I want to start lifting (SS) but I have extremely weak back muscles.

>>39683468
> pull-downs w/ chin-up grip everyday

when you get strong enough to do chin-ups
>do chin-ups everyday

never do to "failure" point
it is way better to do MAX REPS you can do WITH PROPER FORM

in a month or so you should be able to do chin-ups nicely

that's all

>>39683468
Starting Strength was programmed with extremely weak back muscles in mind. You need to get used to having weight on your back and your back will adjust. Figure out where to actually put the bar for squats, for deadlifts just use as low a weight as you need and really try to figure out the form, cleans ok you can abandon those if you like no one cares.

>>39683468
Squats, cleans and deadlifts with a shameful empty barbell.

File: image.jpg (94KB, 639x656px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 639x656px

Daily reminder that capitalism and anarchism are incompatible.

File: image.jpg (255KB, 2348x1086px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 2348x1086px

>>39683468

Do Lat pull downs with netural pull-up grip (3x5). Increase the weight 2.5 lbs a workout.

Do back extensions on a Roman chair starting with bodyweight for 3 sets of 10 reps.

Do seal rows or cheer supported rows.

Do bodyweight squats. If you have a weight vest, at a few pounds a workout. The weight distribution of the vest is lower on the body and won't strain your back as much.

When you are ready, do sumo deadlifts till you get to 100 lbs, then switch to conventional till you get to bodyweight.

Then, hold the deadlifts constant and start squatting. Once your squats catch up, do starting strength.

Workouts should be 2-3 times a week depending on recovery ability. Also, do some push-ups after every workout.

>>39684756
>Transactions are incompatible with there being no government regulations

How would people buy stuff they like without muh gubernment?

File: image.jpg (65KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 768x768px

>>39685108
I think you misunderstand what anarchists mean when they say they oppose capitalism. They don't mean they oppose markets or people buying things. What anarchists oppose is private ownership of productive property. Instead, anarchists believe in various different types of socialism (mutualism, collectivism, communism, ect.) all of which involve some form of worker ownership and cooperative management of productive property. This means the farmer owns his farm, the factory workers own their factory, the miners own their mine, and so on. Instead of having bosses, workers manage themselves. You would also still own your personal property, which is the stuff you use like your toothbrush and home.

The Free Territory and the anarchist controlled regions of Spain are two of the most notable examples of anarchism put into action on a large scale.

>>39685591
Anyone who believes this has only ever worked skilled labor and never worked retail or assembly line at a factory. Most people in these positions are literally too dumb to think one day ahead or make decisions that re critical to everything flowing smoothly and being productive.

>>39685591
>shoo shoo money goblin
Communism is the real world equivelant of you working out hard in the gym and the lazy fatass down the street getting 40% of your gains.

>>39685108
bitcoin provides decentralized yet verifiable transactions

File: 1481231928238.gif (995KB, 257x194px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 257x194px

>>39686783
The most appropriate way you can put it for this board

>>39685591
How is private property incompatible with anarchy? Why would a farmer not be able to own his farm in a capitalist system? I'm not sure I understand how there isn't in a boss/owner/worker situation. The boss knows what the owner needs to have accomplished and the owner rewards the worker and boss. Hierarchy is patrition and always superior to egalitarianism regardless of whether it is in a socialist, capitalist, or Roman setting.

>>39688293
How there isn't *mutualism*

>>39685591
A system of hierarchy will always be more efficient and less counter-productive than one which attempts to enforce false equality. The emphasis made on a "global revolution" by many communist visionaries exists because a world of (pseudo) equality cannot out-compete a system of hierarchy, such as capitalism.

Anarchy in itself is a silly concept because of how fragile it is. It only takes a single charismatic individual with ill intent to completely bring anarchy to its knees. Political ideologies which rely on the good nature of mankind are doomed to fail since we are (for the most part) inherently evil. Capitalism and Fascism which are dependent on the practice of expansionism and greed work far, far better, and are much more difficult to destroy.

Point made short, I think anarchism is a defeatist ideology and I don't know why people think it's viable.

There's my autism for the day.