>>25539883 >tfw leftism is dead I'd be quite political, but it's a waste of time with so called 'socialists' today.
I don't know if it is exclusive to socialism though. Similar things are happening in other (otherwise reasonable) movements, like the Free Software movement.
I blame a lack of guidance and the prevelence of 'the enemy's truths'. People in Parties and Unions have started to believe western lies about the fesability of socialism. If you take away 90% of socialist teachings, all that's left is the wanky feminist shit that is supposed to be a minority.
A friend of mine is in the local 'Workers' party, and he was trying to tell me that Uber's removal of worker protections and lack of worker organisation was good for the worker. I was like, are you literally fucking me? What the fuck happened to even the simplest in socialist concepts? No wonder SJW shit is so prevelent. It's all that's left once you remove the logic.
>>25539883 I realise this but I still don't agree with communism. Authoritarian ideology in general leaves too much room for abuse by the state. I think either a social democracy or a monarchy where the right to bear arms is protected are the two best forms of government, and communalism might be good but we need to wait on the kurdish revolution for that one.
>>25540863 You need to learn some terminology you pinko fuck, social democracy is the current system; capitalist democracy with welfare. Also, Communism isn't an economic ideology. Socalism is the shared ownership of the means of production, Communism is an economic, social and political ideology. Go actually read some fucking Marx and Engels and Hegel before you make another le edgy gommunist post on here you larping cunt
>>25539883 >w-we hate SJW's our oppinions are totally different >except on gay-marriage, race, religion, wealth-redistribution, gender roles, abortion, sexual morality, culture, borders, education, economics, justice system and so on
What I don't get is /pol/'s idea that if you're not a redpilled conservative, you're an SJW communist liberal or something. Like what the fuck? All I want is for the rich to share their wealth and make more jobs available for people like me who are on their last pennies. Fucking pigs won't even make more minimum wage jobs, instead they just push more and more responsibilities on those who are already working minimum wage. I don't support the left because all they do is tax the rich and hand that money to the poor without making them work. I don't support the right because they support the big money idiots who aren't giving me opportunities to work and make money. I hate both sides. Liberals are lazy, and conservatives are delusional, believing that the wealthy are still generous and making plenty of new jobs.
>>25539883 Either today or yesterday I realised to have lots in common with Lenin. Lovely. It's depresses me, considering that the idea of communism truly is admireable, it the very manifestation of an utopian government. However for an utopian society, hence it is prone to corruption. Besides people are not equal which makes it harder. Therefore at last we, the folks, are what makes the utopia. In order to have a better world, with better policy, everything really, we would have to change the society and folk itself.. A shame.. I really want to see our motherland free of any filth and scum taht plagues it. To see true nations and genuine folks in their glory. Nurturing the many charms bestoved upon us. But instead we're doomed for a cesspool. That's why we have to strive for the better, refuse the lies of idiocy, shallowness and fake tolerance. Rationally, open mindedly and with hearts burning in passion for good and well being, strive towards the better. Besides, what's the point of giving avarge sheep any influance over their shepherd, instead of being rams which do not need one at the first place. huuh.. Strive for hapiness, love and fulfillment.. Just which paths do we have to take so the dream comes true.
>>25542017 >I've never disagreed with a Trumposter before >I've never disagreed with someone who thinks Adam Smith is 100% correct >I've never had an opinion that's directly opposite from the /pol/ hivemind You.
>>25541836 Because even though what you want is reasonable, we will have to pay the hefty cost of more extreme SJW social politics for it, and I'd rather commit fucking suicide than let SJWs take over. The only person in American politics who will do anything to curtail the flood of non-whites is Trump. Of course, he won't really, but it's a nice middle finger to modern society.
>>25542085 I'm >>25540915 this poster. I'm absolutely embarrassed for you. It must be awful to have such a tragically infantile view of the world. >/pol/ need to stop labelling the left SJWs >but everyone who doesn't agree with me is a fucking free marketer trump conservative redpill rich asshole! lmao
>>25542204 this. notice how commies never speak out against mass immigration? It's because they're more concerned with anti fascism than they actually are in keeping the proles employed and getting them a decent pay. Commies really are incredibly similar to SJWs, and there's massive overlap between the two. International women's day was a communist holiday.
No, just /pol/. My parents are conservatives and they aren't mentally ill. My friends are conservatives and they aren't mentally ill. They have the wrong ideas at times that I won't support because they're too forgiving of today's upper-class, but they're not batshit insane.
>>25542302 The fact that you actually, unironically consider /pol/ to be Conservative just shows how fucking stupid you are. It's not a person, but if it did have one unifying ideology it would be reactionary or fascist. Conservatives have only ever made up something like 10 or 15% of /pol/
I doubt many vocal SJWs who only really seem to give a shit about the media care about wearlth redistribution and economics etc. They are mostly teenage girls after all.
On a sidenote, who do people think a one-world government is a bad thing? Wouldn't that be the best thing ever? All the resorces on the earth being used by and for all the people on the earth. Seems like a good idea to me, regardless of the potential (inevitable) corruption and such.
>>25542342 Well maybe they should stop calling everyone who disagrees with them a liberal, and stop associating people like me with communists whose ideas are likely just as stupid as those of the most radical posters in /pol/. It's only natural that their habit of trying to redefine a word to be all-encompassing of half of the political spectrum will brush off on me, we're both on the same website and they crossboard like crazy. Besides, reactionaries were once known as conservatives, like during the Enlightenment revolutions.
>>25542513 Fantastic how you ignored the fact that I was complaining about being no wage instead of minimum wage. Or maybe you're like /pol/ and twist the world to be the way you want to see it, so my posts suddenly say different things just to fit your narrative. I want $7.25/hour, and at least part-time. I want to work. But there's few jobs available and competition is fucking insane. Are you kidding me? Are you telling me that billionaires can't afford to make more minimum wage part-time jobs? I'm a student, I need to work.
TFW consider myself a communist, hatewhat the 'new left' has become, I support nuclear weapons and a strong military, I don't endorse drugs and think drug dealers should be shot. I also think ISIS and religious terrorism needs to be wiped from the face of the Earth not pandered to.
>>25543389 Yeah, let's allow the big money to continue consolidating responsibility to some minimum wage workers while getting rid of others, let's wreck our employment rates even more. Let's find it acceptable for the big money to be pocketing billions, and find it acceptable for all of the American peoples' tax money, big money included, to be going toward NEETs and niggers who are unwilling to work, and find it acceptable for there to be people unable to find a job despite looking desperately for one. Let's continue to find it acceptable to push for a living wage when hundreds of thousands still have no wage and are looking for one. Let's keep replacing human workers with machines. Because apparently our society is just fine and it's my fault that I can't find a job.
Considering how efficient and effective every government on the planet has been with humans/resource cost vs. total gain. I will stick with Republican Capitalism. A strong government with strong protections. Yet not overbearing.
>>25543721 I'm not a failure because I have marketable traits. I have a clean criminal record. I've only accidentally consumed alcohol while under the age of 21, and have never touched an illegal drug. I have a 4.0 GPA. I had a 4.75 weighted GPA in high school. My time-management is supreme. I have a teacher who can confirm this as a reference. I've had temporary paid job training before through a program from my high school and was given high praise by my employer throughout the training. I even use them as a reference. I have an autistic brother who shows what my family is capable of. I was denied by his employer who was hiring. I make myself available on holidays and weekends for all day. I follow all interview advice. But I still don't have a job. There is no way that it's my fault.
>>25539883 SJWs are post-modern products of american liberalism. True communist ethic is basically Sartre's existentialism. SJWs are just a reaction of people who are lost without markers due to the end of modernism and that of reasons' reign. They try to create new markers with all these new communautarianisms to avoid the void of this identity crisis born of the end of the modern era, but instead of giving a meaning of their own to life, they let those communities as a concept to bear the burden of identity instead of themselves. As such, they are not defined by who they are and what they do, but they are defined by their ethnic or cultural belonging, which is pretty much western essentialism at its finest. They're pretty much dooming themselves to a life of stereotypes because they prefer to let communities as a concept to give them an identity. You're not a human being anymore, you're a trans, or black, or asian, or gay, or cis. You're not sharing the concept of humanity with other beings, you're creating more strife between humans by using reactionary rethoric for your "identity" to strive (kinda like some people do in the US or Europe, like Identitarians in France.) SJWs aren't revolutionaries, they're basically reactionaries and conservatives in disguise who should strive to build themselves not based on origins or social groups, but on what they do, their own acts. Sartre's existentialism is the left's best and ultimate answer to SJWs.
As long as you believe in the good in human beings then there's always hope. Because if you are capable of thinking this, then why wouldn't other people be able to think the same? Read on intersubjectivity, it's pretty much at the root of all social activity, even revolution.
>>25541079 SJW is a way to detract from the material world and plunge the leftists into fruitless debates about things that really do not matter and therefore do not threaten the capitalism.
When you discuss the underlying relationships between laborers, labor and capital owners, the conclusion is that laborers are not fairly compensated for their labor because such compensation goes against the interests of the capitalists.
For a worker to be properly compensated, a worker's collective must be formed.
>every attempt at communism killed millions of innocent workers or at the very least turned the country into an utter shithole for decades to come >but the next time we try it its totally gonna be Utopia!
>>25545553 It's not like capitalism has a clean slate with the slave trade, imperialism, oil wars, etc. Most of the countries (if not all) were remarkably shit before communism was introduced (especially Russia). Communism turned Russia from a serf/agricultural economy based country into a nuclear super power in the span of 60 years. That fact is incredible on it's own.
>>25545734 going by those standards western imperialism did the same thing short of nuclear power in a possibly shorter span of time
the command economy is full of horror stories and their poor performance made them inferior in productivity to the capitalist economies of the time. Not to mention the insane death counts associated with industrialization.
so I feel that you might be exaggerating when you say things like that
>>25539883 doesn't matter you're still dumb as shit. Communism CAN'T work because it demands complete equality, but each person has reasons to act on their own accord and out of greed. The unity for the good of the country thing only works if humans have no greed or self worth.
Capitalism is essentially basing your economy on the assumption that people are basically greedy and self-interested, and therefore we should use competition between them to generate wealth. As depressing as that assumption is, I think it's far more correct than the assumption of socialism and communism, which is that people are basically altruistic and therefore we should use cooperation between them, through a government, to generate wealth.
>>25546059 >being this uneducated go read a book, preferable Anarchist-Communist Principles by Kropotkin.
>>25545996 >"To look at people in capitalist society and conclude that human nature is egoism, is like looking at people in a factory where pollution is destroying their lungs and saying that it is human nature to cough." - Andrew Collier
>>25546059 >So..you contradict yourself? Please discontinue that meme. Anarchism implies the strength of the state, while Communism implies a level social system. They can, and do, go together quite logically.
>my funny quote beats all empirical data that shows capitalism is vastly superior >my magic commie government will not shit on human rights although it happened pretty much every time before >my magic commie government will get the 5 year plans right although it has never worked before
>>25546020 That's basically what it is, no? They're figuring that people are altruistic in the sense that they care about others, enough to willingly give up their wealth and labor to benefit others.
>>25546117 It's human nature to want power over others. Socialism and communism just kick the ways to do that around a little bit. Instead of ownership of wealth, it's positions of leadership in government.
>>25546269 unbelievable dude you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, but you're giving your opinion anyway you're an incredible and beautiful example of human determination and ingenuity
>>25546232 You'll never have a world without a state, because there will always be some people that disagree with the way you want society to be run. Either you need some organization to hear disputes and provide the means for people of differing opinions to get together and make binding decisions about how things ought to be, which implies a need for politics, and a state, or you need some type of organized security force to find these people and either remove them or compel their compliance with your order, which also implies a state.
>"nah brah everyone's gonna agree that this is totally the best way to do things" that has never happened in the history of the human race. Why would it happen now?
>>25546288 >Why did it never work in the past? Socialism has worked, see: Paris Commune, Anarchist Catalonia.
>Why dont you buy stocks of your employer if you want to own the means of production? That's not the point, the point is that it is your right to own the fruits of your labour and have every say in something that effects what happens to the fruits of your labour.
>>25546100 I merely stated the fact that the Russian economy made a huge boost thanks to communism. I found that incredible. I did not defend the deaths of millions of people, that's your interpretation.
>>25545841 Fwiw I'm not a communist. I recognize it has a nick for totalitarianism. I do, however, agree with a lot of socialism/communism principles. For example, I think that worker control of the workplace is essential for the growth of a more humane society. It stops the exploitation of workers and the earth's resources. Standards such as the GDP or productivity are poor measurements for the well-being of a country and more importantly it's citizens in my opinion.. If anything I'm more of an anarcho-syndicalist although I'm not sure on that either. Still developing my political stance I guess.
>>25546339 Organisation does not equal state. >State, The The collected institutions that create and enforce laws created by a small minority of people within a given territory. Through laws the state claims that only it has the right to grant the use of violence. The state uses the law to justify and protect a capitalist economy. Organisation through direct democracy is possible and has been achieved in societies and in various political bodies of the past, such as some unions (IWW) and of course the soviets prior Lenin were run in direct democracies.
>>25546339 >You'll never have a world without a state, because there will always be some people that disagree with the way you want society to be run. this is a really stupid argument because if you remove the fact that it's relevant for today you can say it about literally anything >you can't abolish slavery because there'll always be people who disagree with you
>>25546432 You get money (the wage), but the amount of money you get and have a say in is not the full amount which you are producing, this is why it is exploitation and why the capitalist can have a profit. If the capitalist gave the worker control over full value of what was being produced by the workers themselves, the capitalist would be obsolete. Also, wage-labour is slavery, and because I cba summing it up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oztdRo9GLLk
Also i think it's worth noting that most people can't just start their own businesses or buy stocks, considering millions of people live barely above the poverty line because their employers are paying them the lowest possible wages so that they can scrape a profit.
>>25546432 People will be better off, people were better off in Anarchist Catalonia, in the Free State, and in the Paris Commune. Quality of life (especially in Catalonia) increased dramatically after socialism was created and, despite the civil war, productivity boomed.
>>25546348 >That's not the point, the point is that it is your right to own the fruits of your labour and have every say in something that effects what happens to the fruits of your labour.
So I, through my own labor, make a widget. As I read your statement, that means that I have the right to determine what happens to that widget, since I made it. Do I have the right to sell that widget? Maybe I don't need a widget, but I need a gizmo, and I can't make gizmos. Can I go over to the guy who makes gizmos and say "Hey, I'll trade you"?
Because if I have the right to sell the fruits of my labor, then we're just back at where we are today - people engaging in work-for-hire for an employer, in exchange for some kind of compensation.
>>25546496 We're back to that murky swamp of the labor theory of value again, aren't we. There isn't an objective way to determine what something, or some given amount of labor is "worth". All there is is "what is someone else willing to pay in exchange for it".
>>25546421 >only it has the right to grant the use of violence So does everybody have the right to use violence in your system? If someone does so contrary to the rules of the system, who has the right to punish them?
and why should the capitalist give the workers his means of production for free? Cuz hes a nice guy? Sounds more like a cuck
Slavery means another human being owns you. If you are alone, you will die if you dont work. Theres no slaver here. Getting a job voluntarily to survive is not slavery. Forcing someone else to work so you dont have to work is slavery. Fuck off commie scum.
>>25546528 Firstly, you cannot determine how much something is worth, and I didn't claim you could. That is why a Communist society would be moneyless, because the value would be determined by the collectives and communes by how they saw fit. Secondly, sorry I screwed up green-text by accident, lol, it's mean to be >State, The >The collected institutions that create and enforce laws created by a small minority of people within a given territory. Through laws the state claims that only it has the right to grant the use of violence. The state uses the law to justify and protect a capitalist economy. And yes, everybody has the right to use violence against their oppressors, but in a Communist society where there are no classes, nor oppressive or exploitative structures (such as the state and capitalism) violence would be irrelevant.
Finally, yes you do have a right trade so long as you're only exploiting yourself.
>>25546588 >Slavery means another human being owns you if they just own your labour there's no practical difference >If you are alone, you will die if you dont work. Theres no slaver here. you won't die if your work isn't stolen by a boss >Getting a job voluntarily to survive is not slavery. if your only options are to suck my dick or die then that's not rape if your only options are work the plantation for massa or die then that's not slavery >Forcing someone else to work so you dont have to work is slavery. I agree, that's why capitalism is so bad
>>25546588 The capitalist should give the worker's his means of production, because it's better than a violent revolution where he gets put to the wall.
And to your second point, they do own you. You have to receive a wage or you starve, so logically you do anything to receive this wage - much like a slave must do anything their master says or they risk being put to death. If the wage-earner does not receive his wage, he starves and freezes to death
>>25546528 >There isn't an objective way to determine what something, or some given amount of labor is "worth". All there is is "what is someone else willing to pay in exchange for it". Yes, exchange- and use-value. It's the subject of the first chapters of Capital. A very interesting read. Here's a quick summary: https://youtu.be/zwuMrd_Hgww?t=3m23s
>>25546770 but on an island yu're working for yourself and not a boss who has violent institutions in his power also that's a naturalistic fallacy >Forcing other people to work for you is slavery. again I'm glad we agree that capitalism really isn't any better than slavery
>>25546604 >That is why a Communist society would be moneyless, because the value would be determined by the collectives and communes by how they saw fit. money is just a means to quantify trade. Is my chicken worth less than, the same as, or more than, your sack of potatoes? By how much? How do we keep track of accounts so that if you need a chicken and I give mine to you, you know how much to give back to me later?
>>25546670 the capitalist kills people to steal their wealth. so you kill the capitalist to steal his wealth. how are you different, again?
>>25546770 what if others work for me voluntarily? Suppose I, through my own labor, manage to make a hundred thousand dollars. I then give loans to people and stop working, living off the interest. There's no coercion, just a voluntary agreement of "I need money now, so if you give it to me, I'll pay you back more money later". Or do the commies ITT propose to ban the practice of loaning money (or other things of value, same difference)? If so, then how do I still have the right to do as I see fit with the fruits of my labor?
>>25546897 >the capitalist kills people to steal their wealth. so you kill the capitalist to steal his wealth. how are you different, again? why is self defence justified and not assault? >what if others work for me voluntarily? >Suppose I, through my own labor, manage to make a hundred thousand dollars. I then give loans to people and stop working, living off the interest. There's no coercion, just a voluntary agreement of "I need money now, so if you give it to me, I'll pay you back more money later". Or do the commies ITT propose to ban the practice of loaning money (or other things of value, same difference)? If so, then how do I still have the right to do as I see fit with the fruits of my labor? First of all, a little kid voluntarily walks into an unmarked white van. Convincing people that something is right doesn't make it right, no successful thief or exploiter would choose the threat of dissent over their victims being oblivious. When the exploited don't know that they're exploitedm the exploiters don't need to get their hands dirty and everything runs smoothly. Secondly, you don't make money through your own labour, it has to be given to you by a boss.
>>25546935 >No one forces you to work in slavery countries you goddamn retard. Your "muh oppression by master" doesnt change the definition of slavery. >You are FREE to VOLUNTARILY work in slavery societies. You can also EARN THE RESPECT OF YOUR MASTER AND HAVE NO MASTER.
>>25547032 >why is self defence justified and not assault? In some places, it isn't.
>Convincing people that something is right doesn't make it right, no successful thief or exploiter would choose the threat of dissent over their victims being oblivious. When the exploited don't know that they're exploitedm the exploiters don't need to get their hands dirty and everything runs smoothly. so how do I know that what you say is true? You could be an exploiter.
>>25539883 Fuck off, faggot. If you actually read any classical leftist literature you'd know that they were as much SJW cucks as they are today, the only difference is their degeneracy wasn't fully developed.
>>25547115 >In some places, it isn't. because oppression depends on violence, the violence of the oppressed is always justified >so how do I know that what you say is true? You could be an exploiter. what power over you do I gain from this?
>>25547174 >>what power over you do I gain from this? you gain my trust. If you say many things, and convince me that you speak the truth, then I'm more likely to either a.) believe an untruth that you subsequently slip in, or b.) not critically examine other things you say after a while, and follow you blindly.
>>25545553 >every attempt at communism killed millions
nice reduction of history memebrain
revolutions are the product of highly volatile conditions, such as poverty, famine, the collapse of an administration, the break down of social order, etc. etc. revolutions almost always lead to civil wars. war is bloody. conflict between revolutionaries and reactionaries, and within these groups, leads to more conflict and bloodshed. the attempt to create a stable government - communist or otherwise - in the wake of this kind of upheaval is incredibly difficult, and often leads to mismanagement or excessively punitive measures taken by the government. to reduce all these factors to "try communism = get killed" is reductionist horseshit. opposition to communism is no guarantee of peace and stability. just look at indonesian killings of 1965-66 and other anti-communist purges. in 20th century conflict between communist and anti-communist regimes, anti-communist regimes have just as bloody a track record.
>>25547454 the rest of your sentence doesn't negate what i said at all
civil war and revolution fucks a country up badly, often for decades
given this fact, some of the successes of communism are more remarkable than its failures
the bolsheviks for example succeeded in turning russia from a feudal, illiterate backwater into a heavily industrialized nation with space-faring technology, and all this in the wake of an incredibly destructive revolution, civil war and world war
>>25542698 >I support nuclear weapons and a strong military, Pretty dumb desu. Our military spending is one of the most idiotic things to exist. Higher than like 23 allies combined? What a fucking joke.
> I don't endorse drugs and think drug dealers should be shot Grown adults should be allowed to do whatever they want. Sure, make shit like crocodile illegal but seriously take the kid gloves off. The only reasons the "war on drugs" is still a thing is A) the DEA would lose all it's jobs B) the drug kingpins make their money off the fact that drugs are illegal.
>I also think ISIS and religious terrorism needs to be wiped from the face of the Earth not pandered to. At least we can agree on something. They should all be executed without remorse. They lost their right to be considered human after taking the lives of innocents for no reason other than "Muh god is better than your god"
>>25542355 >All the resorces on the earth being used by and for all the people on the earth Oh god, the retardation. They're already being used. We have something called international trade you know. >as if the US voters aren't dumb enough we need to give our power to the dumbest retards in Africa, South America, India, and the Islamic world because equality n shit
Communism implies another man can provide for me. Which is simply not true, i will be providing for them irregardless of how much i hate them, or the fact they cannot ever hope to output as much as i can Anti-robot ideology if there ever was one, might as well adopt Chad's bastard
>>25539883 I like socialism (in terms of the gov. helping people who need help) but I don't agree with the cultural part of todays socialist/leftist partys. I don't like the idea of communism too. I want freedom about my education, work and family. Besides that communism is dead in every country that's not a uncivilized shithole today.
Also I'm too nationalistic to support todays left. I know it sounds edgy but some kind of national socialism would be perfect for me. Not Nazi national socialism, I don't want millions to be killed in a war or concentration camp. I like the idea of an authoritarian state that cares about it's people and supports the poor financially and tries to make them a part of society. Todays capitalism is fucked up (just watch some documentaries and videos about the world banks etc and money in general). The nationalistic part is hard though today, but I just hate this multicultural/SJW crap from todays left. Thank god I don't live in the US where both parties are money controlled puppets. Both Trump and Sanders seem to dislike this though, so theres maybe some change in the future, unless idiots vote Clinton.
>>25548813 truly the current system is the best for robots. I live in the UK and you get 200GBP a month unemployment, bumping up to 400 a month if you're depressed and 1000 if you have the 'tism. I've never understood all the revolutionary sentiment on here. Other than all the fucking brown people they keep letting in it's pretty great.
>>25549881 that's nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with the human condition. you can live within capitalism and not be reduced to petty materialism. I'd honestly rather live in a system of plenty and have to worry about people falling into debt or overindulging themselves than live in a society where famine and clothing yourself are serious concerns. you're romanticising scarcity and it's a terrible, dangerous mistake.
>>25549923 >you're romanticising scarcity and it's a terrible, dangerous mistake I'm just pointing out the fact that you don't need Lamborghinis and Apple stock shares to live. The problem is that in this "system of plenty", not only we mistake ourselves about what is precisely "plenty" (cars? Food?), but also plenty is not necessarily available to everyone to begin with.
>you can live within capitalism and not be reduced to petty materialism Just look at the amount of households living in poverty. It's depressing. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf "In 2014, the official poverty rate was 14.8 percent. There were 46.7 million people in poverty. "
>>25550122 >food? Yes. Food. There is plenty of food and it's amazing. We have a fucking obesity crisis, mate. We're worried for the nation because the "poor, downtrodden, oppressed" working class have so much fucking food that they're becoming obese. >poverty How many of those people in poverty have electricity, running water and food? I'd wager a substantial amount of them.
>>25542355 >who do people think a one-world government is a bad thing? There literally isn't enough shit in the world, communism isn't bringing everyone up to western levels, it's lowering everyone to africa levels.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.