This thread is permanently archived
Anti-Commie Thread
| ⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️⚒️
| Fascists are not human!
| A soy latte with extra soy, comrade.
| I don't get the relation between communism and soy. I thought soy is a capitalist thing to increase profits by non-sustainable monucultures for stock fattening and/or to strech meat and milk. Soylent Green is a capitalist dystopia, which pretends giving food supply based on soy, but in fact it's people. Yes: SOYLENT GREEN IS MADE OF PEOPLE!
| >>309201 soy based products are just healthier and associated with urban hipsters who mostly happen to be progressive liberals or socialists.
| btw I would argue growing soy is better for environment than growing cows
| Fuck the left, fuck the right, fuck centrists.
| >>309239
Liberals and socialists are two diffrent things. Most hipsters are liberals, who believe in the capitalist system. Actually there also are so called "nipsters", which are nazist hipsters.
| >>309201
Soy makes you effeminate due to the phytoestrogens within the unfermented products. The left is largely effeminate man children aka soyboys.
| >>310173
It isn't a myth.
Also keep telling yourself that, soyboy. I'm sure women are very impressednwith your limp wrists and bitchtits.
| >>310106
pick one
>the left are effeminated soyboys
>the left are evil and brutal antifascist
Either you make fun of them like a douche, or you cry like a baby because of brutal and evil antifa. Plealse make a final decission, because you can't have both.
In other words: Even if you drain out the last testorone out of me and pump me full with your estrogene semen from behind, I would easyly beat up any fat degenerated nazist dude.
| >>310299
I think the "evil and brutal" thing is only in your own imagination. To us, you are useful-idiot soyboys and nothing more.
| Let's thank socialists for finally making it clear that they are not liberals.
| >loses ww2
>tried to big mouth on boards
nice
| A big round of applause for the g/u/rl here who sees the world in black and white.
| I thought it was an anti communist threat not some kind of threat for people to get to each others nerves and talking about other political ideologies.
| Fucking commies ruining everything.
| >>311439
So what you're saying is that commies made everything better as a result. I can get behind that.
| >>311462
You don't get behind anything as long you don't accept materialism as driving force begin history.
| >>310314
>>310285
Well actually the right parties talk pretty much about "left violence", like little babies.
Btw. meat and milk contain additions which change people in a much worse way than soy. This, beside incest, explains why rightists always appear so degenerated.
I've seen mantitts and stupid behavior much more on non-vegetarians than on vegetarians.
Btw. I'm vegetarian who doesn't eat soy at all. What now?
| Islandmonkeyfood is bad in general, who knows what bullshit is put in there XD
Leftists as well as rightist are largely uneducated idiots, when you get to the representative Speaker tho that's something entirely different because what rightosts say sounds stupid and reprehe reprehensible but is largely correct while leftist speakers say reasonable shit thats impossible to achive the way they want it.
Now stop bitching at each other.
And don't let your feefees get hirt so easily XD
| >>312579
Undereducation is a general issue which affects any political movement. It's neither caused by the right nor by the left, but by the global dominating and selfproclaimed "center", which in fact is a successful neoliberal/neoconservative lobby for the rich and against the not-rich.
And by the way: Research and Reality shows, that right-wingers of any kind benefit the most from undereducation.
| >Talks about how everyone is uneducated
>Speaks how the economy is neoliberal at the moment
>Even though that collapsed years agp
>Even though economical theorists are trying to find a new theory
Makes you think.
| >>312634
Economical theorists are not neutral or critical. They just search for excuses to avoid questioning the system from the core. In the end they are part of the bourgeoisie or at least on the capitalists paylist. I don't expect anything from most economical theorists in this time. There are too much interest conflicts.
| >>312634
Also in my country it's like there is no discussion about economics, except about creating jobs and increasing profits.
All debates are dominated by identity politics. There also is as bit about the impact of technological advance, but mostly by people who don't have any idea about technology or just want to advertise their new it-business concept.
| This was supposed to be an anti-commie thread. Go and make your own safe space.
| >>313386
90% of internet became a anti-commie thread. It started with the neoliberal capitalists and their dotcom speculation bubbles and weird marketing/advertising assholes, was continued by banksters for speedtrading bullshit than taken over by spy-agencies and in the end of this sad development it became a propaganda platform for the far-right.
If you want commie bashing get out of here and play elswhere with your mainstream neoliberal or pseudo-oppositional nazist friends.
| >>314067
Or better yet, assuming you're right about the 90% thing (which I think is kind of a stretch), your ideology doesn't work and the majority of internet users recognize this.
Also, there's no way to prove whether the internet-using populace is 90% pro or anti- anything, so please stop trying to establish your cult as the underdogs in some great war with capito-nazi-facsist illuminati that rules everything, please. Thank you.
| >>314250 If I use a real world example, that just's not real communism, so I will criticize it based on its internal logic instead.
In order for something to succeed, there has to be a goal. Communism wants what capitalism has but without class (a classless society).
For most, Communism isn't even a system. It's a pipe-dream utopia that, according to Marx, is achieved through a socialist government run by the proletariat.
| So I should probably rephrase my criticism as "Communism is completely unachievable." Even in a heavily automated society, where there is no longer any need for a working class, classes will always exist. By virtue of people being able outperform others due to their natural and nurtured gifts, people will try to separate themselves from the masses. If there is an authority (e.g. government) that prevents this, that government becomes the new high class.
| The difference is that people don't need to outperform others (via producing something of value to others) in order to join this exclusionary society within society. They just have to know the right person. Or they have to poison Dear Leader and put themselves in charge. It's rewards based on luck, ass-kissing and/or violence, rather than rewards based on luck and production.
| inb4 "oh that's not my personal definition checkmate"
| Penis dogfart
| >>314460
Not exactly as capitalism uses markets to facilitate the transfer of commodities, while communism seeks to facilitate the transfer of goods using gift economies: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy
Though I will agree that for many MLs and their ideological kith it is utopian.
I will say that I am an Ancom, so I personally don't believe a "worker's state" could bring about communism.
| >>314529
The statement was me agreeing with the idea that at very least Marxist-leninist state can't achieve communism BTW.
| >>314467
1)That's why I turned to Anarchism as there isn't a higher authority than you and your local government that everyone participates in, which acts when the consensus of all is reached.
2)That implies that people feel alienated for they're talents (natural or nutured) as the main social push behind communism is cooperation with others in order meet everyone's needs, not competition for domination of others.
| >>314469
How is that any different from the internal politics of any other type of state, yes, some states aren't as blatant, but the results of rigging an election or creating an oligopoly on state power is the same as you described, as everyday people feel the effects of policy they have no real hand in.
| >>314548 The difference is that's an exception to the rule in status quo societies, and with a society that pursues Marx' communism, that will eventually become the rule. Tyranny is corruption in the former and leadership in the latter.
| >>314618
I disagree as nation-states trend toward a central authority controlling everything, as that type of governance best maintains a state's monopoly of violence, as well as propagate the dominate culture at the expense of minority cultures, from my point of view all states move to authoritarianism and with that authoritarianism comes oppression.
This thread is permanently archived
| When the soy latte takes a second longer to arrive, the bourgeoisie will taste our wrath, comrades.