Why are so many robots so reactionary? Shouldn't socialism

>>34507497
Leftists hate robots. We're not black enough for them to give a shit about us.

Maybe if there were ethically consistent socialists who advocated redistributing sex from normies to robots.

File: sngls.png (144KB, 1000x963px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1000x963px

>>34507497

>socialism
>everyone equal

Top fucking kek, if you actually believe this. Robots are apolitical. Why? Because all societies lead to the same hierarchies.

Chads/Stacies on Top
Normies in the middle
Robots at the bottom

Literally every society is like this. Under communism the powerful people ruled ( The Secret Police, The military, Government officials), they fucked ALL the women and the normies got the scraps. Under Monarchy the Kings and nobles had all the wealth and women. Under Capitalism it's the business owners, Chads/athletes, other powerful people.

>>34507675
What you consider communism isn't actually communism, it's actually marxism-leninism, one of the proposed paths to achieving communism, and the path that has arguably been the least successful.

Certain forms of socialism(Anarcho-socialism, anarcho-syndicalism) completely lack a hierarchy and everyone is equal.

>>34507497
Why would I want to be equal to mediocre normalfags when I am destined for greatness?

>>34507724
>>34507724

>Everyone is equal

Except people are BORN unequal, faggot. Chad is naturally better looking, smarter, and more successful. You can't "Redistribute" Chad's genetics. You can't "Redistribute" talent, looks, charm, athletic ability etc etc. Even if everyone is poor (Which is all socialism amounts to) Chad is still better off and still more successful.

This is why redistribution is a normalfag meme based on jack dick nothing.

>>34507757
Considering the state of the world, redistribution would lead to everyone being, at the very least, middle class, not poor.

>>34507497
Why would robots be stupid enough to fall for an ideology that is based on three things that all robots know are lies?

1. Everyone is equal
2. You can trust everyone else to do the right thing
3. Human behavior can be rationally explained and predicted (which is how socialist governments try to plan their economies-look how that works out)

>>34507497
You're a complete idiot if you think everyone would be equal in socialism. Besides, they all went to shit in some way shape or form and led to complete totalitarianism. Hell even Lenin said that the goal of socialism is communism, in his exact words.

>>34507780
The global GDP per capita is $11,000. The global median income is even lower. I don't know what shithole you live in where $11k per year isn't considered poor, but redistribution would lead to everyone being poor.

>>34507801
>>34507805
Governments are a spook, anons.

Anarchism is the way to go.

>>34507820
>Anarchism

fucking kek, it would devolve into feudalism within a month.

>>34507497
Why the would I want to be on equal footing with chads, normies, and niggers.

My political ideology is me and my robot brothers crushing the world. Why should I care if society is equal.

>>34507497
Equal at what?

>>34507820
Right. I advise you take a trip down to Somalia then.

File: Kucharski's_Marie_Antoinette.jpg (1MB, 1600x2135px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x2135px

equality doesn't exist
every (((political ideaology))) for the past 300 years has only been able to produce roving bands of semi-literate thugs

the world is doomed, history is OVER and we're living in ruins
notice that i didn't write "humanity is doomed"
that's because humanity has long since gone extinct
whatever we are, we belong to a lower form of life and we deserve punishment
we deserve every last ounce of pain and suffering accorded to us

Reactionary ideologies (not just fascism, but old-school pre-WWI monarchism, Gilded Age capitalism, etc.) accept the undeniable fact that people are inherently unequal and inherently awful, and tries to find a way to bring order to that kind of society. It doesn't explicitly try to lie to the plebs the way leftist ideologies do. Even modern capitalism is only a weak compromise between those two, in a lot of ways the average person around the world (not talking CANZUK/USA/EU/Japan, but the world as a whole) wouldn't see much difference if you replaced their leftist or pseudo-leftist government with a legit monarchy tomorrow.

>>34507878
Somalia still uses a capitalist system, what I'm proposing is worker ownership.

>>34507838
It worked for Spain, for 2 years, while fending off Franco's goons.

>>34507820
I like my purified water and tax-funded fire department though.

>>34507497
because red is cancer

File: 1481852958585.jpg (15KB, 266x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 266x300px

>>34507910
>It worked for Spain, for 2 years

>>34507886
>history is over

Lol, fuck off Mr Fukuyama

>that's because humanity has long since gone extinct

Objectively, we're more advanced or evolved than whatever we were 100,000 years ago, 10,000 years ago, or even 1150 years ago. We're shit, but "humanity has gone extinct" is one hell of an exaggeration.

>>34507910
>Somalia still uses a capitalist system, what I'm proposing is worker ownership.

Uh-huh. How do you plan to enforce that in an anarchist society? Eventually, some guy with the most charisma, some guns, and easy access to a lot of food/water will start imposing his will on other people.

>it worked for Spain

No, it didn't. It temporarily held together in Catalonia (which, as any good Catalan will tell you, is not Spain) in the face of total war, for less than 20 months. Good luck getting that shit to function in peacetime. Also, the fact that it was crushed so decisively doesn't exactly work in its favor.

Robots aren't delusional enough to think people "should" be "equal". They understand their place at the bottom of the food chain.

What is your guys opinion on marriage?

It is basically a system where normies and robots are given a good chance at a lifetime with a mate.

Without marriage chads get to monopolize all the women easily.

All robots and other low-tier males should be pro-marriage.

I unironically think we should bring back monarchy/oligarchy in the civilized world*, but openly. Not this thinly-veiled pseudo-oligarchy we have now. But an open, unapologetic concentration of all power (not just most of it) in the very top. Socialism and communism are stupid fantasies based on good intentions that objectively make everything worse. Look at Russia, and how its stupid flirtation with socialism set it back so far. It would unironically be the world's dominant power today had the Tsars not fallen (which is part of why the Germans were so desperate to destroy it).

*Europe, ANZAC, USA, Russia, Japan, China

File: Smooth_Santana.png (53KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 225x225px

>>34507780

That wouldn't change my point. No amount of law will ever change the natural hierarchy. Socialists are really just trying to force something which is impossible.

Even under some magical, hypothetical "True Socialism", there will still be Chads, Brads, and Thads fucking all the women and hoarding all the wealth and power for themselves. This is LITERALLY reality

>>34507987
>How do you plan to enforce that in an anarchist society

Voluntary participation/cultural revolution/violent revolution/all of the above

> it was crushed so decisively doesn't exactly work in its favor

It was crushed because Franco received support from both the "Axis" and "Allies", while only the soviets helped the Republicans, and even then, they tried to impose their will on the Republicans, which in itself contributed to its downfall.

File: siegfried-kircheis-3778.jpg (174KB, 400x615px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 400x615px

>>34508058

If only Kircheis were here...

>>34508046
Meaningless as long as divorce for no good reason ("irreconcilable differences") is an option. I understand breaking the arrangement in cases of adultery or abuse, but when people can just opt out at will marriage becomes worthless.

Its entire function, to build the family unit and provide a stable upbringing for children, ceased to be worth anything a long, long time ago.

>>34507987
>objectively we're more advanced than we were a couple centuries ago

by what metric lmao

we've descended so far as to become wholly unrecognizable to true humanity

>>34508089
I mean real marriage with divorce being illegal, if couple separated they could get shunned/ostracized/starved by community, women had to be virgins, etc.

Not shitty lawsuit-divorce marriage like we have now.

>>34508076
>Voluntary participation

hahahahahahahahaha

>cultural revolution/violent revolution

How are you going to carry this out? With some kind of organized, armed force, with a leader and officials carrying out different tasks? What do we call that again? A "government"?

>It was crushed because Franco received support from both the "Axis" and "Allies

It was crushed mainly because as a concept, it's inherently unworkable. An organized, ideologically sound breakaway Catalan state would have succeeded. Socialist, fascist, capitalist, whatever. But not an anarchist one.

>while only the soviets helped the Republican

Liar. The Stalinists actively worked to destroy the anarchists. Comrade Josef had no interest in a thriving example

>>34507819
Oh you fucking shitfuck; I live on 4k per year.

>>34508116
Then yeah, I like the concept. I don't care about it helping "normies" and "robots" or anything like that, but it's valuable for society. Those of us who are true robots are far too fucked up to get married under any situation. Even if you go back to a time when divorce was far more limited than it is today, the only way us "robots" (and we were, of course, rarer back then) were getting married is if our fathers were somebody important.

>>34507987
>evolved
more like devolved

>>34508158
God damn, you poor bastard, you have my sympathy. Eres sudaca?

>>34508076
Dude how delusional are you? That system would implode within days. Maybe if people as a whole weren't so selfish and whatnot then maybe it could work, but the only result from any of those things would be a life that's more shittier than things are now.

>>34508132
>hahahahahahahahaha
Yeah, I know it's pretty much impossible, doesn't mean it's not an option though.

>What do we call that again? A "government"?
Worked for Catalonia.

>Liar. The Stalinists actively worked to destroy the anarchists. Comrade Josef had no interest in a thriving example

I do agree the Stalinists worked against them, the SU did send quite a bit of support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Spanish_Civil_War#USSR

>>34508192
i'm not spanish or mexican or whatever

>>34508169

I dont get it, if robots of olde didn't get married, how do robots exist now?

>>34508218
>Yeah, I know it's pretty much impossible, doesn't mean it's not an option though.

No, that it is exactly what it means. Voluntary mass support for anarchy, with everyone playing by the rules and not trying to make their own states or pseudo-feudal societies, is an absolute pipe dream. If you want to fantasize about it, then seriously, I understand, and more power to you. But it's not even remotely realistic.

>Worked for Catalonia.

No, it didn't. It was ridiculously short-lived, and only survived for as long as it did because of the extraordinary circumstances of a war. It actually ruined Catalonia. A stable, well-organized Catalan state could have very likely survived.

>I do agree the Stalinists worked against them, the SU did send quite a bit of support.

It sent support with the understanding with those who it supported would follow Stalinist ideology. And anyone who tried deviating from that was dealt with in the classic Stalinist style.

I'm not calling you out personally here, just drunkenly whining about commies, but it feels like so many of you are under the impression that the Soviet Union ever truly tried to support socialist ideology. It didn't. From the day Stalin took power (which is when the Soviets truly started looking worldwide), it was an authoritarian militarist state dressed up in socialist ideology, trying to build puppet states. SU support always carried with it the implied condition of "do what we want you to do".

>>34508072
This guy with the real nigga hours

All systems exist to be corrupted and destroyed. Rules turn life into a game to be exploited by the most skillful players, who upon rising to the top will change the system to ensure their dominance is unchallenged. There is no hope to be found in revolution. Perhaps some solace can be found in mental and spiritual liberation, if such a thing is possible.

>>34508246
We're very much a product of our environment, nearly all of us can think of men objectively less attractive or more mentally unstable than us who nonetheless form relationships.

Robots are for the most part a product of modern society, of its hypocrisy when it comes to social relations, the high level of broken families, weak community ties that would normally mitigate those broken families, and the way that so many governments happily subsidize those of us who are basically losers.

Robots were much rarer in the old days because society was so different back then. Being a shut-in was not an option, you would starve. Being a beta faggot was not an option, society endlessly pushed you in the opposite direction. Feminism did not really exist. The clergy was a welcome option for the lost causes, as was a slow and painful death on some battlefield somewhere. Objectively, society as a whole is happier and healthier now. But the side effect is that there are a lot more robots. Look at the words "NEET" and "hikikomori", and where they originated. It sure as hell wasn't a poor, religious country.

>>34508325
>From the day Stalin took power (which is when the Soviets truly started looking worldwide), it was an authoritarian militarist state dressed up in socialist ideology, trying to build puppet states. SU support always carried with it the implied condition of "do what we want you to do".

We're on the same page here, I don't support the SU at all, and I'm generally against any form of marxist-leninism.

File: anarchio feudal catpng.png (6KB, 339x348px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 339x348px

>>34507497
I'm an anarcho feudalist...
The precept of anarcho feudalism is:
Natural/artificial law absolves us of social responsibility and obligation, so the goal of anarcho feudalism is to get rid of the state (as it exists as an artificial law), because the state is immoral.

Territory, morality and honour are forms of communication, like language. Mammals without language still have those forms of communication; a wolf will mark its territory, a lion has a hierarchy and a sense of honour, and chimps have a sense of structural morality and fairness.

The peoples and persons living in the state are called the "polity"; they live according to state laws. Their controlled territory absolves them of the need to protect their own; their controlled morality justifies their legal degeneracy; their controlled honour deprives them of social validation; their controlled language obviates and confuses language to the point that we argue over semantics on every little topic.

But one thing really stuck out, and it shook me to the depths of my soul..
I battled depression when I lived abroad; I'm a naturally manic person, and my family has a history of psychosis. Without an identity or a sense of belonging in a society, and being forced (by the state) into an artificial relationship, how do we find meaning in life? The polity is designed to be void of all meaning, because human relationships aren't emphasized; only money and popularity are emphasized. To a pollite, only money and popularity are desireable, because they sustain an identity relative to the rest of the polity. Depression doesn't have a use in a polity; it's a vestigial organ; it has a function in the rest of mammals, but we've suffered its uselessness, because we choose not to use it. Depression is meant for the socially ostracized; it's meant for the outcast being who inflicts harm upon itself without regard of the consequence, because it benefits a social animal that one dies lest all of them die.

File: Anarcho Feudalism concept.png (35KB, 640x1000px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 640x1000px

>>34508797
>>34508797
Cont'd

Depression is man's most needed vestigial organ.
When I was a small child, someone bullied me at school for saying weird things. I stopped saying weird things, and they left me alone. I was bullied for being fat; I lost weight, and they left me alone. I was bullied for having a gay voice; I practiced my speech, and they left me alone. They antagonized me for being abnormal, and I faced depression because of it, but also realization. And with rules against bullying, nobody dares correct the fat kid, or the kid that sounds like a fag; they leave them alone, so they can stew in their own depressive juices. The outcasts don't know why people avoid them or politely put them down; they don't internalize the normalcy, and so they don't know what normal is. If law exists to prevent hurt feelings and bullying, then how do we know right from wrong, if we're not allowed to experience it for ourselves? Why aren't we allowed to communicate it for ourselves? Why must we be confined to having to speak to Juan, Jamal, and Ahmed, but we can't speak to our own people? The state exists to serve a false sense of "People", and it sustains itself with ideas like capitalism and communism, and politics. They're all scams.

>>34508936
>>34508797
original ideology but autism

>>34507497
Ask yourself what robots stand to gain from current "leftist" politics. Absolutely nothing. The actual socialist left doesn't even exist anymore, not in the USA nor inEurope. It would make sense for robots to vote for increased wellfare in a nationalistic sense (i.e fuck immigrants etc) but that's "far-right" now. The current left offers nothing to robots except increased pressure and competition + continued anti white/anti male propaganda.

File: communism2333.jpg (95KB, 726x900px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 726x900px

>>34508394

What does the left have to offer anyone?

>>34509714
>that pic

I'm finally convinced that capitalism and fascism is built on taking advantage of minorities and the poor for their gain. The idea that America "built itself " is a lie

File: 9k=.jpg (7KB, 158x154px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 158x154px

>>34507497
Every attempt at Marxism-Leninism always ends up in a form of Stalinism.

Social Democracy (safety net + private property) is realistically the furthest you can go left without going overboard.

>>34510066
"built itself" is a phrase that I have never heard in my entire life, as a born-and-raised American with a great deal of history.

That being said, if you consider America the American people, then of course America built itself. Who else did? There were black people picking cotton, but to be blunt, they were beasts of burden, funding the agricultural economy of the south and not architects/designers of the nation by any stretch of the imagination. The men who built the United States are the same people who run it today: men of English, Dutch, and German descent.

>>34511070
*with a great interest in history

I'd prefer for society to move in an ideal direction even if it is detrimental to me personally.

>>34507497
I don't like living under the boot, thank you very much.

>implying I want to live

>implying I don't want to be treated like the piece of shit that I am,

>>34507675
This, social hierarchy is unavoidable.
But to answer the OP, robots are reactionary because most people are reactionary and tribalist, robots aren't any different. Life is unsatisfying, unfair, and terrifyingly unpredictable. It's comforting to think a certain ideology is the path to security and satisfaction, and people feel safety and validation among others who share the same views as them.
Opposing ideologies will clash and feed off of the conflict between them in a vicious circle,. pushing each other more into the extreme, this is accelerated by the mass communication facilitated by the Internet, creating battlegrounds and echo chambers.

File: 1485606949048.jpg (340KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1600x1066px

>>34507497
yet another fucken /pol/ thread here I incroyable oui oui heehee

Equality has never worked and never will work. Stop stirring up those utopia ideas in your head.

Nationalism isn't gonna do jack shit. You'll just get the Chad nationalists on top. Plus people like Trump will take away your tendies and benefits, and if he wouldn't, libertarians would. The left only looks/is so stupid because of their identity politics bullshit.

>>34508083
Reinhardo-sama was a fucking red for empowering all those dirty commoners. He was even more of a red than the Free Planets Alliance.

>>34507497
Robots don't want whats best for them, they want to be the caricature of a predator alpha strongman autocrat warlord.

If robots were rational, a few things would occur:
1. They wouldn't be as they are, since there are quick and easy fixes one can apply to improve their life when they are THAT low.
2. They would want socialism and welfare state and overall leftie things.
3. They would lower their standards to achieve the calm happiness of living with someone who values you.

tl;dr robots don't want whats best for robots, because they are too busy wishing they were Chad, and thus want whats best for Chad, begging that one day they will wake up as him

>>34510155
The end game of all communism is complete anarchy. Communists don't want a state at all.
The only difference between anarchists and communists is that the former think private property will still exist without a state to enforce it, unlike the latter.

In that sense, Stalinism, or the strongman autocratic rule of a cult leader, is the exact opposite of what communism wants.
Stalinism is about the very strong state owning everything, not about nobody owning anything and everyone sharing.

File: 1485763607810.jpg (53KB, 501x471px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 501x471px

>>34507497
Oh yeah I'd be all for a more socialist and egalitarian society except that society needs to be defended. The modern left is intent on self destruction of this society through any means to obtain their revolution and further destruction.

Like a lot of people here I ideally hold libertarian views and if a country was a closed system it would be great. There's always barbarians at the gates though.

>>34515418
Defended against who? You can still have socialism and defend it against degenerates, religious fanatics (i.e. Muslims) and others who wish to destroy it. The modern left is the cancer, not socialism. Ideally, a socialism with a strong sense of law and order as well as one committed to building humanity's potential as strong individuals is undefeatable.

>>34515456
>You can still have socialism and defend it against degenerates, religious fanatics (i.e. Muslims) and others who wish to destroy it.

Socialism implies social justice.
Social justice implies equal outcome for all.

You can't discriminate against a certain group, this isn't social justice and isn't socialism.

What you probably mean is "welfare state", which is an important part of, but not the same as, socialism.
You can have a welfare state in a tyrannical hierarchical system, taxing the haves to feed the have-nots, without pretending they are all equal in any way.

>>34515509
I'll quote Thomas Sankara on this one. "Freedom for sincere men should not mean freedom for dishonest men." By that virtue, we can assume that evil people and those who seek to destroy the socialist system are not equal, at least until they stop seeking to do such things. This is what was applied to capitalists and other such people in Lenin's Soviet Union. Degenerates and religious fanatics are redeemable people. All people besides the worst of the mentally ill (pathological serial killers, etc.) are redeemable.

Yeah I'm still laughing at how /pol/reddit (and the few robots) who voted against their own interests with Trump.

>a rich privileged orange Chad bully will understand me!

how cucked can you get lmao. if brown people didn't exist they'd be lynching YOU up instead.

It's like Slavoj Zizek says, socialism isn't about equality so much as it is about removing obstacles - and people NEED their obstacles. Obstacles make for great excuses for personal failure: "I'm a loser because X" where X can be anything from racial discimination, nepotism, corruption, poverty, etc. Imagine living in a society where you have every opportunity to make it, and still wind up as a NEET. It'd be on you and you'd know it: you'd know that you're a failure and that there's no excuse.

The reverse is true. The more reactionary a society the more excuses you have.

>>34507497
Only the weak would benefit from equality and they are the only ones to advocate it alongside the manipulative who sell them the idea of empowerment to achieve power for themselves, therefor this political preference of yours tells me all I need to know to completely dismiss and disregard you as a weakling who is of no consequence regardless of your beliefs or will.

>>34507497
A lifetime of being a robot leads to the understanding that equality is a ruse.

>>34507724
>>34507757
Anarchism lacks formal or institutional hierarchies, but natural hierarchies would still occur as people are just different. Bakunin addresses this specifically, accusing Communism of forcing equality through a kind of procrustean bed, while anarchism would let personal differences flourish without damning anyone (i.e. nobody would starve to death for not being smart enough).

>>34515630
you think like a woman. most people recognize equality, camaderie and safe cooperation is the strength of a civilization. alpha/beta and social hierarchies are for women and animals.

kill yourself

>>34507497
Populists are very good at making people act against their own self-interest.

>>34515595
Then what was the alternative? Hillary? with Trump we atleast get to see normies screech.

>>34515677
trump is bad for you too

hillary would've made your autism, neetdom, health defects even obesity. acceptable and supportable

>>34515677
This feels childish.
>I may have voted for someone who despises me and my lifestyle, but at least people I don't like hate him

>>34515509
"Social justice" does not mean equal outcome necessarily, and equal opportunity is just as legitimate a goal. But more importantly, 'equal outcome' does not mean everyone gets to do whatever they want, including being a jihadist. Rather it means that all people get to develop and flourish to their full potential, which would include the removal of hurdles to such a developments, which would include mind-poison such as fundamentalist religion.

The idea that socialism means "no discrimination" is silly and something you just made up - the socialist is opposed to the capitalist and will of course discriminate against capitalists (for example, considering workers superior managers of the means of production).

File: choose life.gif (987KB, 245x220px) Image search: [Google]

987KB, 245x220px

It's silly how far their asses everyone is in threads like this. Good job guys.

>>34515658
You think like a typical idealist, disconnected from reality and primacy, fled into a mythical fable of a fictional vicarious construct you call 'humanity', grandiosely imagining being above the primal when in reality you are simply trying to escape the undeniable realization that you can not impose your will without having power which you irredeemably lack.

>>34515726
>*how far up their asses

>>34515509
Socialism does not imply justice.
It does not imply any sort of morality, it's another brand of vicious opportunism, but one that I can get behind.

>>34515595
Not everybody who voted for Literally Hitler, (even if Hillaryous having won would have benefited them in some way such as welfare) did so because they were sodding idolatrous morons like the Deus Vult L'Epic God Emperor Trumpence Magaman faggots who would lick the ground that their demigod walks on.

For many voters it was there disdain of Clinton rather than their idolatry of Trump that caused them to vote the way they did.

Excuse some people for their not wishing to be drafted to die on a battlefield during WWIII, (or being swallowed by an atomic blast and having to endure a nuclear winter if they were unlucky enough to survive the initial impact) or being murdered while out and going about their business by some theocratic lunatic who had no right to be in the country in the first place, or by some thug who should have been sent back to their original country due to a criminal record, but was not because we are so masochistically tolerant of violent criminal immigrants who have no reverence for our laws whatsoever.

File: hmmm.jpg (46KB, 341x290px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 341x290px

>>34515705
Trump has nothng he can take away from me, I'm not on neetbux, the screech of normies fuel me.

>>34515703
I don't believe society should support rejects for just existing.

>>34515718
It is equal outcome, financially speaking at least.
If I own 100 money, and you own 20 money, and that other guy owns 0 money, in the end we all will own 40 money (or benefits equal to that value).
Equal outcome, regardless of individual worth.

This can be expanded to religion, saying everyone has the right to worship regardless of religion (equal opportunity) and everyone will have the same number of temples and money for temples regardless of number of faithful (equal outcome).

>>34515794
Maybe in some retardo form of socialism. We didn't see that in historic self-identified governments, and there's no need to see it in any future socialist government.

If we went by your definition of socialism, socialism would indeed be some retarded shit no one would ever support.

File: 1485755239509.jpg (35KB, 700x505px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 700x505px

>>34515746
>was there disdain
their*
your list has therefore been officially invalidated by your own idiocy, retard
go with Bog, and may Bog be with you
you'll need it for where your pathetic self is going
enjoy your rundown, naive one

>>34515746
Politics is a game of fear.
How many of these things would actually have happened?
It doesn't matter.

What matters is that Trump and his supporters turned these ridiculous borderline superstitions into something that actually feels real and made the people associate them with a Clinton victory.

Which is quite the feat, if you consider how ridiculous the idea of Donald Trump being the President actually is.

>>34515794
But why can't the religious groups just fuck off, all of them?
That's also equal opportunity and even outcome too.

>>34515844
If you ban ALL religions, thats equal outcome, yeah. Social justice achieved, in a way.

File: dGdSXdh.jpg (109KB, 900x658px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 900x658px

>>34515844
>But why can't minorities fuck off, all of them?

>>34515794
No that is a wellfare state. And yeah in that case you might get religious equality, but even that doesn't imply allowing lunacy; if equality means that we get the same number of money and temples, then it also means that we get to commit the same number of crimes, which is of course 0 - I don't get to commit crimes because allahu akhbar anymore than you get to for the lulz.

You're trying to make it seem like socialism MUST be like what you describe but that's just silly, there are varieties of it both historically and theoretically and I know of exactly 0 versions that match your description.

Also, socialism in the original sense meant democratic control of the means of production by the direct producers (i.e. workers and communities), and it was opposed to stuff like religion. "Equality" then means equal say in how a community and it's resources are managed, but it would still be a majority decision. So if I want to use most of a region's resources to build mosques, make BLACKED porn and provide HRT for trannies then I can voice that opinion, but unless I can sway everyone else I'll just be that weird guy with crazy suggestions that gets ignored and laughed at, and at some point the community might express their concerns by having a shrink examine me.

>>34515849
Which a smart socialist would instead try and redirect the religious impulses of people. Socialism itself can be treated as a religion, but also see the Soviet era "God Building" project.

>>34515765
'reject' is relative
surely some would consider you a reject
you're lucky those types of people aren't in power
if a government isn't willing to support its hopelessly needy dependents, then it should be willing to do itself, them, and everybody else a massive favor by killing them
if they're such leeches, drags, and (self) destructive undesirables, then do all a service by eliminating them entirely
not subsidising their existences in cells of an insanitorium or prison, but spending one last bit of coin on whatever the costs of executing them all
put your beliefs into action because you know that most of those people are never going to change and benefit society, so be rid of them once and for all of time instead of pussying out of getting gone those who you see as useless
but sadly most people who whine about rejects and degenerates haven't the balls to get them gone themselves or won't risk having people look down on them for doing it because that might cause problems further down the road
they just play it safe and complain endlessly
yolo

>>34515862
Good idea, but you're not thinking about this like a socialist, just yet.

Why should we let the concept of minorities exist in the first place?
Why not have Minorities either adapt to the way things are and force them to become indistinguishabe from the majority?
This can easily be done within 2 generations.

>>34515873
You just described a regular vanilla democracy, as practiced by the ancient greeks.
Where is the socialism part?

>>34515922
[please try reading this in a thick russian accent]
Only minority is capitalist scum - idea of 'minorities' among workers is bourgeois propaganda to divide and prevent Glorious Revolution. Religion also tool of bourgeois oppression. Workers have no country, no religion, no ethnicity, and no allegiance accept Revolution and Worker's Party. All else bourgeois fascist lies, solved with pulyu v lob.

>>34515953
Democratic control over the economy as well. Politics encompasses economics; it is indeed an extention of the Greek ideal.

File: one.jpg (67KB, 640x460px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 640x460px

>>34515915
I've never said i wasn't a reject myself, I just hate seeing complete fuck ups blame everything but themselves and expect other people to shovel their shit because life is ''sacred''. I do believe that some people are just born broken and their lives are just needless suffering.

>>34515989
There are records of greeks voring on stuff like "this guy has too much control over the leather tanning business, we should force him to sell some or to fuck off" or "the prices of bread in that guy's bakery are too high, he is abusing the fact that he is the only one in that region selling, he should lower them". And they voted on that.
It was literally mob rule, people voted on stealing money from the rich to build boats for example. The rich would hire philosophers to argue their case against others, to sway the vote, like lawyers.

You may remember that this mob rule system had the bad habit of imploding into the most savage autocracy dictatorship once every few generations, and ended up resulting in the athenian empire, where Athens held a few dozen other city states hostage by extorting money from them for their huge fleet.

>>34507497
>muh socialism

Yeah look how nicely it played out for trotsky the intellectual. He was killed on behalf of a georgian chad who has robbed trains in the past.

Socialism is everything a Robot despises. Being forced to regularly participate on society. Showing solidarity, being forced to enjoy and life normie culture.

Once you participate on the 1st may workers parade and afterwards have to attend critical discussion circle you will regret your support.

Oh and breadlines.

File: gommunism.gif (1MB, 800x667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x667px

>>34507497
>soashuhlizm
>not a literal meme

i get the "state-issued gf for all" meme but it's just that

>>34507497
>since everyone would be equal?
lol that never happens

most robots just want what people like us already had under despotism; hitler and napoleon were both robots
>>34507675
>Literally every society is like this
despotism is full of social retards who had chad and stacey executed

>>34507497
Socialism is bad on paper and worse in practice. It does sound like something the average mentally ill robot would prefer.

>>34515989
I don't doubt the existence of these issues, unlike what you are implying.
I am offering solutions.

>>34516092
>99% of attempts were based on the soviet system
>surprised when they all fail

The few times anarcho socialism was tried, it succeeded.

>>34516125
which country is anarcho-socialist today?

>>34516151
The Zapatistas in Mexico and Rojava in Syria.

>>34516092
>state-issued gf

Hahahahhaa niqqa. Try again. All Socialists are feminists. They respect womens choices and they want them to integrate too the workforce. And the women want to hop on the dick of the totally-not-the-leader Chad who somehow calls all the shots in the workers commitee despite authority being abolished.

>>34516125
>MUH anarcho-socialism.

Getting raped by less bathshit crazy socialists or fascists surely is a success...

>>34516166
exactly. no anarcho-socialist countries.

>>34516056
Yes, that was a huge problem, the lack of organisation. It was not common ownership and democratic management, it was as you state a kind of mob rule where you could just steal shit. The Greek IDEAL is still nice, but there are definitley pitfalls that have to be avoided. There are literally tons of books on this if you are curious, but the idea is way too complex for a single post. The tl;dr would be kind of imagining everyone as owning a stake in everything, and voting and deliberation being done on major issues and the direction the whole economy takes rather than on miniscule bullshit like specific prices.

Google "democratic planned economy/socialism" and "decentralised planning" if you want to learn more. The book "Towards an Inclusive Democracy" by Takis Fotopoulos tackles the issue using lots of Ancient Greek thought (it's free, google it).

File: wymyn ruin corporate performance.jpg (218KB, 925x588px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 925x588px

>>34516171
Back in the day, women knew their place during Socialism, and that place was out of education and in well-defined female-only professions.

File: 1463066059598.png (141KB, 599x255px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 599x255px

>>34516180
I believe you've got some brain problems friend.

>>34516125
Anarcho-socialism, or anarcho-syndicalism, or just plain old communism, is the end game of the USSR model of totalitarian state.
You are meant to transition into it over time, once you stop getting fucked up the ass by every other state and are left alone.
The Soviets tried to transition immediately, and Poland invaded and carved a part of the USSR. Then they went into totalitarian empire blob mode as an overreaction.
Still, while the idealism existed in the higher up Soviets, it was acknowledged that after the war, after we solidify borders, after we get on our legs, we will start moving towards disbanding the state and freeing people. It just never happened.

Also I just solved my captcha correctly three times in a row, with three errors. What the fuck. I am certain the last time it wanted me to select a soccer playground as a tennis field because too many morons did in the past and the AI is now retarded.

File: HaaNHvZ.jpg (468KB, 4879x3489px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 4879x3489px

>>34516197
Wrong.

>>34516199
Anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism are not communism, they're a path to achieve communism just like Soviet marxist-leninism or democratic socialism.

>>34516188
Can I sell my stake in the state for short term gain?
What will the guy who now has two stakes do, does he get two votes?
When determining how to organize our farms, do farmer votes count for more than taxi driver votes?
If our economy is in the shitter, how do we convince the majority to vote for austerity measures that we as a matter of fact need, when nobody will understand nor accept to pay for other people's mistakes?

My political knowledge is strictly limited to arguing on forums, I have never studied anything, so those are legitimate questions that are perhaps answered already, not mocking.

>>34516221
>Thank you Mikhail Gorbachev
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgm14D1jHUw

>>34516114
Only solution is Revolution.

But seriously, I think the degree to which different cultures are a problem is exaggerated to create divisions among the working class, not to mention that the actual differences are also exaggerated by those seeking to control their populations. In a free, socialist society, I reckon the moslem and the christian and the white man and the black man would have more in common and less to bicker about.

>>34516151
Well to be honest most of them got killed of by the Soviets, which doesn't disprove the theories. It worked alright while it was employed. Read 'Homage to Catalonia' for more info.

>>34516171
Getting overwhelmed by a supposed ally who betrays you does not disprove a theory. You do realise there's no currently existing ideology that didn't at some point lose? Democracy, capitalis, fascism, monarchy; they where all at some point a small, fringe ideology that got stomped by an enemy who just happened to out-gun them.

File: micky.jpg (41KB, 675x238px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 675x238px

>>34516221
>>34516241
The man, the legacy.

>>34516197
You clearly have very deluded ideas about socialism.

>Which country in WW2 drafted women into the armed forces?
>Which countries rushed womens integration into the workforce because muh ideology (and very real labour shortages because they were only able to expand quantity-wise not quality wise in the economic sense)
>Why are the former soviet citizens still sperging about all the Sex they got ?

I support socialism, but the current left agenda is not that. They are pushing a hierarchy with white men on the bottom.

>>34516282
Sexual liberation and feminism were part of the pre-Stalin period of the USSR. Free abortions, divorces at will, end of religion meant casual sex, women are equal, and so on.
Stalin turned the system from this free for all (which was the ideal goal) to a fascist state, seeking to produce many factory workers and soldiers.

Really, Stalin is like the corpse of a prussian dictator wannabe reincarnated to rule Russia. He is so... un-russian.

>>34515341
>1. They wouldn't be as they are, since there are quick and easy fixes one can apply to improve their life when they are THAT low.


tell me more about it

>>34516069
there are different kinds of socialim

What's really sad to me is that the ideology I support, nationalist socialism, will never come to pass simply because people scream Nazi at its mention. The Nazis claimed to be National Socialists but their evil deeds do not define the politics. Insular, homogeneous (within reason) countries with socialist policies are the best bet we have for world peace.

>>34516171
>All Socialists are feminists.

wrong, I'm a socialist, but I'm definitely not a feminist

>>34516230
Good questions, and the answer it "is depends on the system", and the system may not be the same everywhere. So maybe in one region we have actual shares like in a company that you can sell, maybe somewhere else you just get votes, who knows? As for who's voice counts more, there are arguments on this and lots of them. Someone might say that the voice of everyone who is affected by the decision matters equality, while someone else might say that concerning the specific organisation of a farm, the farmers should have the only say (so the taxi driver gets to be a part of the decision of how much food is produced, since he eats food and is affected by the decision, but he gets no say at all in how the farmers organise their work).

Lastly, austerity is a difficult nut to crack and I know that the anarchist groups in Catalonia and Aragon did have some problems getting everyone to look at the big picture. I guess we'll have to see. It's not a perfect system, nor a panacea to all problems, it's more like a different approach to finding solutions that's more fair and inclusive. So we might still get an economic crisis, but we get to try and find a solution together instead of having decisions imposed on us (likewise, the crisis wouldn't be caused by a small group of the super-wealthy fucking us over, but either our own failures or natural disaster).

>>34516306
That's because he is, in fact, a jewish georgian called JEWgashvili.

>>34516258
All anarcho-socialist experiments were either:
>1.memeing and much more nationalist/marxist-leninist/etc. than Anarcho-socialist
>2.swiftly crushed because they were uncompetitive
>3.reliable on outside political/military help and special circumstances (in Addition to being 1. Rojava for example brokered Deals with the Assad-regime to be left alone and recieved western aid)

>>34516345
So larping?

>>34516331
Who somehow all end either in stalinesque authoritarianism or maoesque permanent revolution hellhole shit.

>>34516306
Even in Stalins SU and its sattelites 'feminism' was pursued. It was only in the 70-80s when the west actually started overtaking the eastern bloc in that regard because they gave women actual power instead of just larping to increase the available workforce.

>>34516342
Are you sure you're not just a nationalistic socialist - like say the Scottish National Party is - and not a "national socialist", which is in fact a nazi, i.e. a racist fascist and not a real socialist at all ?

>>34516407
Like I said, there's no real example of an ideal anarcho-communist society - just enough stuff to indicate that it might be feasible maybe kinda. But there was no real example of an ideal capitalist democrazy 300 years ago and yet here we are. To claim that "it hasn't been done before, therefore we shouldn't try to ever do it!" is just silly in politics. New things happen all the time, new ideologies are tried constantly. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't, but the real world is complex and sometimes the outcome is not due to any inherent virtue of flaw within the ideology itself.

I mean the French Revolution was a burgeiose revolution at heart, and ended up with the Reign of Terror. Does that mean that a liberal (capitalist) democracy inherently ends in beheadings and that pursuing it was a mistake? Of course not, things just happened to play out that way for very complex reasons.

>>34511070
>The men who built the United States
you mean the same people who made money off the backs of slaves

>>34516367
Have you heard of the quadratic voting system?
The idea is, everyone can vote as many times as they want, from zero to infinity, but they have to pay a fee.
For every consecutive vote, the fee is squared, to prevent the rich from having too much power, while giving them a bit more than the casual man (since the rich are likely the educated elite, and thus objectively more valuable and with a bigger stake), and it also funds the new government.

Example:
One vote costs $5. Everyone can afford to vote once a year for $5.
If you want to buy 2 votes, that will be $5, + $25. Two votes cost $30. Three votes cost $655.
You can see how those more passionate could spend cash to "vote more", but not enough to break the system, since the population of the country is likely in the millions.

>>34516462
Ancient Rome pioneered the republican form of government and its citizens engaged in profit building ventures so there's definitely a historical pretext for the Western governments of today

Anarcho-anything is doomed to failure and quickly turns into feudalism because people are inherently self-interested and a system that tries to reject can't last

Meanwhile capitalism accepts the truth that humans are fundamentally self interested and uses competition as a means to regulate competing interests

This is why capitalism flourishes while socialism implodes

>>34516592
That's fucking retarded. You get all the flaws of democracy while legalising the flaws of American democracy. If you think democracy should just be contest between George Soros and the Koch Brothers, then be my guest.

Democracy itself is inherently flawed anyway, since it gives the intelligent and educated the exact same voice as someone like Chris-chan. Like capitalism, democracy is a force that needs to be curtailed, managed, and guided for the good of everyone.

>>34516919
Did you do the math? Buying 10 votes in that system would cost more than 10 million dollars.
Soros would be worth more than you, perhaps, but less than your extended family.

>>34516592
>>34516919
Suggestion: only net positive citizens can vote.
If you take more from the state in benefits than you give in tax, you can't vote.
This can be calculated for the period since last election.
So if you are an autist who lives on welfare, you don't vote. If you are a businessman who declared bankruptcy or got bought out to save your company, you don't vote.
If you are a bit in the red, you can pay a "donation" to the government to get to vote.

We eliminate the biggest leeches, and get to make some money for the new government.
This does however mean that handicapped or seriously ill people will not be represented or targeted by politicians, since they don't vote.

>>34517086
>net positive people are in power
>make it harder for negative people to make money
>gain more power
>oligarchy

Robots are just contrarian middle class people. The normies they have exposure to are mostly leftists from the largely leftist middle class or from Hollywood/the media. And if they are lower class robots they will more easily fall for right wing propaganda, and if they are upper class robots they are just protecting their interests.

>>34517086
Idiots isn't limited to poor idiots. There's rich idiots out there too. The idea that being rich entitles you to special privileges is retarded. There's shitty poor people, and shitty rich people.

There needs to be a better way of guiding democracy than just letting rich people run things.

>>34507730
How close are you to achieving the greatness you're destined for?
(If you're anything like me, it's a very long way)

Is there a form of socialism that would help you get there more quickly?
If so, do you support it? If not, why not?
And if there isn't such a form of socialism, why don't you invent one?

>>34517413
You should agree that if you are stupid, you are likely to be poor.
There are rich idiots, but mostly poor ones, more so than the general disparity.

Ideal ribot system:
Free healthcare
Unemoloyment benefits
Repealed army
Legal drugs
Legal assisted suicide

Socialism:
Huge army
Everyone have to work
No drugs
No assisted suicide
But yep, free healthcare

However I am interested why am I responding to pol bait.

>>34517479
your ideal ribot system is socialist too, socialism can be various different things

>>34517504
same with liberalism btw, the republican party is also liberalism, people need to get their definitions straight

>>34517467
So improve the poor to make them less stupid. One way is to reduce poverty. Poor people tend to be stupid because of poverty rather than inherent flaws of their own.

>>34517467
Wrong. Socialism:
Huge army only if need to genuinely defend the nation (i.e. not against people like Saddam)
Everyone works if they want to live above bare minimum since universal basic income exists
Legal drugs if you mean marijuana and hopefully psychedelics (but not meth and crack and shit)
Assisted suicide is legal
And yep, free healthcare

File: 1440081638700.gif (398KB, 480x238px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 480x238px

>>34507497
The problem with socialism is that it needs very strong, uncompromising leadership to enforce it. It's easy for shitters and cunts to take advantage of an ideal society. So you need some serious law to stop them.

I don't think there are enough trustworthy people capable of overthrowing the current system and establishing themselves as unquestioned rulers.

>>34517538
Socialism is a meme cos everyone have his own defenition.

>>34517566
it's more of an umbrella term desu, same with liberalism and anarchism, noone seems to realize this though

>>34517564
Agreed. That's why democracy needs to be guided, and the leader strong. A left-wing version of Donald Trump would be one of the greatest things ever.

>>34517632
his name was stalin
and he was a mass murderer lol

File: 1383499728817.jpg (17KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 225x225px

I'm for socialist policies since they keep me fed for free.

File: Marriage.jpg (285KB, 648x1308px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 648x1308px

>>34508046
Don't do it, it's rigged against men.

File: 1485652453881.jpg (8KB, 198x255px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 198x255px

>>34508046
>It is basically a system where normies and robots are given a good chance at a lifetime with a mate.
It's a legal binding so that you have some permissions/privileges but also be able to use the justice system in case something goes wrong between you and your spouse. It's like a business contract. Nothing more, nothing less.

>Without marriage chads get to monopolize all the women easily.
Who says they ain't doing it already? I dare you to marry a Stacy. This will happen: >>34517705

>All robots and other low-tier males should be pro-marriage.
False. In theory, you don't need marriage in order to live with your lover because you LOVE each other right?. But this isn't some fantasy land. This is real life where people are materialistic, needy, and support the juridical system to do justice for them because we're too primitive and selfish to do it with our own hands.

TL;DR marriage doesn't change anything in regards to normies and robots. It's just a contract.

>>34517644
Nope. Stalin arose out of the context of Tsarism. Any communism which arose out of the context of a modern Western state (or even, say, 1930s US or Britain) would be far different.

>>34518070
This is political determinism.

>>34518161
>using determinism as a epithet
kek

>>34518161
You can't say I'm wrong. If the United States overthrow capitalism in the Great Depression and joined the Third International in the 1930s, do you really think American communism would look exactly like Russian communism?

In any case, the best American in the 1930s was Huey Long. Norman Thomas was pretty great, but I think a Huey Long regime would've been best for the US. Nowadays, we need a figure like Huey Long in this country. I live in the South and talk to Trump voters all the time. I think many "conservative" southerners would be very receptive to a Huey Long sort of figure.

sorry but i dont want to be making the same as everyone else, i want to be rich and no ones gonna take my hard earned money from me
socialism is "equality" but lets face it, some of us have dreams of being above others

>>34519024
Have fun in the gulag scum.

>>34519085
have fun staying a robot for the rest of your life cuz i dont plan on being one forever

Communism is gay

>>34519024
But why should you be above others? Only the people who have rightfully earned that should have that privilege. Note that many people above us today should not be above us. Many rich today deserve to have their wealth redistributed. It bothers me that all the wealthy nowadays either support Soros-esque bullshit or they're for the equally bullshit Koch Brothers, Peter Thiel, libertarian bullshit. In the end, it only benefits them.

Better dead than red.
And I doubt that scrawny jew manlet could acquaint anyone's head with the pavement
The soviets did acquaint his torso with an ice axe though

>>34507497
>bullied by non-whites throughout school
>"theyre your equals lol, say hello to your comrade jamal"
I wonder why.

>>34519777
>bullied by whites throughout school
>"theyre your equals lol, say hello to your comrade dustin"
I wonder why.

>>34519085
Keep larping, commie shit.

>>34519826
If you don't feel an affinity towards your own race, your brain is broken. You're basically equivalent to a faggot or a tranny.

>>34519928
>tfw mixed but feel 100% loyal to the white race

>>34519928
Affinity for one race doesn't have to include disdain for another.

>>34520045
Right, but it should include it when the other race does shitty things all the time.

>>34520149
But muh totally coincidental socioeconomic circumstances

>>34520149
But I'm black, and the whites did shitty things to me all the time, still do.

>>34519928
If you're an utter failure and some nigger is better, then you deserve what you get. Look at the Soviet generals in World War II. Many were a bunch of random peasants in 1917, especially the lower ranking ones. That proves you can find geniuses amongst any random group of people. Look at who was leading the Soviet armies in 1944 and 1945, and look at their background.

I think a socialist force could shape the inner city gangbangers into skilled leaders (these people have killed more than you have, let's face it) while gaining the support of the white man in the countryside (who in turn, would also have skilled leaders). Black, white, Hispanic, whatever, we can overthrow capitalism and lead ourselves to a brighter future.

>>34520169
>But I'm black, and the whites did shitty things to me all the time, still do.

>>34520197
>If you're an utter failure and some nigger is better, then you deserve what you get.

Alright, but look at the statistics of *how often* these things happen. It's easy to say "every race has losers", but when you start to tally up exactly how many there are in each race, the difference is striking.

>>34520270
>what are socioeconomic factors

The poor stay poor, poverty breeds crime, crime breeds poverty, etc.

It happens to blacks and whites, race is unimportant.

>>34520270
Which correlates well with poverty. Black people tend to suck because they're largely poor. But go look at poor, rural whites (I live in a 96% white county, and there's idiots being arrested all the time who are of course white). They're about as bad as blacks, they just aren't as concentrated.

And this isn't all black people. To condemn all black people because of the evil blacks among them is pretty stupid.

File: 1485588552722.jpg (217KB, 996x842px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 996x842px

Fuck off you commie bastard.

>>34507497
Communism and Socialism is just Slavery in a nicer packaging. The state purports that everyone is equal, but in actuality they censor all traces of the elites. The government makes the general populace their bitch by getting into their heads and getting them to want to be slaves. That's why there's so much glorification of the common worker, but really there's all the other people who aren't working, and aren't starving who reap the rewards of their labor.

Communism and Socialism may sound good on paper but that's just a product of all the mind fuck shit communist entities put out. All media outlets are under extreme control, where any mentions of unhappiness or independent thought are censored. Art is severely censored where you can't even express unhappiness, but that would constitute reason to disagree with the government. The general public is forced to work themselves ragged, while living in poverty and anyone who resists gets thrown in a gulag or re-education camp where they're tortured into submission and if that doesn't work they're killed. Communism and Socialism lead to nothing but suffering, stupidity and death.

>>34520299
Most people are poor because they're dumb and/or violent. Blacks are genetically predisposed to being dumb and violent, so it makes sense that they're poor. The "cycle of poverty" liberals always talk about is just dumb people having dumb kids who can't figure out how to make money without robbing someone.

>>34520361
What % of whites are poor?
What % of blacks are poor?

This goes back to my first argument. There are shitheads of every race, but if a certain race is mostly shitheads, there's a problem with that race.

>>34508072
What you are saying is the most basic and rudimentary critique to this philosophy and these days is almost universally reiterated by the uneducated because it doesn't take any extended thought, just analogies from the theory of species. Rather than me explain how these things can be interpreted differently I suggest you read some books to educate yourself komrade. You may start with the big red one.

>>34520361
>dumb people having dumb kids
Therein lies the problem, lack of education.

If you can't educate yourself then you can't prosper(within the confines of a capitalist framework)

Genes arguably have nothing to do with it, since this happens to both blacks, whites, latinos, arabs and every other race and/or ethnicity.

>>34520375
The US isn't the only country in the world.

Even in "ethnically pure" countries, these problems persist.

>>34520375
Whoops, replied to the wrong post. Meant it for this one >>34520317

Can anyone actually say what's wrong with reactionary ideologies?

>>34520395
When I said "dumb" I didn't mean "uneducated". Education does not improve IQ.

>>34520395
>Even in "ethnically pure" countries, these problems persist.
Right, but again, look at the NUMBERS. In homogeneous white societies, crime is FAR lower than in homogeneous black societies. Of course crime will always exist, but don't pretend there isn't a difference between "one murder per year" and "100 murders per month".

>>34520398
A question like that is begging to get into a pedantic and philistine conversation of morality. The basic idea is that if something is reactionary it is also ephemeral, and so superficial. Ideally people aren't so influenced by events specific to this day that they find whatever causes they are supporting to be irrelevant in 10 years.

>>34520398
They're based on inequality, oppression and exploitation.

>>34520415
IQ is a meme, which is HEAVILY influenced by general education.

According to IQ tests, most africans have the IQ of a mildly retarded person, do you really think they would have survived until now if an entire fucking population was mentally retarded?

File: 1466226564317.jpg (1MB, 1500x3400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x3400px

I D E O L O G Y
D
E
O
L
O
G
Y

>>34520453
>if something is reactionary it is also ephemeral
I'm not following you at all here.
>>34520458
>inequality
Which is bad because?
>oppression and exploitation
How does a society function without a class of people to be "exploited" (read: perform manual labor)?

File: Communism has never been tried.jpg (62KB, 544x960px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 544x960px

>>34520359
I meant to attach this image. I've heard that The U. S. S. R. has killed 9 million people for political reasons, and that may or may not include the people who starved to death. Communism sucks, and anyone living in that society gets killed who realizes that.

>>34520475
>How does a society function without a class of people to be "exploited" (read: perform manual labor)?
Worker ownership of the means of production.

>>34520482
>every attempt at socialism stems from the Soviet's flawed system
>surprised when they all fail

>what is Catalonia
>what is Rojava

Try harder.

>>34520505
That doesn't fix anything, it's realistically impossible to apply anyway. Please explain your reasoning.

>>34520475
Because the thing they are reacting to, like the establishment, will change soon. Its not complicated. The US switches between republican and democratic candidates. What else does that imply that public sentiments change over time. Thats being ephemeral.

>>34520534
It was realistically applied in Revolutinary Catalonia, and it worked.

>>34520458
>do you really think they would have survived until now if an entire fucking population was mentally retarded?
Yes? Retards can eat animals and fuck. They can't farm or build complex societies, but neither can Africans.

Crime results from a lack of fear of consequence. If your life is already shite, you do not fear the consequence.

>>34520559
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kingdoms_in_pre-colonial_Africa

Educate yourself.

>>34520536
You're mistaken, or maybe I wasn't being clear.
I was talking about ideologies that are often said to be reactionary, like traditionalism, fascism, or monarchism. I didn't mean "reactionary" as an end in itself.
>>34520553
>it worked
I guess that depends on your definition of what "working" means. It crumbled under its own weight rather quickly.

>>34520559
I think you are one of those guys that thinks the entirety of Africa is like ground zero from an H-bomb complete with fallout 3 ghouls and boko haram wandering the waste but while african countries have high crime rates even a place like somalia has schools, hospitals, and public facilities.

File: 9be.png (90KB, 856x1382px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 856x1382px

>>34520482
I can post retarded pictures too, see!

>>34520597
I crumbled due to foreign(Soviet) influence and due to the fact the enemy was supported by pretty much every major nation.

File: 1482089733128.jpg (34KB, 479x541px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 479x541px

>>34520482
originaIi posIi

>>34520625
If your movement crumbles as soon as foreign influence gets involved, it doesn't set a great example.

>>34520597
>traditionalism, fascism, or monarchism
Right now we live in a world where none of these have any major impact, but there was once a time where it had major impact. This is a testament to how ephemeral they are.

>>34520664
>as soon as foreign influence gets involved

It lasted for 2 years bro, then they lost the war to a side supported by Germany, Italy, France and Britain.

>>34520665
That's just sophistry.
We also live in a world where communism doesn't have a major impact, if any.

>>34507497
Robots are apolitical.

>>34520697
>We also live in a world where communism doesn't have a major impact, if any.
Ok. So? I am not here to tell you whether or not communism will be irrelevant in 100 years. I doubt the principles of economic equality will be, but whatever. If anything has changed in the last 1000 years in western society its how much influence the common person has.

>>34520745
History tells us that monarchy has only become "irrelevant" in the last 50 to 100 years, compared to several millenia of success. So I think it's not relevant whether or not there exists no true monarchical system at the moment
People naturally create a hierarchy, regardless of a community's scale it always ends up like that. Equality is unnatural.

>>34520789
Humanity is unnatural. Comparisons to ancient social systems and behavior in animals is only a superficial reference, it is not scientific.

>History tells us that monarchy has only become "irrelevant" in the last 50 to 100 years, compared to several millenia of success
Monarchy hasn't been in full force since the fall of rome. Fuedalism distributed power to local land lords, and the Magna carta is a very early example of the king's power being limited by his own people. over 300 years ago is about when oliver cromwell died and parliament started to control great britain. 200 years ago the french revolution removed monarchy from france and it turned to an american model after napolean. I dont know what monarchies you are saying where in any force 100 years ago. The point here is that monarchy has been on a steady decline, advances in everything human happen at faster rates.

File: 1475246993118.jpg (75KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 960x960px

>>34508158
could only work with penguins, look at their sweet black fur

>>34520899
>Humanity is unnatural
What?
>monarchy has been on a steady decline
You're right. But considering the rise of corporatism, I fail to see how that goes against what I'm saying about hierarchy being the most natural way for humans to organize.
If anything, current events and trends show that we're as far from being equal as we've ever been before.

>>34520987
Humanity is as far from natural as they possibly could be. Terraforming the planet and making a society this astronomically complex voids any comparison to "natural" instincts in ancient humans. It is therefore irrelevant to say that humans most naturally use hierarchies as an argument for continued use of hierarchies in society, in particular economic hierarchies. Often people confuse realistic goals of things like socialism concerning economics with bizarre visions of everyone wearing gray clothes in a forced socialist dystopia.

>>34520900
http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Penguin_quest_series ?

>>34520987
Hierarchy is natural because the best people should rule society. Who cares if its a caste system. The best people should still be in charge.

>>34520361
Even if the majority of Africans are stupider than you are, I bet there's still Africans smarter than you. Races inferior IQ-wise are just people to be looked after.

>>34520197
>Black, white, Hispanic, whatever
I refuse to work with gringos and niggers. They have proven themselves to be my enemy.

I only collaborate with fellow brownbros. Arab and hispanic (no spanish spiggers)

>>34507497

1) Most robots are uninteresting, unattractive white men, and white men are literally the devil to liberal socialists.

2) Robots don't contribute to society so in any system they would be at the bottom

>>34520197
>these people have killed more than you have, let's face it
Murder is not something that has no place in the skillset of a political or military leader.

File: Murray bookchin.jpg (26KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 640x360px

>>34507497
But anon I like democratic confederalism and bookchin's stuff. I still got a lot more to read though.

>>34521053
Nothing unnatural exists.

File: quote-i-m-so-despondent-about-everything-everything-i-try-goes-totally-wrong-there-s-no-escape-joseph-goebbels-92-7-0728 (1).jpg (80KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 850x400px

Fascism is the ideology of the robot.
A robot that recognizes his weakness is bound to become a fascist by conquering it.
Struggle forms the fascist man, and a robot has known only Struggle.

>>34522290
Was Goebbels one of us?

>>34522306
Yeah
And a certain failed painter that was homeless in the streets of Vienna, was one too.

>>34522306
Absolutely, and so was Hitler. The third reich was a beta uprising.

>>34522370
>>34522413
Is natsoc worth looking into? I've always thought it was a meme.
What does it consist in, aside from the jew part?

>>34522370
>yfw you realize that failed painter from Linz was in a homo-relationship with wittgenstein
he was a fag, just like us

>>34522445
Read Mein Kampf if you want to have a good understanding of it. The ideology is closely tied to the conditions at the time in Germany, so there's really no short explanation. Just make sure you find a pre-war translation, IIRC it was fucked with pretty heavily afterward. Last I checked there was one on TPB.

>>34522574
Ok, thanks.
So the people who describe themselves as natsoc aren't actually making sense?

>>34522595
In a sense yes, because we aren't in Weimar Germany. However, there are a hell of a lot of similarities in modern culture (which you'll spot immediately when you read MK). Also the ideology could be generalized to basically mean "social democracy in an ethnically homogeneous society" which could be applied anywhere.

>>34522651
I see, I'll take a look then
Not a fan of social democracy but it could be interesting anyway

>>34522675
I think the idea is that you're more willing to help your fellow man if you can relate to him on a genetic level. Nation as an extension of family, or something like that.

File: 1480283767517.jpg (174KB, 1600x800px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1600x800px

>>34522445
Its pretty hard to define in words, because there has never been something like it. But once you get it youll feel it. A part of it being hard to define comes from the fact that its not a finished ideology, its fluid.
Its being part of something bigger, having a purpose. But it is also a constant fight in your heart, mind and soul.
Ill suggest that you listen to speeches, look at the history of the movement (and not just from mainstream sources), read Mein Kampf, look at thr quotes. Immersive yourself in it and youll find its worth.
https://youtu.be/PQP953yIJQM

File: hhcfhcdtg.png (300KB, 634x359px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 634x359px

>>34521053
Yes, economics. Which goes back to OP's question of why more robots aren't natural socialists. Their problems aren't resolved through economic equality. Their grief is the harshness of life is as a natural consequence of the BIOLOGICAL hierarchy. You can't solve their problems, not even if you took away women's sexual autonomy.

>>34522953
Why has nobody extended socialism to the sexual realm? Seizing the means of production is one thing, but what about the means of REproduction? Why are those still privatized?

>>34507724
>What you consider communism isn't actually communism, it's actually marxism-leninism
If someone said "we are not nazis, we just want to kill all the jews, take over the world and give everyone free milkshakes" it wouldn't make any difference.

All flavors of ideology are just variations on a theme of the normy social pecking order. Working class Stacy wants creepy beta males kept away from her, we would be pigeonholed somewhere and do nothing but work, from us according to Stacy's 5 kids' needs, that would be our life's purpose designated by the "people's republic" or whatever you call the institution needed to stop us accumulating "capital". Working class Chad isn't content to live like that, he would use his charisma to look like le revolutionary hero and all the normies will kowtow to him despite it being massively hypocritical and contrary to socialist dogma. As long as the Tsar calls himself a fellow commie/marxleninist/anarchist/blabla that means being a cuck is ok. Right?

>>34521338
And then my armies of gangbangers, their leaders raised up to high-ranking officers, overwhelm their enemies. See so many Soviet officers, do I need examples? A bunch of random peasants ended up being some of the greatest generals in history, serving under people like Zhukov and such. Tsarism would have ignored these men, but communism selected them for greatness and power.

>>34507497
Is there even a good ideology for robots? I see a lot of /pol/fugees try to promote NatSoc, which is ridiculous since one of its core tenets is the right for 'superior' people to dominate the lesser. Communism sounds shit as well, what doctor who worked years for his degree is going to want the same wage as a janitor? It's only possible in a highly educated and mechanised society

>>34523224
But that's a completely different situation, and marxist leninists and anarchists are frequently against each other, and work against each other.

>>34523628
All the janitors I've known from elementary school onward were hard working, good people from everything I know. A lot of college professors and other people I must address as "Doctors" are idiots or otherwise deserve no more than those janitors.

Hmm...

>>34523628
>I see a lot of /pol/fugees
Crossboard posters actually

>>34523757
It's not about what you think they deserve. It's about the fact that you need little to no training to be a janitor, and you need 7 - 12 years to be a doctor, plus passing the rigorous entry requirements. That applies to all skilled jobs, sure some people are going to still go for it because it's what they love, but for most people, they're going to go for a very easy job since everyone gets the same pay anyway. They will have no motivation to succeed. Communism would work fine in a society where most menial and unskilled, as well as a lot of skilled jobs have been filled by robots, but not today's society

>>34523628
Another aspect of NatSoc is eugenics, which a lot of people with a harsh awareness and resignation to biological reality can at least see the appeal in getting something done about it.

>>34523995
Do you really think eugenics would be a good idea, on a robot board? This place attracts the schizos, the manic-depressives, the people with bi-polar disorder. A central piece of dialogue here is that things outside of a robots control, often 'shit genetics', is a reason as to why they have failed socially. The people here would be sterilised or euthanised under a NatSoc society

>>34524138
I think eugenics is very good and compatible with leftism. Remember that many 19th/20th century leftists were eugencists.

If you were better off never born, then you were better off never being born. There's no need to bring broken people into this world. Retards, autists, etc. If you have shit genetics, you'll never be born, and you won't give a fuck because you won't be alive to care.

>>34524138

Actually yeah, desu, I think a lot of people here would sterilize themselves if there was dignity in it.

>>34507820

FRIENDLY REMINDER:

There have been and never will be, any non-structured societies every anywhere. They are not even possible with genetically-engineered super humans because coordination of effort to achieve anything implies concensus and concensus can only be guaranteed under force. Anarchism is a total fucking chimera. It is literally impossible, unworkable, unwanted and un-reachable.

Even total anarchies VERY quickly evolve into governed societies.

Have fun believing in something that is even less likely to come to pass than jebus' return :)

>>34507956

Tippity toppity kek

Trying toi imply that republican forces and groups that CALLED themselves "anarchist" but enforced laws and patrolled the streets locking up people who didn't do what they said were actually "anarchist".

Sure buddy. It was an anarchist society, except for the men with guns still telling people what to do. Your beliefs are literally dumber than christianity, and that shit is dumb.

>>34508218

Not the guy you're having the back and forth with but lets SUPPOSE, just SUPPOSE that your catalonia example is valid. Doing so is, in my opinion, a bit like accepting that religions are quite likely true because some guy in texas says he's jesus and jesus said he'd come back, so christianity is definitely true (again, from one of my other replies to someone who was probably you, HOW IS IT ANARCHIST if there are still men with guns making rules that everyone HAS to follow?)

Lets suppose you get to use catalonia...


That's one anarchist commune that survived for the equivalent of a cigarette break in history. Therefore, to claim that it can ever actually be a worldwide system is roughly akin to my claiming I can make a sucessful main battle tank out of a mini cooper. It'll totally work!

>If I can call it a tank without a main gun
>And it never has to fight in a battle
>And it doesn't have tracks
>And it falls to pieces the minute even an enemy infantryman shoots at it

DUDE. I CAN TOTALLY MAKE TANKS OUT OF SOME DINKY LITTLE CAR FROM THE 60's!

ZOMG THIS WILL CHANGE THE WORLD. ALL POWER TO THE COOPERTAT.

>>34522290
But fascists don't respect my struggle because I'm not white. They don't even think i can even be fascist.

Fuck that.

>>34510066

If slavery was so fucking vital to either the west or america then why did the north so comprehensively BTFO the south. Why did the federal states economies continue to grow even as the south's shrunk? Why did those who had to pay for all their labour still have more net wealth than the slave-holding south...

Ans: Because while america was PARTIALLY built on slavery it wasn't the most productive part of it. Fuck, half the people that advocated abolition did it purely on economic grounds because they already KNEW that slavery was, at best, utterly inefficient. People who weren't dicks also knew it was wrong.

Sorry motherfucker, but most people in the west DO build their own houses, metaphorically. They will PAY more in taxes than they ever get out of it - that is WHY economies grow. If taxes = gross wealth production then living standards could never rise unless the state purchased everything for you...as they clearly have risen and this is not the case, people therefore MUST have "built themselves up" and their state with them.

tldr; fuck off commmie.

>>34524324
>>34524291
Well I guess if you can look in the mirror and think about your life, and then say "I should be sterilised or killed to improve my group's genetic quality", then NatSoc is right for you. If it comes to it, you might find your survival instinct is stronger than you imagined.

That's not even going into the issues of having a committee decide who should be able to breed, and who shouldn't. Or the fact that we know so little about the human genome, and what makes up or is a desirable trait.

Also the act of aborting people with diseases like Tay-Sachs is not eugenics, it's to avoid human suffering. Eugenics is a purposeful program which aims to better the human race, by controlling the breeding process and introducing or eliminating traits.

>>34516166

>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHA

Oh my fuck....lel...two tiny little places and groups no one has ever fucking heard of or seen and from which no news emerges that is confirmed.

*le smiling yellow ball giving a thumbs up maymay*

File: 1467795681016.gif (622KB, 480x304px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 480x304px

>>34524436
>What is revolutionary Catalonia
>who are the zapatistas
>what's a rojava lol

>>34524654
Are you saying there's never been a country that lost a war against a military superior enemy?

>>34524903
Your ignorance has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

>>34524903
To be fair it's a bit hard when you either have islamic militant groups trying to kill you at every turn or the mexican armed forces trying to wipe you out. Making it difficult to expand very far.
Considering that it's rather impressive that they have been able to create such autonomous societies
Ancaps which I think your refering to on the other hand have never had their theory ever put into practice once.

>>34524832
I'm not NatSoc, but if it's completely voluntary, privately done, and wouldn't create any third class dysfunctionals, I imagine a good number of people could probably see the good in it.

But I think it'd only work if people could be assured it'd be widespread and programmatic, and have the intended benefit. Not like you can't still have recreational sex or partnership intimacy after the fact.