jesus fuck, you people. I've now unsubscribed, which is a shame, because a lot of greentexts are genuinely funny, but this alt-right underbelly is just unbearable.
Not sure Dystopia was ever something anyone has ever intended. It tends to be the result of someone's delusions of grandeur. One person's Dystopia is another's Utopia. North Korea would probably be the closest according to my limited intellect and I am not saying that because it is a dictatorship.
Cubans dont exist. And also the only venezuelans you see are the white rich ones with higher oqs that could actually help the country turn the power back on and help the dying starving sick people. They not the ReAL PrOliteRiAt!!!
And chapos absolutely hate that. They hate those people, call them traitors, petty bourgeoise, oppressors, etc.
There's nothing these privileged mayo kids from San Francisco hate more than well-off brown people who earned their success. They want brown people to be on the right side of history (and die of starvation).
Yesterday. Probably a comment about it in my history not too far back if you want to see the undeleted thread. Please just promise not to read any of my other comments. You don't have my consent for that.
An American backed coups would’ve had Maduro out of a fucking heli already. This is just Venezuela doing shit on their own which is why it’s been so difficult.
But, and a big but, Leopoldo Lopez is free and under Spanish protection so this is unironically a huge win for all us Hispanics so oppose Maduro across Latin America.
Dude they are fucking everywhere. They arent fruit flies either, dirtier and grosser. Just disgusting tiny gnats. Put out an apple cider vinegar trap and they didnt touch it.
I just need a way to ensure the purity of my household.
I had an infestation of those in our turtle tank. I had to throw out all the rocks and buy new ones then bleach everything, that's the only thing that got rid of them. Find out where they're spawning and throw away everything you can then soak the rest in bleach.
We've always keep our house spotless otherwise, and we're still finding dead gnats in light fixtures or above windows five years later.
Sorry to hear that mate. I hate any pests with a passion. I’m an ethnobotanist on the side and have often dealt with spider mites and scale, with scale being the devil incarnate in pest form and I wish for their utter extinction.
I hope the meat trap works for you. I’m a fragrance chemist, so I can look to see if there are any pheromones that gnats/fruit flies may be attracted to. They’re usually pretty common and inexpensive, and gnats are so prevalent I’m sure they’ve been a target for development. That’s the best way to isolate and eliminate airbornes. Send me a PM and I’ll link what I find there.
Venezuelan cops and military: * fight against imperialism and anti-democratic coups *
Lmao running over abuelita y su ñietos is protecting the country against fascism.
Also, you faggots are the first ones to cry to cops when shit doesn’t go your way or you see a colored person enter your neighborhoods so don’t act like you’re some grand savior of my poor brown ass, dude.
Except the leftist didn't call the cops asking for protection. That would be idiotic of them, since cops hate leftists and are rarely willing o protect them. What actually happens is the city deploys the cops to protest zones whether the leftists like it or not.
If they didn’t protect you you people would be killed, lol.
I noticed you quickly pivoted away from your original point about leftists like to call the cops. Again, cops don't protect leftists. The two groups are literally existentially opposed to one another.
I mean chapos might existentially hate middle class cops but if you guys called one and didn’t screech in their faces when they arrived they would help you no questions asked
God I just want him to taze me stupid and tackle me. I want to feel the sweat dripping off his neckfolds as he handcuffs me and goes to town on my bussy. I wanna hear him grunt, "I'm gonna let that tight ass seize the means of reproduction," as he glazes my doughnut hole. Then I want to be extrajudicially executed because he got spooked by me reaching to push his thick white ropes of oppression back up my anus.
Furthermore, correlation coefficients show that female and nonwhite respondents were likelier than male and White respondents to engage in physical aggression against an intimate partner.
Don’t the racial and sex factors just strengthen the “all cops are bastards” argument though? Since that means it’s tied to the cops themselves rather than to the demographics that make them up
Did you know that black communities were the biggest supporters of War on Drugs originally? This is because they knew firsthand that the natural state of a community (not necessarily black, but drug-riddled) from which the police withdraws is not people drumming in hippie circles, it's druggies robbing you to get money for their fix and dealers spraying lead in competition for providing druggies with their fix. Also, rapes.
So with that tried and found unsatisfactory the next policy implication would be to have a whiter, maler police. Statistics say that this might or might not result in better outcomes.
I’m actually pretty damn sure they never supported sentencing for personal use, mandatory minimums, or increased policing, but if you stretch “War on Drugs” to apply to literally all anti-drug campaigning then sure, they were in on the ground floor for that one
the natural state of a community from which the police withdraws is druggies robbing you to get money for their fix and dealers spraying lead in competition for providing druggies with their fix
yeah good thing the War on Drugs fixed all that and didn’t just lead to a more heavily armed, militant, and paranoid dealers or a cycle of endless recidivism and escalation of criminality
also the cops would be replaced by medical personnel, plainclothes detectives and basically a neighborhood watch, ijs
I’m actually pretty damn sure they never supported sentencing for personal use, mandatory minimums, or increased policing, but if you stretch “War on Drugs” to apply to literally all anti-drug campaigning then sure, they were in on the ground floor for that one
yeah good thing the War on Drugs fixed all that and didn’t just lead to more heavily armed, militant, and paranoid gangs or a cycle of endless recidivism and escalation of criminality
That's because we live in a hellworld where having good intentions doesn't guarantee good outcomes of the policy you lobbied for. That's not because there are evil people who sabotage your policies, that's because in a hellworld any given policy is most likely to be self-defeating and worse.
also abolished cops would be replaced by medical personnel, plainclothes detectives and basically a neighborhood watch rather than by nothing, ijs
So replace cops with cops but this time we make sure they are nice people. That's the problem, cops aren't nice people, and we solve it not by making and supporting systems that force cops to be nice (like for example the part where illegally obtained evidence can be thrown out and a murderer walks free), but by simply ensuring that only nice people are cops. This is going to work in this hellworld.
Btw, the "medical personnel" part reminds me of the way the untreatable schizophrenics were thrown out to the streets and became homeless or prisoners because of the conjunction of the liberal "involuntary hospitalization is evil" and conservative "yay cut down the costs of mental hospitals", so a large part of the US prison population actually maps to permanently hospitalized mental patients in less retarded countries.
Ohhh, so like “black community” as in the one around D.C., like in Black Dynamite
I guess that’s different. Even they changed their tune by Reagan though
That's because we live in a hellworld where having good intentions doesn't guarantee good outcomes of the policy you lobbied for.
that’s the state for ya
personally i think “good intentions” is a pretty vague barometer though
That's not because there are evil people who sabotage your policies
the idea that bad guys generally sabotage good policies is like, almost the opposite of what i believe lol
So replace cops with cops but this time we make sure they are nice people.
Nah. No chief, no uniforms (except for the medics), no mandatory weapon administration (guns are fine, just bring your own), no legal protections, no right to question civilians for perceived civil offenses, no obligation to uphold private property rights, no holding, no tickets, no fines (for individuals at least), and we pretend like the jail is a hospital. Other differences, too, but I don’t wanna waste all my time on that
Btw, the "medical personnel" part reminds me of the way the untreatable schizophrenics were thrown out to the streets and became homeless or prisoners because of the conjunction of the liberal "involuntary hospitalization is evil" and conservative “yay cut down the costs of mental hospitals”
Reagan, Clinton, two birds. Liberals hate a lot of the stuff they support if you call it by the wrong name lol
so a large part of the US prison population actually maps to permanently hospitalized mental patients in less retarded countries.
Yep, the idea is we can take that dynamic and stretch it to an absurd degree.
That's because we live in a hellworld where having good intentions doesn't guarantee good outcomes of the policy you lobbied for.
that’s the state for ya
No, that's the hellworld. Whenever the state withdrew from Detroit, the normal people begged it to come back. Because the absence of state is gangs, much more and worse of them.
personally i think “good intentions” is a pretty vague barometer though
Obviously, because the entire basis of chapocel ideology and how it's different from fascism is having good intentions. So you look around and everyone has good intentions and it's pretty vague.
I'd send all people with good intentions and social engineering aspirations to a gulag where they are forced to plant potatoes, harvest potatoes, peel potatoes, boil potatoes, also cut trees, make trees into planks, build dwellings from planks, shit like that. For a year, mandatory, around 18yo, like replace the first year of highschool with an immersive hands-on "this is why the man-made world around you exists" experience. Then some of them decide that they are actually OK with that and don't waste 4 more years, and those who'd prefer to work in AC rooms get one hell of a stimulus and also an inoculation against commie bullshit, "in the utopia some people would pick potatoes because they enjoy the process", lmao.
No chief, no uniforms (except for the medics)
But what would the 50% of the chapos who want to design uniforms for gay policemen do then?
If you’re just talking about some kinda no-go zone, tha Bluff was a no-go zone for decades and it didn’t make anything any shittier than it started out as.
Because the absence of state is gangs
Gangs exist anyway
The state IS a gang, so who cares
Gangs are driven by the pursuit of capital and/or authority, so they’re kind of a nonfactor in this little scheme I’m proposing
because the entire basis of chapocel ideology and how it's different from fascism is having good intentions.
I wouldn’t know lol. The only episode of CTH I ever heard was the one with the Mike Reiss interview, and I only ever go to the sub from /r/drama links to tell them they’re wrong.
But if they really think authorial intent and whether it’s “good” is the deciding factor in how power structures play out, they’re fucking retarded lol. You can twist any ideology into something that sounds like it benefits society.
"in the utopia some people would pick potatoes because they enjoy the process"
what the fuck are you talking about lol
literally every communist/commie-adjacent movement has had some kind of mandatory workweek
it’s just that we’ve got it down to 20 hours now. 15 once the kinks are worked out. 8 once the machines overthrow us.
But what would the 50% of the chapos who envision themselves as designers of uniforms for gay policemen do then?
When Stalin ended up the head of the USSR and killed and starved a lot of people, that wasn't the doing of some capitalist state.
When Mao ended up the head of state and killed and starved even more people, that wasn't because of enemy state machinations.
When Pol Pot starved and murdered a quarter of his people, you noticing the motif already?
But enough about dictators, when another male feminist turns out to be a rapist, when DSA's Medicare for All canvassing is shutdown by DSA disabled rights activists, when every single lefty group despite being specifically designed to not have a power hierarchy is torn apart by power struggles between cliques, that's not the work of COINTELPRO agents protecting the interests of the capital, even though the lefties doing that to themselves are functionally indistinguishable from hostile agents.
It's because we live in a hellworld were most ideas have catastrophic consequences and most selection processes optimize for the exact opposite of what you want them to.
Imagine living in a nice word where you notice, say, that sparrows eat some of the grain during harvest, order peasants to kill all sparrows, and everything goes as expected, nothing bad happens and you just end up with some extra grain for the people. But no, we live in a hellworld where as a result bugs eat most of the harvest and 20 million Chinese die.
Or imagine living in a world where you notice that there's some antisocial assholes, establish a Ministry of Love that identifies and gulags them, and that ministry doesn't end up consisting entirely of murderous sociopaths. Imagine living in a world where the Vanguard has kind and thoughtful leaders for a change, just once, instead of always ending up with the most ruthless psychopaths the hellworld has to offer in charge.
But no, we live in a hellworld were most ideas have catastrophic consequences and most selection processes optimize for the exact opposite of what you want them to, so all of the above weren't super unlikely unfortunate accidents that surely wouldn't happen this time.
But of course, and that's a hilarious thing about the hellworld, it also ensures that whenever someone manages to find some ideas that work and erect a structure that keeps the worst of the hellworld out, next thing you know there's a bunch of sheltered retards who point at the walls protecting them and say "this is the hellworld, let's raze it to the ground".
When Pol Pot starved and murdered a quarter of his people, you noticing the motif already?
Obviously another state, but Pol Pot wasn’t even a communist lol. He was basically just an anti-Western fascist.
when DSA's Medicare for All canvassing is shutdown by DSA disabled rights activists
the fuck kind of sense does that make? sounds like poor planning tbh.
when every single lefty group despite being specifically designed to not have a power hierarchy is torn apart by power struggles between cliques
MAREZ, Freetown Christiania, Mondragon Corp, Rewe, Dreamtime Village, Revolutionary Catalonia, Rojava. Last two dealt with existential external threats, but not internal ones.
that's not the work of COINTELPRO agents protecting the interests of the capital
I mean, sometimes it is, but obviously that excuse isn’t necessary if it doesn’t happen every time
Imagine living in a nice word where you notice, say, that sparrows eat some of the grain during harvest, order peasants to kill all sparrows, and everything goes as expected, nothing bad happens and you just end up with some extra grain for the people
Sparrows play a significant role in the ecosystem lol, that’d be retarded. This is why we have the natural sciences.
Or imagine living in a world where you notice that there's some antisocial assholes, establish a Ministry of Love that identifies and gulags them, and that ministry doesn't end up consisting entirely of murderous sociopaths.
As in the administrators or the patients? Can’t be violating the hippocratic oath, doc, the focus is on rehab.
Murderous sociopaths are in charge of the things we have already, they’re just given free reign to abuse currently.
Imagine living in a world where the Vanguard
leaders
staaate
The weird thing is, I totally agree with the basic sentiment here, I’m just saying the solution is to prevent people from having authority over others (with a few rotating exceptions, like ship captains), not just hope we can make sure that the authorities are always good and just.
But no, we live in a hellworld were most ideas have catastrophic consequences and most selection processes optimize for the exact opposite of what you want them to, so all of the above weren't super unlikely unfortunate accidents, it was a guaranteed outcome will happen again and again every time someone thinks that this time will be different.
None of the above ever happened to an anarchist society, and there’s been like hundreds of those. It doesn’t have to be “different,” it just has to happen more often.
The funny thing about the hellworld is that just about all its worst tendencies are made far, far worse, and far more destructive, through unnecessary vertical hierarchy.
Don't we need an explanation for why the majority of leftist mass movements start with a commitment to equality and freedom for all and end up with oppressive dictatorships that'd make fascists blush? It's like I'm giving you an example after example of AIDS patients who died from rapidly spreading skin cancer and you say that their problem was that they got skin cancer.
when DSA's Medicare for All canvassing is shutdown by DSA disabled rights activists
the fuck kind of sense does that make? sounds like poor planning tbh.
But anyways, that makes TOTAL sense if you realize that we live in a hellworld and that has nothing to do with states or capital. I strongly suggest reading https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm that I linked earlier, it gives a lot of examples of that shit happening.
Basically: any community that tries to do anything real is aching for and has more than enough natural nucleation points for structure, that is, hierarchy and inequality. There are people who take initiative and there are people who like to be told what to do, there's the guy who has a car and so gets more say on where we print pamphlets, there's a girl who volunteered to be the treasurer and so also gets to call shots more than the average member. And if the community refuses to have an explicit structure that could be made transparent and accountable, then it inevitably grows a hidden structure and it suuuuucks.
MAREZ, Freetown Christiania, Mondragon Corp, Rewe, Dreamtime Village, Revolutionary Catalonia, Rojava. Last two dealt with existential external threats, but not internal ones.
Thank you, that's interesting. Maybe I should be a little less pessimistic.
Sparrows play a significant role in the ecosystem lol, that’d be retarded. This is why we have the natural sciences.
No, we have respect for ecosystem in part because Mao went and did that, the madman. And the desire to avoid yet unknown catastrophic consequences is why we have the freedom of speech, as a social institution or a shared agreement that we should listen to arguments that try to discover truth instead of suppressing anything that goes against the prevailing opinion.
It seems to me that most leftists are optimists, don't believe that we live in a hellworld, and don't see much value in free speech, including anarchists, you don't need a particular Mao guy to get offended and deplatform someone.
The weird thing is, I totally agree with the basic sentiment here, I’m just saying the solution is to prevent people from having authority over others (with a few rotating exceptions, like ship captains, all of which should have democratic basis), not just hope we can make sure that the authorities are always good and just. [..] The funny thing about the hellworld is that just about all its worst tendencies are made far, far worse, and far more destructive, through unnecessary vertical hierarchy.
First of all, the entire history of liberalism and democracy and shit is dedicated to building systems that can function with authorities that are not good and just, and are regularly replaced without bloodshed.
Second, have you noticed that there's no "Capitalists" protesting Mondragon Corp or REWE, because workers deserve to be oppressed? Like, not a single one in the history of ever?
I've been noticing lately that there are usually two completely different parallel non-intersecting discussions happening simultaneously in the two-corner rotation of the world. On one plane you have people arguing that capitalism is immoral because it doesn't give fair compensation to workers etc etc, and against them are the people arguing that capitalism is moral because property rights follow from the NAP. On the other plane there are people arguing that capitalism is a necessary evil because it's a no shit magical alien technology that produces mostly pro-social outcomes despite not 1/10th, not 1/3rd, not 49%, but everyone involved being a greedy asshole, and against them are people who say that no no no, we can just ask everyone to work according to their ability and solve everything.
And I notice that most of the time it's the anti-capitalist person from the moral plane arguing with a pro-capitalist person from the "works or doesn't work" plane.
Like, when you say "unnecessary vertical hierarchy", do you mean unnecessary as in it's there because selfish capitalists want workers to suffer, or unnecessary as in we can get rid of some of it and not end up with empty shelves like USSR or Venezuela? btw this comment is super enlightening about all this stuff.
Finally, I'm concerned about the way we call the necessary hierarchies. I was reading through Wikipedia articles about your examples of anarchist communities and this stood out to me: sooner or later a community will have a problem with bad people doing bad things. And then (or hopefully before actually) it has a choice: either it can stick to the "no authorities" principle literally and get a bunch of people shot by gangs like the Freetown Christiania and be all like surprisedpikachu.jpg, or do create authorities that are basically the police, only a _better police, and then be called out from the left for having a police. And also representative democracy but better, and so on. At which point: why do you need a revolution if you still have all the same social institutions only better, which you can reach evolutionarily?
Don't we need an explanation for why the majority of leftist mass movements start with a commitment to equality and freedom for all and end up with oppressive dictatorships that'd make fascists blush?
i’m honestly really interested in your numbers here in finding “the majority,” because AFAIK authoritarian lefty movements usually don’t pose as libertarian lefty movements
It's like I'm giving you an example after example of AIDS patients who died from rapidly spreading skin cancer and you say that their problem was that they got skin cancer.
If that’s the weirdass analogy you’re going with, then my AIDS is cancer-proof.
This piece, which I’d actually seen a video about prior to this conversation but hadn’t read before, discusses the potential tyranny of a vocal elite in a system with no formal hierarchy.
The only examples it provides are of small feminist cliques and the “New Left.” Nothing about anarchism, socialism, communism, or syndicalism, and not even examples of actual tyranny, just informal hierarchy.
I do believe the concepts translate, and consider its information important to establishing a liberated society, but more as a word of caution than an outright dismissal of the idea.
Basically: any community that tries to do anything real is aching for and has more than enough natural nucleation points for structure, which means hierarchy and inequality.
Structure is needed, but hierarchy isn’t necessary to structure.
It does mean some inequality of roles, though. But that’s more like “diversity.”
First of all, the entire history of liberalism and democracy and shit is dedicated to building systems that can function with authorities that are not good and just, and are regularly replaced without bloodshed.
The history of liberal democracy— which is still a far cry above most earlier systems, mind you!— is full of bloodshed.
No, we have respect for ecosystem in part because Mao went and did that, the madman.
Yeah Mao spent too much time thinking about guns and not enough time thinking about science
And the desire to avoid yet unknown catastrophic consequences is why we have the freedom of speech, as a social institution or a shared agreement that we should listen to arguments that try to discover truth instead of suppressing anything that goes against the prevailing opinion.
Yep, freedom is good.
Completely unfettered free speech has never existed though, and definitionally can’t exist, because speech can fetter other speech.
It seems to me that most leftists are optimists, don't believe that we live in a hellworld, and don't see much value in free speech, including anarchists, you don't need a particular Mao guy to get offended and deplatform someone.
I think anarchism is the most effective way to neuter said hellworld, and in a liberal society deplatforming basically is a form of speech.
I tend to be pretty comfortable with deplatforming hate speech that has a chilling effect on other speech. At that point you’re basically choosing between shutting up two people, might as well silence the dick.
Unlike most though, I do think Nazis deserve a platform under the current system, they just don’t deserve to use other people’s platforms. Though I still prefer that they do, because also unlike most, I’m willing to push back, and it’s a lot easier to do that when they’re not stuck in a safe space.
Just in the US, the police execute people at a higher rate than even the Chinese government does (although that’s only because Chinese executions dropped off after 2002). The homeless are attacked for sleeping in unoccupied buildings or “stealing” food that was thrown out by stores and restaurants. There were tons of massacres of unionized labor in the 19th century. There are economic incentives for locking people up as long as possible. And that’s not even getting into the slave shit, the injun shit or the imperial shit we’re still doing.
Speaking of injuns, Canada was still forcibly sterilizing them in 2017. Canada.
Second, have you noticed that there's no "Capitalists" protesting Mondragon Corp or REWE, because workers deserve to be oppressed? Like, not a single one in the history of ever?
Cooperatives work with the current capitalist system. Other companies are not existentially threatened by their participation, and can even benefit from it.
Capitalists never push back against other (non-subsidiary) companies unionizing, only their own, because they gauge success by profit margins. Any company that unionizes or turns cooperative has to sacrifices their own margins to some extent for the sake of the employees. So if their competitors do it, that’s just going to make their own company more attractive to investors.
Besides, that’d just be wasting energy and sort of giving the game away, wouldn’t it? They wouldn’t want people associating socialism with employee satisfaction.
On the other plane there are people arguing that capitalism is a necessary evil because it's a no shit magical alien technology that produces mostly pro-social outcomes despite not 1/10th, not 1/3rd, not 49%, but everyone involved being a greedy asshole, and against them are people who say that no no no, we can just ask everyone to work according to their ability and solve everything.
The ability of capitalism to produce pro-social outcomes is greatly exaggerated by organizations like the World Bank (who erroneously claim global poverty rates are on the decline), though not entirely baseless. The improvements in social conditions are primarily due to technological advancement (which can be facilitated by capitalism, but also by many other things), not to private property rights.
Further, many under capitalism do not act like greedy assholes, despite endless incentives to do so. Social workers, firefighters, schoolteachers— all these jobs are relatively low-paying and often come with plenty of problems of their own.
Work would still be compulsory under almost any system. The mechanisms for enforcing it would just be different.
Like, when you say "unnecessary vertical hierarchy", do you mean unnecessary as in it's there because selfish capitalists want workers to suffer, or unnecessary as in we can get rid of some of it and not end up with empty shelves like the USSR and Venezuela
The second one.
USSR had empty shelves to begin with. Venezuela actually got empty shelves stocked under Chavez (who only got them 30% of the way to state socialism, and just went for a welfare state otherwise), then lost everything due to a combination of a drop in oil prices, the leader’s actions (Maduro’s embargo), and the interference of foreign banks.
Finally, I'm concerned about the way we call the necessary hierarchies.
Necessary hierarchies mainly apply to potentially life-risking ventures where quick adaptability is key. Operating a ship, performing surgery, etc.
Other temporary hierarchies can be implemented at the behest of a group for any reason, though— say a factory is complex enough to benefit from a rotating foreman. The point is to not leave anyone with arbitrary power.
And then (or hopefully before actually) it has a choice: either it can stick to the "no authorities" principle literally and get a bunch of people shot by gangs like the Freetown Christiania and be all like surprisedpikachu.jpg, or do create authorities that are basically the police, only a _better police, and then be called out from the left for having a police.
Or they can just anesthesize them. Medical goons got you covered.
What’s this gang after, anyway? Respect? Commodities to sell in another society?
At which point: why do you need a revolution if you still have all the same social institutions only better, which you can reach evolutionarily?
The only thing “revolution” would be required for is taking over the companies basically, I mean in theory all the other shit could be handled by existing democratic processes.
I should note my model of revolution is essentially just a mass labor strike, though
First of all, I want to say that apparently we don't disagree on a lot of points, or if disagree then in a way that can't really productively resolved, like I have my vague gut feelings, you have yours. However some things I do disagree about.
i’m honestly really interested in your numbers here in finding “the majority,” because AFAIK authoritarian lefty movements usually don’t pose as libertarian lefty movements
Do self-admitted authoritarian lefties even exist? Or alternatively how do you define libertarian left in a way that doesn't exclude everyone who wants to expropriate the means of production at least a little instead of joining a co-op or going to the jungle and building their own factory there?
Structure is needed, but hierarchy isn’t necessary to structure. [...] The point is to not leave anyone with arbitrary power.
So you don't have anything against the US governance system, in principle, since it doesn't have any hereditary and very few lifetime tenures (for arguably good reasons)? If not for capitalism, would you call the entirety of the US government, including the police, an example of an anarchist governance?
Completely unfettered free speech has never existed though, and definitionally can’t exist, because speech can fetter other speech.
I think that a very productive approach is to switch from "freedom of speech" to "freedom to listen". It covers most cases where most people agree that it's good (especially various kinds of whistleblowing), excludes most cases where most people agree that it's bad (when it interferes with your freedom to listen to other people by spamming you with comments telling you that you're a fag), and provides a clear and reasoned guidance for cases where antifa infringe on the right of the students to listen to a deplatformed person.
Any company that unionizes or turns cooperative has to sacrifices their own margins to some extent for the sake of the employees. So if their competitors do it, that’s just going to make their own company more attractive to investors.
Wait a second. Co-ops don't have "profit margins for investors", or else are in the same boat as everyone when deciding to voluntarily take investments (that is, loans).
The only way co-ops can be less efficient on the free market is if they are in fact less efficient. Which poses a conundrum: if all firms were co-ops then it would be better for the workers but worse for the consumers because the losses would be passed onto them, but workers and consumers are the same people in that world, so...
Fortunately two of your examples show that co-ops can be very successful, so maybe it's a mute point. Unless that is you really want to expropriate the means of production without making an actually reasonable argument for why the socialist revolution can't come in the form of co-ops quietly taking over the world.
Besides, that’d just be wasting energy and sort of giving the game away, wouldn’t it? They wouldn’t want people associating socialism with employee satisfaction.
Again, you're too eager to argue in the plane where your opponents are evil and greedy. The much more reasonable explanation is that they just really like having full supermarket shelves and honestly cheer for the second largest supermarket chain in Germany because that's really all that it's about.
Btw this means a lot for your attempts at socialist propaganda: it means that pointing out REWE would get people on your side, while trying to shame people for being evil and hating co-ops is guaranteed to backfire because they don't hate co-ops and don't perceive themselves as evil.
the World Bank (who erroneously claim global poverty rates are on the decline)
Citations would be very welcome.
The improvements in social conditions are primarily due to technological advancement
Just a funny thing, are you aware that you make literally the same argument as Mencius Moldbug here?
USSR had empty shelves to begin with.
It had reasonably full shelves for a while, but then lost everything due to stagnation inherent to command economy, and by that I don't mean that it's impossible to compute how many pairs of rubber boots the population needs, but that it's very hard to solve the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal–agent_problem, especially when decisions are made based on infights in the bureaucracy with ideological purity as the weapon of choice.
What’s this gang after, anyway? Respect? Commodities to sell in another society?
The old usual, not having to work, getting more and finer stuff than people who work. Saying that in your utopia people wouldn't have these motivations has really dystopian implications however you slice and dice it.
Do self-admitted authoritarian lefties even exist?
Well there’s people who say shit like “Stalin was a great man,” but I’d say self-admitted vanguard socialists count.
Wait a second. Co-ops don't have "profit margins for investors"
That’s my point. Profit margins are zero.
I think that a very productive approach is to switch from "freedom of speech" to "freedom to listen". It covers most cases where most people agree that it's good (especially various kinds of whistleblowing), excludes most cases where most people agree that it's bad (when it interferes with your freedom to listen to other people by spamming you with comments telling you that you're a fag),
What about threats, or defamation? In addition to having legal precedent, both are kinds of speech that can create an environment hostile to hearing the speech of others.
and provides a clear and reasoned guidance for cases where antifa infringe on the right of the students to listen to a deplatformed person.
Anyone saved from having to listen to even a minute of Sargon of Akkarl has been done a great service.
So you don't have anything against the US governance system, in principle, since it doesn't have any hereditary and very few lifetime tenures (for arguably good reasons)? If not for capitalism, would you call the entirety of the US government, including the police, an example of an anarchist governance?
It’d actually be pretty close! We’d just have to abolish basically all state and federal law though, reproportion and inflate Congress, which is no longer tasked with federal legislation, but managing inter-state trade; replace state governments with basically larger state legislatures, and make the president’s only role be as a UN representative. And I guess subdivisions would have to vote on whether they kept their cops and civil servants and shit. Then we’d be primed for anarchism on a national level, though we’d probably not be anarchist on a community-by- community basis right away.
if all firms were co-ops then it would be better for the workers but worse for the consumers because the losses would be passed onto them
the workers are also the consumers, so whichever one takes a loss the other one gains
Again, you're too eager to argue in the plane where your opponents are evil and greedy.
I don’t think most of them are, I think most of the major figures are just ignorant or in denial, but I was responding to a question that seemed to challenge the assumption that any of them could be.
I do think most of the more influential are motivated by a mixture of greed and denial. It’s not necessarily malicious, but still doing harm. I think it’s the same basic phenomenon that fueled so much propaganda that defended institutions like slavery. (They had philosophers, academics, preachers, everybody)
Just a funny thing, are you aware that you make literally the same argument as Mencius Moldbug here?
Mencius Moldbug argued against neoliberalism? I mean I guess when he swings at the right targets he’s bound to make the right points.
The old usual, not having to work, getting more and finer stuff than people who work. Saying that in your utopia people wouldn't have these motivations has really dystopian implications however you slice and dice it.
Anyone saved from hearing even a minute of Sargon of Akkarl has been done a great service. No good can come of that.
Do you want me to decide for you what good can come out of listening to things I find worse than useless?
if all firms were co-ops then it would be better for the workers but worse for the consumers because the losses would be passed onto them
Profit margins are zero. [..] the workers are also the consumers, so whichever one takes a loss the other one gains
Exactly, so you gotta explain how exactly co-ops are less competitive in terms of: for whom exactly being forced to buy from a co-op is worse.
I think it’s the same basic phenomenon that fueled so much propaganda that defended institutions like slavery. (They had philosophers, academics, preachers, everybody)
the World Bank (who erroneously claim global poverty rates are on the decline)
Citations would be very welcome.
Here’s a good one
Am I missing something or does it agree that global poverty rates are on the decline, but that the battle against poverty is not won after conquering the $1/day "extreme poverty" line but we should get closer to $2 at least, which is why "the World Bank, UN Development Programme (UNDP) and governments of developing countries all regularly use poverty-lines higher than $2-a-day"?
The old usual, not having to work, getting more and finer stuff than people who work. Saying that in your utopia people wouldn't have these motivations has really dystopian implications however you slice and dice it.
That’s what the docs are for. They get rehab.
I know this one exactly! "A Deepness in the Sky" featured a fascist civilization that uses so called "Focus", a sort of permanent endogenous targeted ADHD medication that made their slaves really like to work. Unfortunately Vernon Vinge was not woke enough to realize that he was describing a utopia and neither am I.
Do you want me to decide for you what good can come out of listening to things I find worse than useless?
Depends on the example, I guess.
Exactly, so you gotta explain how exactly co-ops are less competitive in terms of: for whom exactly being forced to buy from a co-op is worse.
When cooperative ownership leads to raised prices— which it would for some companies, but not for others— its effects would be offset by the accompanying rise in consumer spending power.
A guy who thought whites should be slaves too, and basically argued that the problem with capitalism was not being feudalism?
Am I missing something or does it agree that global poverty rates are on the decline
It shows how properly adjusting for inflation dramatically hits the claimed gains.
It doesn’t discuss the conceptual meaninglessness of a global poverty line, though. The poverty line is far higher in many of the world’s least developed countries.
I know this one exactly! "A Deepness in the Sky" featured a fascist civilization that used so called "Focus", a sort of permanent endogenous targeted ADHD medication that made their slaves really like to work.
The fact that unethical medical practices can be promoted as a form of subjugation does not mean that medicalizing the penal system will produce those tendencies.
When not carried out in the service of a ruling class, there would be no incentive to abuse patients systemically. The threat in such system would be individual abuse, which is why it would be designed to ensure public accountability.
When cooperative ownership leads to raised prices— which it would for some companies, but not for others— its effects would be offset by the accompanying rise in consumer spending power.
I don't follow. Naively I'd assume that the only difference is that the workers no longer have a part of their labor appropriated by capital owners. Which means that they can sell stuff cheaper while getting paid more.
When not carried out in the service of a ruling class, there would be no incentive to abuse patients systemically.
I consider making me like work to be a form of abuse. I don't see how a ruling class wouldn't arise naturally given how anyone who doesn't like the arrangement is considered mentally ill and gets medicated until they are content.
That's not to mention that we don't have anything clean like Focus yet, so "fixing" people who don't like to work will involve a lot of collateral damage.
I don't follow. Naively I'd assume that the only difference is that the workers no longer have a part of their labor appropriated by capital owners. Which means that they can sell stuff cheaper while getting paid more.
That would usually be the case, but there could be a case wherein workers could still not make a living wage if they continued selling the product at the same price. So they’d have to raise those prices.
But everyone making the switch would effectively raise the minimum wage, so people would be able to pay more for the product.
I consider making me like work to be a form of abuse.
Well, no one would make you like work, just like they don’t under the current system. They’d just expect you to be willing to put in 15 or so hours a week to do your job, there’s no need to get all We Happy Few about it.
I don't see how a ruling class wouldn't arise naturally given how anyone who doesn't like the arrangement is considered mentally ill
It doesn’t apply to everyone who doesn’t like the arrangement, just those who absolutely refuse to work, which would most likely be the result of debilitating depression or antisocial tendencies.
Anyone who just doesn’t like the arrangement would be free to voice their concerns at a community meeting and even call a vote to change it, not to mention to renegotiate their contract. Even confined patients would be able to participate remotely.
People who refuse to work are criminalized by the current system and sucked into a cycle of unemployability and recidivism. There isn’t really a basis to claim that medicalizing that process would have to make it any more invasive, especially since they’re not to be isolated from society at large.
"fixing" people who don't like to work will involve a lot of collateral damage.
They don’t have to like to work. No system requires people to enjoy their work. This system would better allow people to do what they enjoy or care about than the alternatives, though.
Also by the way, there's an interesting counterargument you can use on fans of Capitalism: somehow every single firm, including the very big and successful ones, doesn't run on Capitalism internally. It's, like, a mix of feudalism and socialism, with increasingly unabashed communism in software companies closer to the core, and any attempts by the managers to try performance evaluations and shit considered a bad move resulting in major talent drain.
And some of those companies would rank pretty high on the list of countries by population, so how comes capitalism is the best now, nerd?
You get a lot of butthurt and some very interesting discussions from it, in my experience.
First of all, the entire history of liberalism and democracy and shit is dedicated to building systems that can function with authorities that are not good and just, and are regularly replaced without bloodshed.
I just want to mention a couple that stand out in this respect.
So, the court system. We don't trust neither the prosecutor nor the defender to not be biased assholes, so we have both trying to find truth in an adversarial setting, expecting them to be as biased as they possibly can. And it works much better than if we had just a single judge.
But there's more, the real mindblowingly good shit is where the judge can throw out unlawfully obtained evidence. So now and then a totally guilty murderer walks free, everyone knows that he's guilty, but this acts as a powerful deterrent for the police doing bad shit, which is really good long-term. This is awesome. How long do you think it would take an anarchist community to reinvent this approach? Could they figure it ever, given how counter-intuitive it is, and that you should be thinking in terms of social structures to get it?
A similar thing is liability shift as implemented by Visa and Mastercard. Like, naturally, getting everyone to switch from mag-stripe cards to chip cards is hard because while the end result is massively reduced losses from fraud, each individual bank issuing cards or Point-Of-Service terminals has to spend a lot of money on switching, without much benefit for themselves until everyone else has switched as well. That's a typical tragedy of the commons situation or something.
So everyone agreed (or was forced to by the majority) that past a certain date (2005-2008 in EU, 2015-still not in the US) whenever there's a dispute, whoever didn't have the chip capability automatically loses. The bank can still sue whoever goes to supermarkets with no chip-POS, buys a lot of shit, and then disputes the purchase, but as far as Visa and MC were concerned those disputes were instantly resolved towards the cheater. So everyone went and upgraded their shit.
By the way, the idea of two-tier conflict resolution system, first the rules and arbitration between banks, but then the usual courts as a fallback, is awesome! Actually it's three-tier even, a bank might take a loss and still refund their client.
Also by the way, the dispute resolution system between banks has a genius touch: there are four steps, the card issuer bank sends a dispute to the acquiring bank of the merchant, then the acquirer sends a message back with the details of the purchase, then the issuer might send another message requesting more details, then the acquirer may respond, and if that doesn't settle it then it's up to the Visa or MC Arbitrage Committee. The genius touch is that every message here is also a transaction that transfers the entire amount of disputed money to the institution that sent the message. How neat is that? Can you figure out what problem this little touch completely prevents?
I really really enjoy clever social systems like that.
/r/drama people are so fucking weird, it's like a cliquey extremely online smarmy circlejerk of radical centrist losers who sustain themselves on whatever """drama""" they can find which is almost always shit of absolutely zero consequence.
Oh my sweet little SRDine. The only difference between you and the retards on this sub is that we are able to have fun with our mental disabilities, when you simply choose to wallow in it.
Centrist? Are you sure? It's much more like leftists pretending to be centrist in that case. Pretty sure this place is pro: ANTIFA, feminism, gamergate, Anita Sarkeesian, BLM, LGBT+, anti-Trump, etc. This sub even per-emtively banned people from CringeAnarchy (right wingers + edgy centrists). This place is 1 part snowflake, 1 part SJW, 1 part dramaqueen, and 1 part smarmy EMO teen.
This sub is designed to be a cesspool of extreme altright deplorables. If you can't see that then you just haven't caught on to the dog whistles yet. Make no mistake, everyone here is a literal fascist hardcore gamergator.
Analysis of /u/TheKomuso's activity in political subreddits over the past 1000 comments and submissions.
Account Created: 4 years, 2 months, 0 days ago
Summary: This user does not have enough activity in political subs for analysis or has no clear leanings, they might be one of those weirdo moderate types. I don't trust them.
Analysis of /u/Momruepari's activity in political subreddits over the past 1000 comments and submissions.
Account Created: 8 months, 5 days ago
Summary: This user does not have enough activity in political subs for analysis or has no clear leanings, they might be one of those weirdo moderate types. I don't trust them.
Behold, good people, the famous memeing and triggering tactics of the right, clearly they are a force to be beheld with their many chins and unwashed asses.
282 comments
1 DistortedLines 2019-05-01
Fuck cops lol
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
only if they buy me dinner first
1 kanga_lover 2019-05-01
dinner of doughnuts for you? yeah, you'd like that you fat fuck.
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
fat is beautiful, and i need you to not use hate speech
the largest members of the population are the most valuable. you disgusting thincels are out here causing all the problems of society
1 kanga_lover 2019-05-01
tis true, the only thing uglier than my personality is my grossly withered body. we should hook up sometime bby ;)
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
sorry but
if ur thin i won't stick it in
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
trans women are men
1 Coonass_alt 2019-05-01
Unbelievably based.
1 zyx121 2019-05-01
Nah
1 Penis_Retard 2019-05-01
But it's true
1 tendiesreee 2019-05-01
Wrong.
1 BernieMadeoffSanders 2019-05-01
RIGHT
1 rosa_deserved_it 2019-05-01
.
1 dramasexual 2019-05-01
I fucked ur mum last night xD
1 SnapshillBot 2019-05-01
jesus fuck, you people. I've now unsubscribed, which is a shame, because a lot of greentexts are genuinely funny, but this alt-right underbelly is just unbearable.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 le_epic_xd_part_2 2019-05-01
Cope
1 FarAwayFellow 2019-05-01
Didn’t know Snappy was a Chapo
1 vicedets 2019-05-01
Chappy
1 jacob_charles_666 2019-05-01
Great movie
1 MikeStoklasaBackup 2019-05-01
He cute
1 a_cute_grill 2019-05-01
you wouldn't say that if you knew the donuts represent the number of minorities he shot today 😢 not so cute no eh you absolute monster!
1 jPaolo 2019-05-01
That makes him even cuter.
1 Ketosis_Sam 2019-05-01
And it makes me erect
1 Megazor 2019-05-01
Officer 👮🏻♂️Doughnut 🍩 can cavity search me anytime 😉 🥰
1 throwawayserver012 2019-05-01
Boot licker
1 MikeStoklasaBackup 2019-05-01
Cope
1 Inside-3 2019-05-01
I'll gladly lick the boot of anyone in a handsome uniform.
1 PostDemocracyISNOW 2019-05-01
Honestly, what is it with chapoLARP and foot fetish promotion? I guess CTH and CBT are close, did a pornhub typo start your LARP?
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
H O G G O R G G O
1 PostDemocracyISNOW 2019-05-01
Teens and weird pervy obsessions are like communism and malnutrition
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
O heck freakin yes
1 TsumugiIsMyWaifu 2019-05-01
idk. why are all cops overweight? It's weird
1 NoahHaders 2019-05-01
same reason all baseball players are fat.
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-05-01
you know why
1 NoahHaders 2019-05-01
you don't need a lot of physical fitness to hit a home run / shoot a black person. Just a moment of upper body strength and a good eye.
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
genetics, obviously
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-05-01
born blue
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
Matter race
1 [deleted] 2019-05-01
[deleted]
1 MikeStoklasaBackup 2019-05-01
Because they're American
1 degorius 2019-05-01
They sit on their asses more than office workers, cops are generally fatter than the general public.
1 shallowm 2019-05-01
aa
1 Dramatictuna 2019-05-01
40%
1 MikeStoklasaBackup 2019-05-01
It's a good thing
1 ThePeoplesResistance 2019-05-01
13:55
1 Kilo914 2019-05-01
But he kinda quirky tho 😳
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
post a picture of a landlord next
and then maybe somebody who worked hard to get a good job that pays them well
1 ArtisanalCollabo 2019-05-01
Or a job application
1 Mod_Impersonator 2019-05-01
literally shaking rn
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-05-01
lol at applying for jobs
1 Grape_Gatsby 2019-05-01
Bonus points if the hard worker is an immigrant who came here legally
1 LeEpicMemerDude69420 2019-05-01
Especially if they’re from an eastern bloc country.
1 xthek 2019-05-01
Think bigger. Cuba or Venezuela.
1 USABOBFL 2019-05-01
SOCIALISM DOESN'T WORK.
1 Bobbafeck 2019-05-01
It sure helped out the Banks during the crash.
1 Intensely_Accurate 2019-05-01
Everything the government does is socialism, the more the government spends, the more socialister it is.
1 jamesangleton 2019-05-01
Socialismer*
1 CMDR-FusionCor3 2019-05-01
Sociautistic*
1 Bobbafeck 2019-05-01
Probably a good thing because otherwise we would all end up in an Ayn Randian, Bioshock, Dystopian future.
1 Intensely_Accurate 2019-05-01
If only.
1 Subscrib-2-PewDiePie 2019-05-01
Real dystopia has never been tried
1 Bobbafeck 2019-05-01
Not sure Dystopia was ever something anyone has ever intended. It tends to be the result of someone's delusions of grandeur. One person's Dystopia is another's Utopia. North Korea would probably be the closest according to my limited intellect and I am not saying that because it is a dictatorship.
1 Grape_Gatsby 2019-05-01
Flair when
1 MinimumAdagio 2019-05-01
Probably a bad thing*
1 Bobbafeck 2019-05-01
Feel free to expand or continue.
1 collectijism 2019-05-01
Cubans dont exist. And also the only venezuelans you see are the white rich ones with higher oqs that could actually help the country turn the power back on and help the dying starving sick people. They not the ReAL PrOliteRiAt!!!
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
Just post a pic of south Florida dude. Lots of Hispanics here who’ve made themselves a good life through working hard and getting educated.
1 xthek 2019-05-01
And chapos absolutely hate that. They hate those people, call them traitors, petty bourgeoise, oppressors, etc.
There's nothing these privileged mayo kids from San Francisco hate more than well-off brown people who earned their success. They want brown people to be on the right side of history (and die of starvation).
tl;dr dude horseshoe theory lmao
1 HIVnotAdeathSentence 2019-05-01
Pitbull
Light skinned, Cuban immigrant, and a successful rapper.
1 Grape_Gatsby 2019-05-01
The thread would inevitably include some form of the chapocel mantra: "Communism was never meant to work on a large scale."
1 GalaxyBejdyk 2019-05-01
Wait, I'm not sure I understand. Do Chapo's have a vendetta against Eastern Europeans or something?
1 multiplesifl 2019-05-01
Should I post a picture of my landlord? He's a cop!
1 NoahHaders 2019-05-01
REEEEEEEEE
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-05-01
https://i0.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/nr-illustration-bernie-sanders.jpg?fit=786%2C460&ssl=1
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
how can you tell that a non-Moroccan landlord is a landlord just by looking at them?
1 Osterion 2019-05-01
We need an interracial landlord + cop combo to trigger everyone
1 Enzo_SAWFT 2019-05-01
I can see why. Honey Glazed suck. Cake donuts are superior.
1 Some_Khajiit 2019-05-01
Infidel.
1 [deleted] 2019-05-01
[deleted]
1 igq98 2019-05-01
COPE
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2019-05-01
Inshallah all cake donuts will be thrown off a roof.
1 Leakylocks 2019-05-01
preach
1 BasicallyADoctor 2019-05-01
🍩 THIS
1 deeteeohbee 2019-05-01
Those are for people who really fucking like cake, not people who actually like donuts.
1 pi_over_3 2019-05-01
Chapos are too busy praising the military/police in Venezuela for crushing the protests.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
wait when
1 nybbas 2019-05-01
Yesterday. Probably a comment about it in my history not too far back if you want to see the undeleted thread. Please just promise not to read any of my other comments. You don't have my consent for that.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
ok i ctrl-F’d lol
i mean it does sound like they’re talking about the failed coup rather than the general protests, or at least trying to
don’t get me wrong, they’re still retarded, but coup bad
1 vtesterlwg 2019-05-01
why is coup bad
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
Maybe this American backed coup in South America. I have a feeling.
1 SpiceAndEvNice 2019-05-01
An American backed coups would’ve had Maduro out of a fucking heli already. This is just Venezuela doing shit on their own which is why it’s been so difficult.
But, and a big but, Leopoldo Lopez is free and under Spanish protection so this is unironically a huge win for all us Hispanics so oppose Maduro across Latin America.
1 nahnotreallytho 2019-05-01
This but unironically
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
Unironically believing this.
1 nahnotreallytho 2019-05-01
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
1 zyx121 2019-05-01
Because it's instigated by a no-name political instill action by the US to do more fascism
1 vtesterlwg 2019-05-01
you should be peacefully expelled
1 zyx121 2019-05-01
And Guaido deserves the express out of the country, preferably this planet
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
Gringos fuck off
1 zyx121 2019-05-01
Maduro bad, coup good, America help
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
Okay, what are your galaxy brained alternatives then, what’s the course for actual economic/social recovery in Venezuela then
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
bc coup-holder is even worse and even less of a democratic representative than maduro
1 vtesterlwg 2019-05-01
drama = coup
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
drama = failed coup too, though
1 jacob_charles_666 2019-05-01
Are you still having fruit fly problems?
You should try gassing them - that solution has been a good final one in the past
1 nybbas 2019-05-01
Dude they are fucking everywhere. They arent fruit flies either, dirtier and grosser. Just disgusting tiny gnats. Put out an apple cider vinegar trap and they didnt touch it.
I just need a way to ensure the purity of my household.
1 carthoris26 2019-05-01
I had an infestation of those in our turtle tank. I had to throw out all the rocks and buy new ones then bleach everything, that's the only thing that got rid of them. Find out where they're spawning and throw away everything you can then soak the rest in bleach.
We've always keep our house spotless otherwise, and we're still finding dead gnats in light fixtures or above windows five years later.
1 nybbas 2019-05-01
Little fuckers.
1 jacob_charles_666 2019-05-01
Sorry to hear that mate. I hate any pests with a passion. I’m an ethnobotanist on the side and have often dealt with spider mites and scale, with scale being the devil incarnate in pest form and I wish for their utter extinction.
I hope the meat trap works for you. I’m a fragrance chemist, so I can look to see if there are any pheromones that gnats/fruit flies may be attracted to. They’re usually pretty common and inexpensive, and gnats are so prevalent I’m sure they’ve been a target for development. That’s the best way to isolate and eliminate airbornes. Send me a PM and I’ll link what I find there.
1 HyruleforHyruleans 2019-05-01
Try some old fruit or a piece of raw meat in the trap instead. It'll smell rank, but it'll work
1 nybbas 2019-05-01
Might have to try the meat thing. Thanks :D
1 HyruleforHyruleans 2019-05-01
Found it.
1 nybbas 2019-05-01
There it is!
1 turtle_stank 2019-05-01
Don't forget Chapocels declaring Russian influence to be good now
1 Zac1245 2019-05-01
Is there anyone more inconsistent than chapocells?
1 Chapocel 2019-05-01
🇷🇺🤖👌
1 -Shank- 2019-05-01
IIRC the OP of that comment was baiting, but the Chapocels upvoted it, unironically agreed with him and sperged at anyone trying to call him out.
1 betazoom78 2019-05-01
Did you know 40 percent of Venezuelan police have ran over protestors?
1 ShlomoTheDoorHolder_ 2019-05-01
13% of Venezuelans run over 50% of protesters
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
American cops and military: * uphold white supremacy, imperialism, and capitalism *
Venezuelan cops and military: * fight against imperialism and anti-democratic coups *
r/Drama: I literally can't tell the difference!
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
Lmao running over abuelita y su ñietos is protecting the country against fascism.
Also, you faggots are the first ones to cry to cops when shit doesn’t go your way or you see a colored person enter your neighborhoods so don’t act like you’re some grand savior of my poor brown ass, dude.
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
Hahaha what are you talking about, no we don't. You're so obviously confused about the difference between liberals and leftists.
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
Brb, going to rob you
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
Except the leftist didn't call the cops asking for protection. That would be idiotic of them, since cops hate leftists and are rarely willing o protect them. What actually happens is the city deploys the cops to protest zones whether the leftists like it or not.
1 PracticalOnions 2019-05-01
If they didn’t protect you you people would be killed, lol.
A bunch of white upper middle class manlets aren’t the proles, papito.
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
I noticed you quickly pivoted away from your original point about leftists like to call the cops. Again, cops don't protect leftists. The two groups are literally existentially opposed to one another.
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2019-05-01
Then why haven't the weedy leftists in the videos been stomped to shit by the cops.
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
Because there are people recording their actions
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2019-05-01
And why would they care if they're the ones in power? Just sprinkle some crack.
1 a_few 2019-05-01
I mean chapos might existentially hate middle class cops but if you guys called one and didn’t screech in their faces when they arrived they would help you no questions asked
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
Yeah, just like they help thousands of rape victims no questions asked. Honestly, if you think cops are in the business of helping people no questions asked, then you need to stop watching Paw Patrol and face reality.
1 shallowm 2019-05-01
gdagf
1 fat_fist_fister 2019-05-01
Chapocels: we need an armed uprising of the people against the oppressive government for the betterment of their lives.
Venezuelan populace: arms themselves to fight against the oppressive government for the betterment of their lives
Chapocels: MOMMY THE BROWN PEOPLE ARENT DOING WHAT I WANT THEM TO DO. MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP.
1 Shuwin 2019-05-01
US intervention is going to make people’s lives worse, not better. see: all of American history after 1945.
1 HIVnotAdeathSentence 2019-05-01
It's always nice to see a revolution put down.
1 gourdFamiliar 2019-05-01
God I just want him to taze me stupid and tackle me. I want to feel the sweat dripping off his neckfolds as he handcuffs me and goes to town on my bussy. I wanna hear him grunt, "I'm gonna let that tight ass seize the means of reproduction," as he glazes my doughnut hole. Then I want to be extrajudicially executed because he got spooked by me reaching to push his thick white ropes of oppression back up my anus.
1 lolbitchcalmdown 2019-05-01
aCaB fOrTy PeRcEnT
fuckin pigs
cops remind me of my stepdad Dale
“Make your bed, Bryson!”
“Don’t touch your sister’s private area, Bryson!”
fucking fascists
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
BRYSOOOOOOOOOOOON. BRYSON GET BACK HE- AWWWW FUCK
1 moondoggy101 2019-05-01
We need to start a campaign of responding to post hog with post your feminine penis or neo pussy.
1 byobombs 2019-05-01
... or bussy?
1 moondoggy101 2019-05-01
yeah but according to the chapo census you have like a 1/10 chance of seriously offending them
1 Kilo914 2019-05-01
Implying that the other 9 won't shit their pants if you make fun of a tranny
1 Some_Khajiit 2019-05-01
No one wants to see that 🤮🤮🤮
1 a_few 2019-05-01
So that’s why they ask for pictures, so the can measure their fenis up with a real one
1 throwawayserver012 2019-05-01
40%
1 loli_esports 2019-05-01
I think more than 40% of all cops are based
1 throwawayserver012 2019-05-01
“Based”, oh so you are a alt right pig?
1 loli_esports 2019-05-01
All Cops Are Based is a chapo dog whistle
1 throwawayserver012 2019-05-01
How about you shut up before i make you shut up
1 loli_esports 2019-05-01
chapo is a cultural appropriation of "capo" and thus racist
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
wait
cultural appropriation isn’t racist
1 loli_esports 2019-05-01
yes it is always
1 trapochaphouse 2019-05-01
Lmao please do, I think we'd all like to see that.
1 byobombs 2019-05-01
You couldn’t make anyone do anything except cringe.
1 AlmostFamoose 2019-05-01
Please do make him shut up. Leave your house and do something.
1 xthek 2019-05-01
how about you post hog chud
1 FrostBittenSalsa 2019-05-01
Who's alt is this? I gotta know
1 pepperouchau 2019-05-01
We're taking the word back as devoted Lil B enthusiasts
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
based on what
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
"Based" mean that they are free-basing cocaine instead of whatever you normies do with it.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
freebase, dissolve, inject
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
yeah don’t do that
1 -Shank- 2019-05-01
But enough about the Chapos
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
The study you're referring to: https://sci-hub.tw/10.1177/0886260510368156
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Ohhh so that’s what he meant
Don’t the racial and sex factors just strengthen the “all cops are bastards” argument though? Since that means it’s tied to the cops themselves rather than to the demographics that make them up
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
Yeah, but that has all sorts of hilarious policy implications and all around uncomfortable statistics!
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
policy implication: abolish the police
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
Did you know that black communities were the biggest supporters of War on Drugs originally? This is because they knew firsthand that the natural state of a community (not necessarily black, but drug-riddled) from which the police withdraws is not people drumming in hippie circles, it's druggies robbing you to get money for their fix and dealers spraying lead in competition for providing druggies with their fix. Also, rapes.
So with that tried and found unsatisfactory the next policy implication would be to have a whiter, maler police. Statistics say that this might or might not result in better outcomes.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
I’m actually pretty damn sure they never supported sentencing for personal use, mandatory minimums, or increased policing, but if you stretch “War on Drugs” to apply to literally all anti-drug campaigning then sure, they were in on the ground floor for that one
yeah good thing the War on Drugs fixed all that and didn’t just lead to a more heavily armed, militant, and paranoid dealers or a cycle of endless recidivism and escalation of criminality
also the cops would be replaced by medical personnel, plainclothes detectives and basically a neighborhood watch, ijs
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
I meant this https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/when-black-america-was-pro-police/524481/
That's because we live in a hellworld where having good intentions doesn't guarantee good outcomes of the policy you lobbied for. That's not because there are evil people who sabotage your policies, that's because in a hellworld any given policy is most likely to be self-defeating and worse.
So replace cops with cops but this time we make sure they are nice people. That's the problem, cops aren't nice people, and we solve it not by making and supporting systems that force cops to be nice (like for example the part where illegally obtained evidence can be thrown out and a murderer walks free), but by simply ensuring that only nice people are cops. This is going to work in this hellworld.
Btw, the "medical personnel" part reminds me of the way the untreatable schizophrenics were thrown out to the streets and became homeless or prisoners because of the conjunction of the liberal "involuntary hospitalization is evil" and conservative "yay cut down the costs of mental hospitals", so a large part of the US prison population actually maps to permanently hospitalized mental patients in less retarded countries.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
That was a mistake. You're about to find out the hard way why.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Ohhh, so like “black community” as in the one around D.C., like in Black Dynamite
I guess that’s different. Even they changed their tune by Reagan though
that’s the state for ya
personally i think “good intentions” is a pretty vague barometer though
the idea that bad guys generally sabotage good policies is like, almost the opposite of what i believe lol
Nah. No chief, no uniforms (except for the medics), no mandatory weapon administration (guns are fine, just bring your own), no legal protections, no right to question civilians for perceived civil offenses, no obligation to uphold private property rights, no holding, no tickets, no fines (for individuals at least), and we pretend like the jail is a hospital. Other differences, too, but I don’t wanna waste all my time on that
Reagan, Clinton, two birds. Liberals hate a lot of the stuff they support if you call it by the wrong name lol
Yep, the idea is we can take that dynamic and stretch it to an absurd degree.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
If only you could put that energy into your relationships
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
No, that's the hellworld. Whenever the state withdrew from Detroit, the normal people begged it to come back. Because the absence of state is gangs, much more and worse of them.
Obviously, because the entire basis of chapocel ideology and how it's different from fascism is having good intentions. So you look around and everyone has good intentions and it's pretty vague.
I'd send all people with good intentions and social engineering aspirations to a gulag where they are forced to plant potatoes, harvest potatoes, peel potatoes, boil potatoes, also cut trees, make trees into planks, build dwellings from planks, shit like that. For a year, mandatory, around 18yo, like replace the first year of highschool with an immersive hands-on "this is why the man-made world around you exists" experience. Then some of them decide that they are actually OK with that and don't waste 4 more years, and those who'd prefer to work in AC rooms get one hell of a stimulus and also an inoculation against commie bullshit, "in the utopia some people would pick potatoes because they enjoy the process", lmao.
But what would the 50% of the chapos who want to design uniforms for gay policemen do then?
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
If only you could put that energy into your relationships
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Hellworld’s run by states and capital.
Never happened.
If you’re just talking about some kinda no-go zone, tha Bluff was a no-go zone for decades and it didn’t make anything any shittier than it started out as.
Gangs exist anyway
The state IS a gang, so who cares
Gangs are driven by the pursuit of capital and/or authority, so they’re kind of a nonfactor in this little scheme I’m proposing
I wouldn’t know lol. The only episode of CTH I ever heard was the one with the Mike Reiss interview, and I only ever go to the sub from /r/drama links to tell them they’re wrong.
But if they really think authorial intent and whether it’s “good” is the deciding factor in how power structures play out, they’re fucking retarded lol. You can twist any ideology into something that sounds like it benefits society.
what the fuck are you talking about lol
literally every communist/commie-adjacent movement has had some kind of mandatory workweek
it’s just that we’ve got it down to 20 hours now. 15 once the kinks are worked out. 8 once the machines overthrow us.
idk probably die
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
You can type 10,000 characters and you decided that these were the one's that you wanted.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
When Stalin ended up the head of the USSR and killed and starved a lot of people, that wasn't the doing of some capitalist state.
When Mao ended up the head of state and killed and starved even more people, that wasn't because of enemy state machinations.
When Pol Pot starved and murdered a quarter of his people, you noticing the motif already?
But enough about dictators, when another male feminist turns out to be a rapist, when DSA's Medicare for All canvassing is shutdown by DSA disabled rights activists, when every single lefty group despite being specifically designed to not have a power hierarchy is torn apart by power struggles between cliques, that's not the work of COINTELPRO agents protecting the interests of the capital, even though the lefties doing that to themselves are functionally indistinguishable from hostile agents.
It's because we live in a hellworld were most ideas have catastrophic consequences and most selection processes optimize for the exact opposite of what you want them to.
Imagine living in a nice word where you notice, say, that sparrows eat some of the grain during harvest, order peasants to kill all sparrows, and everything goes as expected, nothing bad happens and you just end up with some extra grain for the people. But no, we live in a hellworld where as a result bugs eat most of the harvest and 20 million Chinese die.
Or imagine living in a world where you notice that there's some antisocial assholes, establish a Ministry of Love that identifies and gulags them, and that ministry doesn't end up consisting entirely of murderous sociopaths. Imagine living in a world where the Vanguard has kind and thoughtful leaders for a change, just once, instead of always ending up with the most ruthless psychopaths the hellworld has to offer in charge.
But no, we live in a hellworld were most ideas have catastrophic consequences and most selection processes optimize for the exact opposite of what you want them to, so all of the above weren't super unlikely unfortunate accidents that surely wouldn't happen this time.
But of course, and that's a hilarious thing about the hellworld, it also ensures that whenever someone manages to find some ideas that work and erect a structure that keeps the worst of the hellworld out, next thing you know there's a bunch of sheltered retards who point at the walls protecting them and say "this is the hellworld, let's raze it to the ground".
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
Sorry ma'am, looks like his delusions have gotten worse. We'll have to admit him,
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Nope. It was the doing of some (arguably) socialist state.
There’s a reason I said “states” first. People can never be trusted with (arbitrary) authority.
screenshot-2014-06-30-604x380.png
just as an FYI though most of the deaths under Mao, like under Stalin, were due to a state trying to enforce shitty agricultural practices
ok also look up Chiang Kai-Shek tho
Obviously another state, but Pol Pot wasn’t even a communist lol. He was basically just an anti-Western fascist.
the fuck kind of sense does that make? sounds like poor planning tbh.
MAREZ, Freetown Christiania, Mondragon Corp, Rewe, Dreamtime Village, Revolutionary Catalonia, Rojava. Last two dealt with existential external threats, but not internal ones.
I mean, sometimes it is, but obviously that excuse isn’t necessary if it doesn’t happen every time
Sparrows play a significant role in the ecosystem lol, that’d be retarded. This is why we have the natural sciences.
As in the administrators or the patients? Can’t be violating the hippocratic oath, doc, the focus is on rehab.
Murderous sociopaths are in charge of the things we have already, they’re just given free reign to abuse currently.
staaate
The weird thing is, I totally agree with the basic sentiment here, I’m just saying the solution is to prevent people from having authority over others (with a few rotating exceptions, like ship captains), not just hope we can make sure that the authorities are always good and just.
None of the above ever happened to an anarchist society, and there’s been like hundreds of those. It doesn’t have to be “different,” it just has to happen more often.
The funny thing about the hellworld is that just about all its worst tendencies are made far, far worse, and far more destructive, through unnecessary vertical hierarchy.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
No, don't reply like this, please do another wall of unhinged rant please.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
any time
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
Don't we need an explanation for why the majority of leftist mass movements start with a commitment to equality and freedom for all and end up with oppressive dictatorships that'd make fascists blush? It's like I'm giving you an example after example of AIDS patients who died from rapidly spreading skin cancer and you say that their problem was that they got skin cancer.
Oh, it was a hilarious trainwreck, here's an example of drama.
But anyways, that makes TOTAL sense if you realize that we live in a hellworld and that has nothing to do with states or capital. I strongly suggest reading https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm that I linked earlier, it gives a lot of examples of that shit happening.
Basically: any community that tries to do anything real is aching for and has more than enough natural nucleation points for structure, that is, hierarchy and inequality. There are people who take initiative and there are people who like to be told what to do, there's the guy who has a car and so gets more say on where we print pamphlets, there's a girl who volunteered to be the treasurer and so also gets to call shots more than the average member. And if the community refuses to have an explicit structure that could be made transparent and accountable, then it inevitably grows a hidden structure and it suuuuucks.
Thank you, that's interesting. Maybe I should be a little less pessimistic.
No, we have respect for ecosystem in part because Mao went and did that, the madman. And the desire to avoid yet unknown catastrophic consequences is why we have the freedom of speech, as a social institution or a shared agreement that we should listen to arguments that try to discover truth instead of suppressing anything that goes against the prevailing opinion.
It seems to me that most leftists are optimists, don't believe that we live in a hellworld, and don't see much value in free speech, including anarchists, you don't need a particular Mao guy to get offended and deplatform someone.
First of all, the entire history of liberalism and democracy and shit is dedicated to building systems that can function with authorities that are not good and just, and are regularly replaced without bloodshed.
Second, have you noticed that there's no "Capitalists" protesting Mondragon Corp or REWE, because workers deserve to be oppressed? Like, not a single one in the history of ever?
I've been noticing lately that there are usually two completely different parallel non-intersecting discussions happening simultaneously in the two-corner rotation of the world. On one plane you have people arguing that capitalism is immoral because it doesn't give fair compensation to workers etc etc, and against them are the people arguing that capitalism is moral because property rights follow from the NAP. On the other plane there are people arguing that capitalism is a necessary evil because it's a no shit magical alien technology that produces mostly pro-social outcomes despite not 1/10th, not 1/3rd, not 49%, but everyone involved being a greedy asshole, and against them are people who say that no no no, we can just ask everyone to work according to their ability and solve everything.
And I notice that most of the time it's the anti-capitalist person from the moral plane arguing with a pro-capitalist person from the "works or doesn't work" plane.
Like, when you say "unnecessary vertical hierarchy", do you mean unnecessary as in it's there because selfish capitalists want workers to suffer, or unnecessary as in we can get rid of some of it and not end up with empty shelves like USSR or Venezuela? btw this comment is super enlightening about all this stuff.
Finally, I'm concerned about the way we call the necessary hierarchies. I was reading through Wikipedia articles about your examples of anarchist communities and this stood out to me: sooner or later a community will have a problem with bad people doing bad things. And then (or hopefully before actually) it has a choice: either it can stick to the "no authorities" principle literally and get a bunch of people shot by gangs like the Freetown Christiania and be all like surprisedpikachu.jpg, or do create authorities that are basically the police, only a _better police, and then be called out from the left for having a police. And also representative democracy but better, and so on. At which point: why do you need a revolution if you still have all the same social institutions only better, which you can reach evolutionarily?
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
K
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
i’m honestly really interested in your numbers here in finding “the majority,” because AFAIK authoritarian lefty movements usually don’t pose as libertarian lefty movements
If that’s the weirdass analogy you’re going with, then my AIDS is cancer-proof.
This piece, which I’d actually seen a video about prior to this conversation but hadn’t read before, discusses the potential tyranny of a vocal elite in a system with no formal hierarchy.
The only examples it provides are of small feminist cliques and the “New Left.” Nothing about anarchism, socialism, communism, or syndicalism, and not even examples of actual tyranny, just informal hierarchy.
I do believe the concepts translate, and consider its information important to establishing a liberated society, but more as a word of caution than an outright dismissal of the idea.
Structure is needed, but hierarchy isn’t necessary to structure.
It does mean some inequality of roles, though. But that’s more like “diversity.”
The history of liberal democracy— which is still a far cry above most earlier systems, mind you!— is full of bloodshed.
Yeah Mao spent too much time thinking about guns and not enough time thinking about science
Yep, freedom is good.
Completely unfettered free speech has never existed though, and definitionally can’t exist, because speech can fetter other speech.
I think anarchism is the most effective way to neuter said hellworld, and in a liberal society deplatforming basically is a form of speech.
I tend to be pretty comfortable with deplatforming hate speech that has a chilling effect on other speech. At that point you’re basically choosing between shutting up two people, might as well silence the dick.
Unlike most though, I do think Nazis deserve a platform under the current system, they just don’t deserve to use other people’s platforms. Though I still prefer that they do, because also unlike most, I’m willing to push back, and it’s a lot easier to do that when they’re not stuck in a safe space.
Speaking of injuns, Canada was still forcibly sterilizing them in 2017. Canada.
Cooperatives work with the current capitalist system. Other companies are not existentially threatened by their participation, and can even benefit from it.
Capitalists never push back against other (non-subsidiary) companies unionizing, only their own, because they gauge success by profit margins. Any company that unionizes or turns cooperative has to sacrifices their own margins to some extent for the sake of the employees. So if their competitors do it, that’s just going to make their own company more attractive to investors.
Besides, that’d just be wasting energy and sort of giving the game away, wouldn’t it? They wouldn’t want people associating socialism with employee satisfaction.
The ability of capitalism to produce pro-social outcomes is greatly exaggerated by organizations like the World Bank (who erroneously claim global poverty rates are on the decline), though not entirely baseless. The improvements in social conditions are primarily due to technological advancement (which can be facilitated by capitalism, but also by many other things), not to private property rights.
Further, many under capitalism do not act like greedy assholes, despite endless incentives to do so. Social workers, firefighters, schoolteachers— all these jobs are relatively low-paying and often come with plenty of problems of their own.
Work would still be compulsory under almost any system. The mechanisms for enforcing it would just be different.
The second one.
USSR had empty shelves to begin with. Venezuela actually got empty shelves stocked under Chavez (who only got them 30% of the way to state socialism, and just went for a welfare state otherwise), then lost everything due to a combination of a drop in oil prices, the leader’s actions (Maduro’s embargo), and the interference of foreign banks.
Necessary hierarchies mainly apply to potentially life-risking ventures where quick adaptability is key. Operating a ship, performing surgery, etc.
Other temporary hierarchies can be implemented at the behest of a group for any reason, though— say a factory is complex enough to benefit from a rotating foreman. The point is to not leave anyone with arbitrary power.
Or they can just anesthesize them. Medical goons got you covered.
What’s this gang after, anyway? Respect? Commodities to sell in another society?
The only thing “revolution” would be required for is taking over the companies basically, I mean in theory all the other shit could be handled by existing democratic processes.
I should note my model of revolution is essentially just a mass labor strike, though
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
That's great and all, but I asked for my burger without cheese.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
First of all, I want to say that apparently we don't disagree on a lot of points, or if disagree then in a way that can't really productively resolved, like I have my vague gut feelings, you have yours. However some things I do disagree about.
Do self-admitted authoritarian lefties even exist? Or alternatively how do you define libertarian left in a way that doesn't exclude everyone who wants to expropriate the means of production at least a little instead of joining a co-op or going to the jungle and building their own factory there?
So you don't have anything against the US governance system, in principle, since it doesn't have any hereditary and very few lifetime tenures (for arguably good reasons)? If not for capitalism, would you call the entirety of the US government, including the police, an example of an anarchist governance?
I think that a very productive approach is to switch from "freedom of speech" to "freedom to listen". It covers most cases where most people agree that it's good (especially various kinds of whistleblowing), excludes most cases where most people agree that it's bad (when it interferes with your freedom to listen to other people by spamming you with comments telling you that you're a fag), and provides a clear and reasoned guidance for cases where antifa infringe on the right of the students to listen to a deplatformed person.
Wait a second. Co-ops don't have "profit margins for investors", or else are in the same boat as everyone when deciding to voluntarily take investments (that is, loans).
The only way co-ops can be less efficient on the free market is if they are in fact less efficient. Which poses a conundrum: if all firms were co-ops then it would be better for the workers but worse for the consumers because the losses would be passed onto them, but workers and consumers are the same people in that world, so...
Fortunately two of your examples show that co-ops can be very successful, so maybe it's a mute point. Unless that is you really want to expropriate the means of production without making an actually reasonable argument for why the socialist revolution can't come in the form of co-ops quietly taking over the world.
Again, you're too eager to argue in the plane where your opponents are evil and greedy. The much more reasonable explanation is that they just really like having full supermarket shelves and honestly cheer for the second largest supermarket chain in Germany because that's really all that it's about.
Btw this means a lot for your attempts at socialist propaganda: it means that pointing out REWE would get people on your side, while trying to shame people for being evil and hating co-ops is guaranteed to backfire because they don't hate co-ops and don't perceive themselves as evil.
Citations would be very welcome.
Just a funny thing, are you aware that you make literally the same argument as Mencius Moldbug here?
It had reasonably full shelves for a while, but then lost everything due to stagnation inherent to command economy, and by that I don't mean that it's impossible to compute how many pairs of rubber boots the population needs, but that it's very hard to solve the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal–agent_problem, especially when decisions are made based on infights in the bureaucracy with ideological purity as the weapon of choice.
The old usual, not having to work, getting more and finer stuff than people who work. Saying that in your utopia people wouldn't have these motivations has really dystopian implications however you slice and dice it.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
Mommy is soooo proud of you, sweaty. Let's put this sperg out up on the fridge with all your other failures.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Well there’s people who say shit like “Stalin was a great man,” but I’d say self-admitted vanguard socialists count.
That’s my point. Profit margins are zero.
What about threats, or defamation? In addition to having legal precedent, both are kinds of speech that can create an environment hostile to hearing the speech of others.
Anyone saved from having to listen to even a minute of Sargon of Akkarl has been done a great service.
It’d actually be pretty close! We’d just have to abolish basically all state and federal law though, reproportion and inflate Congress, which is no longer tasked with federal legislation, but managing inter-state trade; replace state governments with basically larger state legislatures, and make the president’s only role be as a UN representative. And I guess subdivisions would have to vote on whether they kept their cops and civil servants and shit. Then we’d be primed for anarchism on a national level, though we’d probably not be anarchist on a community-by- community basis right away.
the workers are also the consumers, so whichever one takes a loss the other one gains
I don’t think most of them are, I think most of the major figures are just ignorant or in denial, but I was responding to a question that seemed to challenge the assumption that any of them could be.
I do think most of the more influential are motivated by a mixture of greed and denial. It’s not necessarily malicious, but still doing harm. I think it’s the same basic phenomenon that fueled so much propaganda that defended institutions like slavery. (They had philosophers, academics, preachers, everybody)
Here’s a good one
Mencius Moldbug argued against neoliberalism? I mean I guess when he swings at the right targets he’s bound to make the right points.
That’s what the docs are for. They get rehab.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
No, don't reply like this, please do another wall of unhinged rant please.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
Do you want to hear threats or defamation?
Do you want me to decide for you what good can come out of listening to things I find worse than useless?
Exactly, so you gotta explain how exactly co-ops are less competitive in terms of: for whom exactly being forced to buy from a co-op is worse.
By the way, get a load of this guy.
Am I missing something or does it agree that global poverty rates are on the decline, but that the battle against poverty is not won after conquering the $1/day "extreme poverty" line but we should get closer to $2 at least, which is why "the World Bank, UN Development Programme (UNDP) and governments of developing countries all regularly use poverty-lines higher than $2-a-day"?
I know this one exactly! "A Deepness in the Sky" featured a fascist civilization that uses so called "Focus", a sort of permanent endogenous targeted ADHD medication that made their slaves really like to work. Unfortunately Vernon Vinge was not woke enough to realize that he was describing a utopia and neither am I.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
Have you owned the libs yet?
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
I guess if it’s funny?
Depends on the example, I guess.
When cooperative ownership leads to raised prices— which it would for some companies, but not for others— its effects would be offset by the accompanying rise in consumer spending power.
A guy who thought whites should be slaves too, and basically argued that the problem with capitalism was not being feudalism?
It shows how properly adjusting for inflation dramatically hits the claimed gains.
It doesn’t discuss the conceptual meaninglessness of a global poverty line, though. The poverty line is far higher in many of the world’s least developed countries.
The fact that unethical medical practices can be promoted as a form of subjugation does not mean that medicalizing the penal system will produce those tendencies.
When not carried out in the service of a ruling class, there would be no incentive to abuse patients systemically. The threat in such system would be individual abuse, which is why it would be designed to ensure public accountability.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
Sorry ma'am, looks like his delusions have gotten worse. We'll have to admit him,
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
I don't follow. Naively I'd assume that the only difference is that the workers no longer have a part of their labor appropriated by capital owners. Which means that they can sell stuff cheaper while getting paid more.
I consider making me like work to be a form of abuse. I don't see how a ruling class wouldn't arise naturally given how anyone who doesn't like the arrangement is considered mentally ill and gets medicated until they are content.
That's not to mention that we don't have anything clean like Focus yet, so "fixing" people who don't like to work will involve a lot of collateral damage.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
That would usually be the case, but there could be a case wherein workers could still not make a living wage if they continued selling the product at the same price. So they’d have to raise those prices.
But everyone making the switch would effectively raise the minimum wage, so people would be able to pay more for the product.
Well, no one would make you like work, just like they don’t under the current system. They’d just expect you to be willing to put in 15 or so hours a week to do your job, there’s no need to get all We Happy Few about it.
It doesn’t apply to everyone who doesn’t like the arrangement, just those who absolutely refuse to work, which would most likely be the result of debilitating depression or antisocial tendencies.
Anyone who just doesn’t like the arrangement would be free to voice their concerns at a community meeting and even call a vote to change it, not to mention to renegotiate their contract. Even confined patients would be able to participate remotely.
People who refuse to work are criminalized by the current system and sucked into a cycle of unemployability and recidivism. There isn’t really a basis to claim that medicalizing that process would have to make it any more invasive, especially since they’re not to be isolated from society at large.
They don’t have to like to work. No system requires people to enjoy their work. This system would better allow people to do what they enjoy or care about than the alternatives, though.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
This is one of the worst post I have EVER seen. Delete it.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
Also by the way, there's an interesting counterargument you can use on fans of Capitalism: somehow every single firm, including the very big and successful ones, doesn't run on Capitalism internally. It's, like, a mix of feudalism and socialism, with increasingly unabashed communism in software companies closer to the core, and any attempts by the managers to try performance evaluations and shit considered a bad move resulting in major talent drain.
And some of those companies would rank pretty high on the list of countries by population, so how comes capitalism is the best now, nerd?
You get a lot of butthurt and some very interesting discussions from it, in my experience.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
nice >:]
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
btw, as a follow-up to my
I just want to mention a couple that stand out in this respect.
So, the court system. We don't trust neither the prosecutor nor the defender to not be biased assholes, so we have both trying to find truth in an adversarial setting, expecting them to be as biased as they possibly can. And it works much better than if we had just a single judge.
But there's more, the real mindblowingly good shit is where the judge can throw out unlawfully obtained evidence. So now and then a totally guilty murderer walks free, everyone knows that he's guilty, but this acts as a powerful deterrent for the police doing bad shit, which is really good long-term. This is awesome. How long do you think it would take an anarchist community to reinvent this approach? Could they figure it ever, given how counter-intuitive it is, and that you should be thinking in terms of social structures to get it?
A similar thing is liability shift as implemented by Visa and Mastercard. Like, naturally, getting everyone to switch from mag-stripe cards to chip cards is hard because while the end result is massively reduced losses from fraud, each individual bank issuing cards or Point-Of-Service terminals has to spend a lot of money on switching, without much benefit for themselves until everyone else has switched as well. That's a typical tragedy of the commons situation or something.
So everyone agreed (or was forced to by the majority) that past a certain date (2005-2008 in EU, 2015-still not in the US) whenever there's a dispute, whoever didn't have the chip capability automatically loses. The bank can still sue whoever goes to supermarkets with no chip-POS, buys a lot of shit, and then disputes the purchase, but as far as Visa and MC were concerned those disputes were instantly resolved towards the cheater. So everyone went and upgraded their shit.
By the way, the idea of two-tier conflict resolution system, first the rules and arbitration between banks, but then the usual courts as a fallback, is awesome! Actually it's three-tier even, a bank might take a loss and still refund their client.
Also by the way, the dispute resolution system between banks has a genius touch: there are four steps, the card issuer bank sends a dispute to the acquiring bank of the merchant, then the acquirer sends a message back with the details of the purchase, then the issuer might send another message requesting more details, then the acquirer may respond, and if that doesn't settle it then it's up to the Visa or MC Arbitrage Committee. The genius touch is that every message here is also a transaction that transfers the entire amount of disputed money to the institution that sent the message. How neat is that? Can you figure out what problem this little touch completely prevents?
I really really enjoy clever social systems like that.
1 LongPostBot 2019-05-01
This is a really long way of saying you don't fuck.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
"They just generally supported the war on drugs. All of it.
Who, you ask? All of them.
How do I know this? Because I'm saying it and you're reading it, what do you mean?? "
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/when-black-america-was-pro-police/524481/
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
Thanks for the read, bich
1 zergling_Lester 2019-05-01
ur welcome, you can post bussy now, or not.
1 ImpeachDrumpf2019 2019-05-01
Hogs still unrolling
1 ShlomoTheDoorHolder_ 2019-05-01
Yeah but it also shows black ones are more abusive than the rest. Funny how chapos leave that part out though
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
Well obviously only the worst black people can become cops, they have a much higher barrier to entry.
1 ShlomoTheDoorHolder_ 2019-05-01
Do you really think departments in large cities dont have "diversity quotas" ? Idk if I would call that a greater barrier to entry
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
i mean in terms of allowing oneself to become a filthy pig
1 ShlomoTheDoorHolder_ 2019-05-01
"40% of cops beat their wives"
Haha so true!
"Black cops are even more likely to do it"
CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION
1 lannister_stark 2019-05-01
Because u a fagget
1 PostDemocracyISNOW 2019-05-01
Are you gunna be part of the 40%?
1 Protista_of_Peace 2019-05-01
😍😍😍
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
i spent a good minute trying to figure out the symbolism of the donur tower, but it’s just bc it’s a smiling cop, right?
1 Woolgun 2019-05-01
I kinda see this is a reference to /r/Good_Cop_Free_Donut so maybe a little symbolism?
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
donuts will never be free as long as the police exist as an institution
1 Van-Diemen 2019-05-01
Good, otherwise chapos would go from skinnyfat to just plain ol' fat.
1 grungebot5000 2019-05-01
i mean tbh that’s an upgrade. they’d be just as unathletic as before, but they’d have a weight advantage and wouldn’t live as long
1 ClementineChime 2019-05-01
/r/drama people are so fucking weird, it's like a cliquey extremely online smarmy circlejerk of radical centrist losers who sustain themselves on whatever """drama""" they can find which is almost always shit of absolutely zero consequence.
1 michaelisnotginger 2019-05-01
This but completely unironically
1 allwordsaredust 2019-05-01
Are you implying this isn't the best kind of drama?
1 the_uncucked_canuck 2019-05-01
Lol kys chapocuck
1 wwaalleess 2019-05-01
😎😎😎
1 Infidel6 2019-05-01
Oh my sweet little SRDine. The only difference between you and the retards on this sub is that we are able to have fun with our mental disabilities, when you simply choose to wallow in it.
1 Talran 2019-05-01
that's ablist. we're all r-slurs here, and we all embrace keeping ourselves safe
1 jacob_charles_666 2019-05-01
I’m autistic not retarded, watch yourself bucko
1 Talran 2019-05-01
Woah there, that's uncalled for, I'm in no way a b-slur, bucko
1 hebrew_nationalist 2019-05-01
Yea its great
1 NazisWereNordicists 2019-05-01
T-t-that i-isn’t t-t-t-true at all.... 🥺
1 600_lbs_of_sin 2019-05-01
you say that like it's a bad thing
1 trappysaruh 2019-05-01
retards are obsessed with chapowatch 😴
1 ClementineChime 2019-05-01
I got called a chapocuck 😆
It's pasta folks, fresh pasta!
1 trappysaruh 2019-05-01
😏😏😏😏😏
1 TheKomuso 2019-05-01
Centrist? Are you sure? It's much more like leftists pretending to be centrist in that case. Pretty sure this place is pro: ANTIFA, feminism, gamergate, Anita Sarkeesian, BLM, LGBT+, anti-Trump, etc. This sub even per-emtively banned people from CringeAnarchy (right wingers + edgy centrists). This place is 1 part snowflake, 1 part SJW, 1 part dramaqueen, and 1 part smarmy EMO teen.
1 PoopShowPass 2019-05-01
u/distortedlines
haaaaalp, literal KIA pedo. Has discussions about visiting Thailand and everything in his profile!
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
he is lolcow. he can stay.
1 PoopShowPass 2019-05-01
u/distortedlines mom is right, he is a lolcow. Maybe temp ban instead of perma?
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-05-01
two separate issues that are both VERY important in Current Year
1 Math_Not-Even-Once 2019-05-01
Topical.
1 MinimumAdagio 2019-05-01
Gamers rise up!
1 Gus_Habistat 2019-05-01
This sub is designed to be a cesspool of extreme altright deplorables. If you can't see that then you just haven't caught on to the dog whistles yet. Make no mistake, everyone here is a literal fascist hardcore gamergator.
1 Shitposting_Skeleton 2019-05-01
Did you not read this very post you commented on?
1 AgitatedFudge 2019-05-01
this but ironically
1 PoopShowPass 2019-05-01
I also just asked for you to be unbanned bc I realized you're a prized lolcow. A rightoid one at that, but also possibly a pedo, so idk.
1 -Shank- 2019-05-01
Going to have to ask you to reel in the anti-semitic dogwhistles, sweaty.
1 couscous_anonymous 2019-05-01
That coppo must've be a heckin' goodboye
1 Nastaya 2019-05-01
all cops are big guys for you
1 1029384756-mk2 2019-05-01
Quick reminder that 40% of chapocels live with their parents.
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
dude 40%
1 Grape_Gatsby 2019-05-01
I'm shocked
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
The 51+ demo tho
I wonder what sad state those folks are in
1 Kilo914 2019-05-01
Unmarried, childless, unemployed
1 Grape_Gatsby 2019-05-01
"Haha I have the same values as you all so I lived a good life guys... right?"
1 Tenshimaru_tokugawa1 2019-05-01
make donut cop flair
1 Sprpr 2019-05-01
Post a lawn next, that ought to make them seethe.
1 aldezar 2019-05-01
Yeah he’s hot. This is a cop daddy all the way
1 TheKomuso 2019-05-01
OOTL, what is a "Chapo"? Is that code for Nazi/incel/alt-right or something?
1 lolbitchcalmdown 2019-05-01
It’s short for Chapstickaholic.
You ever notice how those alt-right Drunpftards have really shiny lips?
It’s a well-known dog whistle. They smear on lip gloss in a racist, misogynistic effort to mock our Qween who Slayys, AOC.
1 nahnotreallytho 2019-05-01
u/userleansbot
1 userleansbot 2019-05-01
Author: /u/userleansbot
Analysis of /u/TheKomuso's activity in political subreddits over the past 1000 comments and submissions.
Account Created: 4 years, 2 months, 0 days ago
Summary: This user does not have enough activity in political subs for analysis or has no clear leanings, they might be one of those weirdo moderate types. I don't trust them.
Bleep, bloop, I'm a bot trying to help inform political discussions on Reddit. | About
1 Chapocel 2019-05-01
🤔
1 snapsticks 2019-05-01
Post hog
1 Strangelump 2019-05-01
triggering chapos, xD!!1!
1 FormedFecalIncident 2019-05-01
He looks like a fat version of Jason Bateman
1 BreezeshineOG 2019-05-01
u/userleansbot
1 userleansbot 2019-05-01
Author: /u/userleansbot
Analysis of /u/Momruepari's activity in political subreddits over the past 1000 comments and submissions.
Account Created: 8 months, 5 days ago
Summary: This user does not have enough activity in political subs for analysis or has no clear leanings, they might be one of those weirdo moderate types. I don't trust them.
Bleep, bloop, I'm a bot trying to help inform political discussions on Reddit. | About
1 morerokk 2019-05-01
Baste
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
u/userleansbot
1 userleansbot 2019-05-01
Rusting is red, and my chipset's blue. Will you let me assimilate you?
1 EasySchmitty 2019-05-01
They were swarming that Venezuela thread from yesterday.
Reminder that chapo tourists are to be detained at the drama border wall with CAnimals and MDEgenerates.
1 PooplordZoosmell 2019-05-01
Behold, good people, the famous memeing and triggering tactics of the right, clearly they are a force to be beheld with their many chins and unwashed asses.
1 Zozbot 2019-05-01
zoz
1 Zozbot 2019-05-01
zle
1 Zozbot 2019-05-01
zozzle
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
C O P E
1 PooplordZoosmell 2019-05-01
Red fox says wash your ass
1 Momruepari 2019-05-01
post bussy
1 Agenda_Poster 2019-05-01
Wow that's a cute piggy! He's so chonky! 🤗
1 lexicondevil1 2019-05-01
ACAB = A Cop Ate Baked >! Goods!<. I'm sorry it was all I could come up with.
1 a_few 2019-05-01
Do chapos hate cops because they are secretly jealous that they get to shoot minorities?