voice actors? And of course there's no clear means of production, if we assume that PCs are personal property and we're using free software.

I think that doing game dev at any reasonable pace is just inherently hard work. The system where publishers dedicate resources and try to make profitable games done as fast and cheaply as possible and then take all the profits is a real problem, but even Kickstarted indie devs are going to bust their asses working on games (unless they happen to be named Falco Girgis.)

While I do not think that profit sharing is necessarily all that viable in game dev, I do think it's one of those situations where you'd see massive benefits from the institution of worker self-management and MoP ownership in the wider economy, as game dev positions would be in direct competition with cooperative commodity producers and people would have more to spend on video games in general. They'll still be working hard, probably, but if they're fairly compensated and we get rid of the publishers that's no problem at all.

For my part I like to imagine that Aoba and co are extremely well compensated for their labour so I can maintain the fantasy that they're labouring out of love of the artform and not dire necessity. That's how I enjoy all of these anime.

Coworkers would democratically determine wages and the allocation of surplus derived from their labor.

How would you see this working in praxis? Say some guy says he wants to make a video game, puts a proposal somewhere, and gets $5000000. Where and how is it decided how many workers there are, who does what and for what wages?

Just kill me.

you start with one guy, that guy needs an animator so he finds an animator

now you have two guys. one decides they need a modeler and so he asks the other guy what he thinks. they both agree so now there are three guys and so forth

the collective expands to meet its needs as determined by the communal labor force that has been assembled to complete the project

the workers recognize the needs of the project and then communally decide who is to do what, or assign roles, or whatever, based on however the collective is organized and along what lines

the workers then work out who gets what compensation for what work democratically and when the project is over what to do with the profits

Do you think there is any conflict between the principles of socialism and allowing the core of the collective to retain primacy and some sort of veto power? I ask this because video games, like film, inherently involve a lot of people labouring to bring to fruition the artistic vision of a relative few, and I think it would be wrong to compromise that vision to any degree in the name of democracy. I don't think that the boom mic operators for STALKER should be able to band together and decide that the story should be different, for example - they might have some good insights and suggestions individually, but ultimately I think the right is with the director how to handle those.

I personally don't think it's necessary to bring someone into a collective in this sort of enterprise - you may only need a couple of models or animations at a given time, and in that way you might be better off contracting that out to an independent labourer producing those things as commodities.

This is a matter of some importance to me, since if I ever achieve any sort of success with my silly little games to the point where I get to work with other people, I would very much like to have a system in place that is fair to them. Don't worry, though, that will probably never happen. ;_;

wew lad, that's some porked up ideology right there

george lucas.jpg

if you don't want to bother with democracy then you don't have to, but if you want to collaborate with people to create a communal project then you might have to deal with having to alter your vision in order to accommodate the input of your work mates

the guy that made myst did everything himself in his garage, so there's nothing stopping you

first of all, why not? without their labor your vision won't come to fruition apparently, so if they veto some part of your project or withdraw their labor, then what are you going to do?

if the collective comes to the decision to give the director that sort of authority, that's one thing, but why should someone have that total control over the collective effort of the group just because they're the "director"

you're right, it might not be necessary. that would be for you to decide when you start this project or whatever.

but really, what are we talking about here? are we still under capitalism, or are we assuming some sort of early-stage socialism, or what? depending on the circumstances, the makeup of the collective or company or whatever might be drastically different, to say nothing of how you get or use these resources, digital or material

that's a noble sentiment, but the reality is what is "fair" to one person might be unfair to the next, so the inclusion of democracy in this sort of creative environment is essential

It's true, though. The problem with George Lucas is that he was given too much credit relative to what he actually accomplished. It got to his head because he didn't realize how much he owed to other people and he fell on his face as a consequence. His failure is entirely his own.

Because, unlike porky's ownership of the MoP, the director's primacy here is earned on the basis of their artistic reputation. He didn't necessarily buy or earn it (I'll get to this later). You can get a bunch of boom mic operators, cameramen, makeup artists, actors etc. together but without a screenwriter and a director you're going to get a muddled mess - in that way, everyone else needs the director as much as the director needs everyone else.

And under my initial example, the director here earns funding based on his proposal together with his reputation. Hence why I'm saying that it's earned - people know his work, they like it, they want to see him achieve more of it. (I'm assuming the crowdfunding model rather than the cigar-chomping hollywood fat cat model, mind.) Making art is not like making fungible commodities, and I think hierarchy is more justified here. Think of it another way, if you're playing guitar for Captain Beefheart (RIP) you're not producing the value of his work, because he's telling you exactly how to play and when to play it - if you did it by yourself, you'd probably produce far less value. In this case, Captain Beefheart's musical talent is like the MoP, except he can be said to justifiably own it. It's an actual meritocracy, unlike capitalism.

Now, to go back to the Star Wars example, it's very clear that persons other than George Lucas had something to do with the massive success of the films. They should be entitled to a share of the profits, definitely. If the only reason he's the director on subsequent productions is because he took an unfair share of those profits and used it to fund his other films and cement his position as director, then I would say that the position is unearned.

I'm not really assuming anything here, but for my immediate concerns we're obviously operating under capitalism unless we can somehow manage to establish socialism between then and now. One big concern is that crowdfunding isn't really the most reliable form of financial backing under capitalism (I imagine that under socialism it would be far more reliable as people in general would have much larger discretionary incomes), so if I ever reach that level of success I'd be worried about having enough to reinvest and keep making games. I wouldn't have a problem with everyone getting a proportional share of the profits if it could be ensured that the games would keep coming instead of everyone cashing out and closing up shop.