>He doesn't advocate for a stateless, classless, and

Because then I would lose all my privileges.

>>36174277
>he unironically believes that a stateless, classless and moneyless society can ever be established on a large scale
wew lad

>>36174313
What privileges?

human naturally segmentize into tribal
tribal naturally divide into hierarchy of capability
whatever idea du jour become de facto currency

welcome to again the entry of mr. bones wild ride

unless there is some methodology of culturethink that prevent this

>>36174353
Actually, the only way it can be established is on a large scale. A small stateless classless moneyless society doesn't have access to many resources, and must thus trade with the outside world (so they are no longer moneyless).

>Why not /r9k/?

Because Chad has the looks and I want to out do him with wealth and power.

That's why, dumbfuck. Why the fuck would I want to be set on a plain level field with Chad so that we both earn the same and live the same life? Then he will just be plain better because of his looks alone.

Fuck that and fuck you.

>>36174374
The problem right now is that the hierarchy of capability is strangled by the hierarchy of capital. The capitalists just hire the capable engineers, scientists, etc. to make more money for them.

In a stateless, classless, moneyless society each person would rise based on their own ability and dedication.

>>36174413
>I have feelings of inferiority so I'm going to force other people to be even worse than me
rightism in a nutshell

File: 1426788635477.png (158KB, 1000x963px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1000x963px

Tax paying normalfags who break down mentally when they don't have a job fund my lifestyle. Let them work so Shekelberg industries can crank out high quality entertainment by the terabyte daily all for my personal pleasure. They need it.

>>36174413
At least you would live in a society where you have free access to resources, so you would live much more comfortably while getting cucked by chad.

>>36174413
Ah it's the classic fantasy of

>one day I'll wear this boot!

File: viking-warrior-symbols-wallpaper-2.jpg (322KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1600x1000px

>>36174277
Because the strong shouldn't have to bow down before the weak. Sure communism works in theory, but in practice, you are gonna slave away your life in the communal farm as an obese blue haired kommissar of indeterminate gender shrieks ARE YOU KIDDING ME? YOU ARE A FUCKING WHITE MALE!! at your face for all eternity.

You can be much more than that, White man, you hail from a proud race of Warriors, harking back to the lost continent of Ultima Thule. We shouldn't have to bow down before our shrieking inferiors.

>>36174485
This.

Also there would be no chads in this society because Chads are a capitalist construct.

>>36174446

EVERYONE tries to attain status. If you don't you're a loser. It has nothing to do with insecurity you retard.

>>36174485

I'm wealthy. Fuck you bitch. Go die.

>>36174489

I'm wealthy enough already.

>>36174533

Liberals are not communists, friend.

>>36174394
>Actually, the only way it can be established is on a large scale
That's retarded. What will prevent different classes from being established in a stateless society? What will prevent people from increasing their capital more so than others, thus creating class, without a state to prevent them from doing so?

>>36174468
the commies call you lumpenprole
they're supposed to hate you but Marxists these days go out of their way trying to appeal to drug dealers and NEETs and petty criminals
because commies these days are stupid larpers who don't even understand marx

>>36174545
>I'm wealthy enough already.
Evidently not enough to get laid, though.

>>36174535

>Also there would be no chads in this society because Chads are a capitalist construct.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Go to the Netherlands or Sweden or Norway or any one of the other "egalitarian" societies.

>>36174533
Ideally that would not happen, especialy given the "stateless" part. Can't get cucked by the comissar if there is no comissar. Also, There are many communists who are not sjws. The sjws are actually quite capitalistic. Their ideal system is a man-hating social-democracy.

>>36174277
I once created a society based on a meme currency. It was pretty good.

File: liberalism.jpg (2MB, 2036x3051px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2036x3051px

>>36174533
>he thinks identity politics is leftism

>>36174545
>I'm wealthy enough already.

It's not a question of wealth but a question of power. Unless you already own private property (means of production) you would have more power under Socialism than you do now.

>>36174277
Define classless

File: FANb002.jpg (59KB, 386x500px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 386x500px

Without a government to keep you safe I'd crush all you weak little roaches under my boot and make you my property
Morality is a tool used by the state to keep the so called "beta"s down, without the laws of the nation to hold me down we'd rise up against, what we lack in charisma we make up for in raw power and cunning

The fact that the state has a monopoly on the use of force is the only thing standing between you sitting in your basement shitposting and eating pizza, and me forcefeeding you estrogen and MDMA and fucking you to death

>>36174566
The fact that there is no money will prevent people accumulating capital and recreating classes. Also, this society only works in post-scarcity times like ours, where there is no longer the need fo fight for resources.

>>36174590

But I do get laid, retard. Not even by flaunting my wealthy, yet.

I'm not one of you mentally deficient retards who thinks that only Chads can get laid.

That doesn't mean that I'm going to give Chads an easier life and rob myself of my hard ended edge, over them.

>>36174566
What will prevent corporations from taking over capitalism and buying out the government?


>>36174593
Literally all those countries you listed are capitalist. State capitalism is still capitalism, buddy-boy.

File: disappointment and contempt.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>36174277
The problem of anarchy is that at the point you put handful of people in the same room, systems will rise unless there's something artificial forcing them to keep apart and in no time we've proto-states with complex hierarchial structures and stuff.

>>36174610

I rent out 3 houses and am in the process of selling my first business.

Please tell me more about

>>36174636
>What will prevent corporations from taking over capitalism and buying out the government?
Don't dodge the question

I can't wait for the wonders and horrors of singularity.
Maybe then we can finally be happy.

>>36174640
Indeed. That was a very astute observation. This is why anarchists think it is fundamental to have mechanisms so stop authoritarianism. The main mechanism is having the main organ of power be the communal assembly. It gives people the power to do a certain task, and can take it away at any time. There are also more mechanisms we have to avoid autoritarianism, but they are more complex.

>>36174636

They are capitalist egalitarian cultures with low wealth inequality where the lower classes have almost as much access to education and healthcare as the upper classes. They also have the tall poppy syndrome where you are not supposed to show off your wealth or indeed and kind of higher status.

I know you're already getting a boner out of hearing this but unless you have Chad looks or are a brainlet, this is actually not a very good environment to live in.

You gommies are really scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to recruit robots to your cause. Whatever happened to strong, hard working socialism?

>>36174654
>literally mr shekelburg

>>36174313
You're on r9k, you probably don't have any meaningful privileges.

Socialism not only removes the potential for rich Chads to hoard all the qts, but it also reorganizes sexual relations on more equitable terms. Women will pull their own weight, and not spend their youth getting plowed before they find a provider.

I support either this or global nuclear holocaust

the only moral options

>>36174632
>The fact that there is no money will prevent people accumulating capital and recreating classes
How about "capital" in a broader sense, namely resources? Surely a man with more resources (including essential and non-essential items) will be of a different class than a man with less resources. Additionally, capital is merely buying power. Resources can operate as capital

>>36174711
Some of us find that it is preferable not to make fun of our fellow man just because he has difficulty getting girls and socialising with people. Our social abilities should not be what defines us.

>>36174313
Privileges are not ordained or withheld in a stateless society... Because there's no state to tell you what you do and don't deserve.

>>36174654
Ah ok well in THAT case you're part of the problem and, unless you're willing to cooperate when the revolution comes, which due to your own rational interest you won't, you'll be promptly put up against a wall.

File: posadas glad.jpg (179KB, 673x323px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 673x323px

>>36174744
>not supporting both at once

>>36174413
You'll never outdo him. You'll die slightly wealthier than you are now.

Unless you're very good at STEM or are charismatic enough to succeed in business, you won't benefit from capitalism.

>>36174762

Thing is even in a true socialist society, most robots would still box themselves in and bitch on the Internet about normies.

>>36174632
>Also, this society only works in post-scarcity times like ours, where there is no longer the need fo fight for resources.
Even in a world of scarcity there would be a need for private-property, assuming resources which are not scarce are not immediately available to a person. Also keep in mind that time is a scarce resource -- thus property rights must still exist in a post-scarcity time

>>36174785
even then youll just get exploited by someone with a well connected family

>>36174747
He would be. However, the society we want functions with a colectivistic economy precisely to prevent that. This means that a man who produces a lot must give the part of his production that he does not need to the rest of the community. Everyone does this, and so everyone has equal acess to resources. People who refuse to give away the part of their production that they do not need, also refuse to recieve the benefits of the economic system. That is: they lose access to the resources of the community.

It's pretty cool, right?

>>36174770

>implying we won't raise a fascist army to kill you all
>implying we aren't already in the process of it
>implying we didn't even still your foot soldiers and convinced them to fight against you lot

File: 1491856323779.jpg (80KB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 479x720px

Communists are worse larpers than the Nazis. When will you faggots understand the white race or the communist Internationale is meaningless to the bottom feeding genetic defectives of society? We lose no matter what.

Normtypicals trying to attach their lives to a cause should promptly fuck off back to /r/eddit. Doesn't get more normgroidish than your local socialists party meeting. Just Chad fucking a harem of rich pink haired roasties going through their "I hate my rich republican dad" phase.

No buddy actually believes in Communism in 2017.

>>36174804
I don't know what you mean, exactly. We are not against people having things for their use. We call it personal property, instead of private property. I'm not sure if that was what you were questioning though.

>>36174833
your dumbass army is gonna get blown up by google, apple and microsoft drones from orbit

>>36174791
Normies are a product of rampant consumerism, which wouldn't exist in an anarchist society.

Think about it robots. Don't you want a normie free society?

The problem with your commie fantasies is that any communist with a brain will eventually realise that it is in his (his because women are all brainlets) self interest to just put his intellect to task, gathering wealth for himself.

We capitalists are smart enough to recruit all the smart lower class folks into our ranks. We even give them fully paid free rides to Ivy League universities and cushy jobs making six figures.

You are only left with brainlets. Enjoy your revolution.

Take if from somebody who was born poor in a leftist family and who flirted with these ideas for a long time before attaining wealth.

>>36174817
>It's pretty cool, right?
Its definitely more appealing in theory than it is in practice, but such a system is still undesirable to me. I like freedom, and capitalism is essential for freedom.

>>36174896

>implying Google/Apple/Microsoft aren't on our side

Why the fuck would you think that those companies would support a commie revolt?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7XJIioZEgQ


ITT: People who support the use of violence against me

>>36174634
>not a virgin
>on r9k
You're just an ugly chad.

File: red bread redemption.jpg (148KB, 920x960px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 920x960px

>>36174533
Communists are against identity politics, which are the domain of liberals. Feminism, for example, is in actuality incompatible with communism and anarchism (which have the same goals) if you really understand the 3. Feminism posits one thing in the minds of most people (equality of women with men) but actually posits two things (the former and that women are a distinct, uniquely oppressed group). Anarchist communism rejects the idea that anyone is necessarily different from one another. Everyone should be free to do as they please, equal in power to one another - to hell with arbitrary identities! It's not as if the alt-right will help you just because your great-great-great-great-grandfather was a Viking. They'll align with the chads if they ever take power and stick you at the bottom again. We're all just people at the end of the day - we don't need to hate each other because some self-declared ruler tells us to! We should help each other to create world which serves our needs, whatever they may be - "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs". The means of production are already being automated, so there won't be work to do. Why should they serve some liberal-cosmopolitan Silicon Valley trust fund kid who sips Starbucks and got a Tesla from his dad instead of you and me?
>>36174634
Then why are you here? Get out, normie.

>>36174566
Marx's class analysis was linked to private property(means of production) not how much money you have.

>>36174654
We're going to take your houses for more NEETbux.

>>36174962

They don't support fascism or communism, they work to defend the neoliberal system. Even fascism is a threat to neoliberals.

>>36174747
>Surely a man with more resources (including essential and non-essential items) will be of a different class than a man with less resources
No. Unless you somehow have exclussive access to means of production, you'll still be the same class. Class doesn't mean income. You can have more luxuries if you work harder. You just won't ever have to work to survive. Hiki life will be guaranteed in communism. Right now I'd have to mooch off my parents.

File: spooker.jpg (69KB, 486x960px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 486x960px

>>36174277
>Says that our current society benefits Jews
Which it does
>Ignores that communism is inherently a Jewish ideology with most revolutionaries and founders of communist organizations being Jewish
To be free of Jewish influence one must resort to paganism/agnosticism and seek to reinstate an ethnically pure national socialist empire

>>36174960
We're talking about a stateless society. What could be more free than this?

In capitalism, you will always be limited by the money you have, but in this system you would always be free. You wouldn't have to be a wagecuck for 8+ hours a day in return for a miserable living. Your living would be asured, and the only thing limiting you would be if your action brought harm to another person, or limited the other person's freedom.

>>36175074
>ignoring that all three of the main theorists of anarchism (Proudhon, Bakunin, and Kropotkin) were all non-jewish

File: United we stand.png (338KB, 1052x1064px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1052x1064px

>>36175127
Anarchism is ok, I simply prefer natsoc so I advocate for that. I'd be down for either of the options quite honesstly

>>36175074
>DA JOOZ

nice spooks nerd

>>36175098
>"We're talking about a stateless society. What could be more free than this?"
>implying there are no alternative forms of anarchism to anarcho-communism
Anarcho-capitalism is freedom. Anarcho-communism is forced collectivism

>>36175127
>anarchy
>workable
Try again later

>>36175187
>I simply prefer natsoc

Why though? You literally get ultra-cucked by the state, and the only thing you get in return is no niggers.

>>36175219
Actually, anarco-capitalism is forced exploitation, and anarcho-communism is freedom for all.

File: easter.png (123KB, 614x614px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 614x614px

>>36175219
>he unironically believes you can have capitalism without the state

>>36175219
Anarcho-capitalism is literally fuedalism.

>>36175245
Nice argument you presented, dude. I now see that I was wrong.

>>36175258
what is free market capitalism

>>36174566
>he doesn't know that human behavior is shaped by material conditions.
he doesn't know that all actions have a cause and nothing, even human nature, is a fixed concept.

File: Day of the rope.jpg (52KB, 507x470px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 507x470px

>>36175251
I have no problem helping others if the money truly goes towards the betterment of the country. Whenever people are united under one common banner they tend to be less selfish and work together, anarchism seems to be more self centered. Really depends on personal taste desu.
>>36175196
Thanks for noticing
>nerd
Take that back

>>36175326
an oxymoron
lol

>>36175219
anarcho-capitalism still believes in fixed concepts such as private property rights that are inflexible to fit personal autonomy.

anarcho-communism doesn't believe in such fixed concepts and that every thing is flexible to personal autonomy, creating freedom for all.

>>36175331
That's literally what "human nature is shaped by material conditions" means though

>>36175326
>"free market" capitalism

>he doesn't know that private ownership of the means of production allows the owners to take the hard earned wealth of the worker

try Mutualism bud. that would appeal to you if you're into markets.

>>36175341
When I said "ultra-cucked" I didn't mean just that you would have to help people. I meant you would lose basic rights that we have today, such as your freedoms of expression and association. That's something that a lot of people don't seem to consider when supporting these authoritarian systems. Only the leaders trully get benefited. The rules don't apply to them.

Anarchism is only self-centered in the sense that we want that sense of unity and solidarity, but without having to abandon our freedoms to achieve it. (if you are talking about anarcho-communism, that is. Because if you are talking about anarcho-capitalism, then yes: it purely self-centered.)

File: Don't be dumb be a smarty come and join the Nazi party.jpg (57KB, 839x1080px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 839x1080px

>>36175435
I was referring to the pigs yes. Ideally those rights wouldn't have to be taken away due to nobody feeling that these small minority groups are powerful enough to cause any social upheaval and the economy will be good enough where nobody will have anything to really complain about. Natsoc only really fails when the country starts to crumble due to enormous stress causing the leader in question scrambling and making irrational decisions to maintain his grasp. Otherwise there is no need for such restrictions to be put in place, I also support many of the things that such a state would believe in so either way it's a win/win for me

>>36175341
>implying being self-centered and helping others is mutually exclusive

do you actually see the common banner as important to you? because that would be pretty self centered lad.

and why the hell would you enjoy being ultracucked by the state when you can help others without being coerced. hell, socializing is an enjoyable activity, and why not help others in the process when its likely they will help you in return a-la mutual aid

>>36175544
Do you also believe that (((they))) control everytthing?

>>36175544
>Ideally those rights wouldn't have to be taken away due to nobody feeling that these small minority groups are powerful enough to cause any social upheaval

you can do something that the leader doesn't like and immediately be labeled as helping the minority group.

>he economy will be good enough where nobody will have anything to really complain about.
then why the hell would you need a state. most of the time the state exists to uphold an order that people don't like, because if they didn't the people would revolt too easily. what economy are you even envisioning? you just vaguely say "the economy" without actually explaining its functions

File: remove kebab.jpg (706KB, 964x1486px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 964x1486px

>>36175561
I support the common banner because it supports my people, which I believe to be the best hope for humanity's future. It's not exclusively about the success of the grorious empire but it's also the belief that what you're doing will give future generations the best future you can give them. Whether or not something is self centered is depends on where you draw the line but I don't see natsoc as such a thing. You're also implying that what I'd be doing for the state would be against my own free will and that I've been brainwashed to believe such a thing. I've developed these ideas without any form of government influence and while I can not assure you that this will not be used to trick others into believing such a thing it is in my personal self interest. Which is self centered but that self centered belief is rooted in a selfless belief which can be spun around to seem self centered which may or not be selfless and self centered at the exact same time. I ate three pieced of vanilla creme cake just now

>>36174545

>EVERYONE tries to attain status.

>If you don't you're a loser.

>It has nothing to do with insecurity

Your being so concerned about not being a "loser" smacks of insecurity, anon.

>tfw no commie gf

Why even live

File: stock smug animango natsoc giruu.jpg (36KB, 500x553px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x553px

>>36175654
It's a global conspiracy man
>>36175672
When I'm referring to the economy I'm talking about whether or not workers are happy with their current position in life and if they feel like they're actually able to accomplish something. Communism seems empty of any sort of emotional attachment to what you're producing, I find this to be the biggest problem since workers will be uninspired and not work as hard. If a worker is getting paid a decent wage and is producing things that he sees are benefitting the country he will be uplifted and work harder. While that same argument can be used for communism in a national socialist society one is able to move up the ranks and acquire more wealth if they so wish to which inspires a semi competitive environment without much of the corruption that capitalism is plagued by. State is only there to make sure things run smoothly, make certain processes easier, make sure no one is breaking any rules that harms his fellow man, and to dish out gibs

Leftypol plz go

File: 1491261262670.png (768KB, 1280x1172px) Image search: [Google]

768KB, 1280x1172px

>>36174277
Let's also advocate for a gravity-less society

We have to organize!!! Be the change!!!

>>36174710
they have low inequality, but they are still cultures that have been tainted with neoliberal capitalist ideology, resulting in the sort of vapid consumer culture that creates chads and stacies

File: 4abff3de5d5962f504b6bb18b72f33d37fc68dfc2.jpg (275KB, 761x1122px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 761x1122px

>>36176051
>states are a thing of nature not a social construct
>this is why elk have a state and currency

File: ancaps aren't anarchists.png (598KB, 946x1680px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 946x1680px

>>36175187
Anarcho-capitalism isn't anarchism. The fact that it's in any way associated with NotSoc proves this. All actual anarchists reject hierarchy and rulers - it's in the name "anarchist" (one who believes in a society without rulers - an-arch-ist, without-ruler-one). Capitalism and anarchism were defined in the same book, "What Is Property?" by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. His conclusion was "property is theft!" and advocated a free market society of worker-owned firms because capitalists would no longer be able to defend their firms without a state. "An"caps are the straight-up bitches of capitalists. Nazis are the bitches of capitalists, but with a veneer of "muh culture". Anarchists don't let themselves be anybody's bitch.

>>36174533
>You can be much more than that, White man, you hail from a proud race of Warriors, harking back to the lost continent of Ultima Thule. We shouldn't have to bow down before our shrieking inferiors.
WE WUZ VIKINGS AND SHEEIT

>>36174533
>You can be much more than that, White man, you hail from a proud race of Warriors, harking back to the lost continent of Ultima Thule. We shouldn't have to bow down before our shrieking inferiors.
so gay lmao. i'd bet any money you are an american

>>36174277
Daily reminder that if you don't believe in capitalism, you most likely deserve to be poor

File: 5d9d7a41f33b37c16cd35b85254cabbc0808ff08.jpg (79KB, 712x478px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 712x478px

>>36177465
>Dumbfuck defending the boot that's kicking his ass
Spooky

File: bb41cae48b09bdba69b27b0f2e12c660d1b37bbb.jpg (47KB, 349x296px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 349x296px

>>36175219
LOL(tm)(c)(LTD)

Because only in this society I can NEET freely. In your "paradise" I'd probably be in a gulag

>>36174558
>>36174610
>he thinks identity politics is leftism
Looking at /leftypol/s discord I have to disagree.
It might be not inherently leftism, but leftism sure attracts the "muh oppressed"

>He doesn't code in a stateless, classless, free and open source project

Losers

>>36177546
If your intelligent, the system works for you. If your stupid you work for the system. Thus, stupid people deserve to be poor, since they can't create new technology

File: marxists hate liberals.jpg (131KB, 750x602px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 750x602px

>>36177847
"/leftypol/" discord is a CIA honeypot run by Redditor tripfags. Ignore it.
Marx personally kicked Victoria Woodhull out of the 1st International. Whether the Left attracts them or not, they never have and never will be a part of it. Fuck liberals.

>>36177909
how could you code something without a class

shut up you commie jew fuck

>>36177847
That's like when libs say "oh I'm not saying conservatives are racist, but all racists are conservatives!" - it means nothing unless you want to imply a correlation.

>advocating for anything when you're a pathetic loser who probably won't live too much longer

>>36178652
t. /pol/ nerd who's never read marx

>>36177408
>Such a loser you have to hate odinism and other mulit god religions about being the best you can be to attain greatness you are capable of and dying proudly.
Its like you never read Beowulf.

>>36178476
Class based OOP isn't even the best kind of object orientation, let alone the best form of programming. Come on senpai.