It really feels hopeless sometimes, doesn't it?

It really feels hopeless sometimes, doesn't it?

Almost all mainstream """"socialist"""" communities are deep in the shit pool of this racist anti-human social-fascist intersectionality tripe. Even online there's just no escaping this utter nonsense. The only movements (in my experience) offline that are against this shit are old guard sittin in rocking chairs, talkin about the good old days of the USSR and while I enjoy hearing their wisdom, they're just so often bitter and unconstructive.

Serious question that may be difficult to come to terms with but is the global anti-capitalist movement too fractured and subverted to ever truly have any impact ? If anyone is honest with themselves, they will acknowledge that literal neo-nazis have more influence than Marxists in our time.

Sometimes it just feels like it's fate to walk alone.

Attached: 1547404960597.jpg (2048x1365, 1.02M)

Here's the thing. The ones that mainstream media labels as neonazis are, in reality, MAGApede civcucks (think the proud boys, patriot prayer, !!!%ers), while actual neonazis are shiposting on 4/Zig Forums's Zig Forums.

Actual neonazis are worthless subhumans that are pissed off about "niggers" fucking their women and being more succesful than their incel asses. There's no reason to be scared of either Zig Forumsturds or stormfaggots, because they are the biggest pussies alive irl that wouldn't even have the balls to call a random black guy a "nigger", since they know they're gonna get laid the fuck out.

As a matter of fact, at least in the US, there has been a surge in a populist left movement (AOC et al). The majority of millennials actually have a negative view of capitalism and are quite left-leaning, even if they're not socialists per se. Granted, most of them are also idpol morons, so we need to despook them.

In my experience this is a lot more difficult than it sounds. I have been harassed and labeled as "racist" and "homophobic" for speaking up against this nonsense, pushed out of self-proclaimed socialist movements. I'm not forceful or rude yet apparently unless you accept bullshit "spook" abstractions like race as legitimate you are yourself a racist.

I have no idea how involved you are with whatever movement offline but in my experience this is how it is constantly and it's almost impossible to discuss anything without this intersectionality venom poisoning conversation.

The only place I can discuss this stuff is my own religious group who I am thankful for but we're only a tiny minority and don't openly proselytize. That's another issue entirely and not relevant to here though.

Yeah, I think I've always been a anti-idpol leftist, I thought the entire point of these cultural stuff was to try to judge people on their actions and character, not arbitrary BS like their skin color or whatever.

And then the SJW bourgeoisie dipshits started to appear and their similarly spooked counterparts on the right-wing.

Yeah I know the feeling there, I believe that this nonsense has to run it's course, perhaps if we tell people the real origins of these spooked race=obsessed morons then they would turn on them or atleast start to question them more.

Yeah, that's what's up.
…and that's how you solve it. Bots can't out-shitpost the humans on a static webpage.

Yeah, too bad the generation next after millennials is growing thinking that fascism is the way to go because of bad internet influence and because they saw just how much of a fucking soft faggots millennials are.

You're pretty much asking kids their political opinion. Most of them are lifestylists of jump on the trendy bandwagon. You can sort of thank Paul Joseph Watson and Ben Shapiro for that. Most of the Z-genners are still underage and utter dipshits that became disenfranchized with the whole gamergate fiasco.

Zoomers will turn hard left as soon as they enter the workforce and realize how fucked they are.

Believe me, I'm with you here. It feels like the sentiment of anti-capitalism has been colonized by a sort of diversity-industrial-complex aided by the Idpol Twitter types. Just look at the "leftist" hatred of Bernie on Twitter. They're so obsessed with "diversities" of the physical: skin color, sex, etc. Consciousness of class over these "diversities" is dismissed as "class reductionism." But the worst part is that people generally really do see shit like social conservatism or even fascism the only alternative to intersectionality.

I like how that's been wordfiltered. hail the new communist empire, America, and may the rest of the world perish, including Israel.

Regarding stormniggers, there are the skinhead types (Aryan Brotherhood, etc.) who really are violent and dangerous, but IMHO they're also harmless on a societal level, because their typical activities (drugs, prostitution, burglary, confidence scams, etc.) have caused them to be priority targets for suppression and infiltration by LEOs, which combines with their already small numbers and marginal social position to render them much like their counterparts among even the less LARP-y AntiFa punk groups irrelevant.

On the contrary, they will blame dah joo even harder when that happen.
Ideology is one hell of a drug.

Oh and also they have no reason to turn "left" because of economic reasons because to them "left" and "right" doesn't have anything to do with economics anymore, it's all about le cultural wars of le sane rational people against le insane ess jay dublya.

As far as I know, the Aryan Brotherhood are actual hardened criminals and are far more busy commiting crimes than shitposting on stormfront, niggermania, Zig Forums or chimpout. You can pretty much tell that Zig Forums retards are merely edgy kids and complete pussies.

They don't need leftist ideology to turn toward leftist ideas. Leftist ideas are wildly popular now, even among those who are ideologically opposed to what they consider to be "left."

This note for autists: multiple levels of irony are intended by this choice of image

Attached: Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-Medicare.png (640x426, 422.3K)

This can and will be exploited by rightist populists to push for fascism.

It doesn't matter what they call the ideas. All that matters is that they are required to address the coming situations. Besides, fascism is not any scarier than neoliberalism is, nor can it save capitalism in a nuclear world.

Trump did, in a half assed way, and look at the recent shitshow that is american politics. Also, compared to what tumblr wants you to think, Zig Forumsniggers have no power outside of their inner circlejerk. They are the absolute lowest, worthless shit that no one wants to be associated with irl.

Just let them shitpost about "muh niggers" and "muh k¡kes". As long as people support leftist ideas they can bitch all they want on their shitty board about how black chads steal all their "aryan" women for all we care; and I'm pretty sure blacks feel the same way.

"I'm pretty sure blacks feel the same way"

lol, that doesn't happen.

autistic master race, irony is dead and shall remain dead.

Are you sure about that?
Last I checked people were still swallowing rightist garbage like Prager University bullshit and did not gave a damn about anything closer to real leftist ideas.
Are you sure you are not just confusing your personal bubble for the overall public opinions?

There is a reason why Sanders is the most popular politician in the US. Ocasio-Cortez is also fairly popular, along with several policies like tuition free college, medicare for all, progressive taxation, legalizing marijuana, protecting the environment, etc; all of those even favored by most republicunts.

Maybe stop hanging with MAGApedes.

Leftist blacks, or at least most of them, sure do. Liberals and BLM? Not so much.

Dead sure. Go ahead and bring up the subject of rent control in even the most aggressively capitalist of cities, and the results will warm your heart. Then talk about how it shouldn't be possible for people to work their whole lives and have nothing at the end of it or how the financial industry is just a gigantic scam. Declare that the cops are a bunch of useless fucking thugs who will tow your ass for being five minutes over on the parking meter but can't be bothered to lift a finger when someone breaks our your car windows and steals your briefcase. Say that landlords raising rents when their expenses stay the same prove that the whole business is a racket. Announce that you think that the entire pharmaceuticals industry should be (ZOMG) socialized. Why, you might even say that the imperialist adventures in places like Iraq are disgraceful, and a good number of the basic bitches will howl in agreement.

As someone who commonly uses this logic to quell ridiculous fears of WWIII starting between imperialist powers today, remember that in the case of capitalism imploding, we have much more reason to fear civil wars within them.

All the rest of what you said are ample proof of what you're arguing, but these two points are George Carlin-esque meaningless grumblings common to pretty much every political persuasion, including every "socialism is gubmint" wannabe survivalist.

Exactly the goddamn point. These essentially leftist ideas are common among even the verbal defenders of capitalism. A whole hell of a lot of leftist ideas are like that.

Attached: Carlin.jpg (1900x1200, 356.39K)

Yes, people feel frustrated about all this shit, but a vast majority are convinced not of socialist worker control of MOP, but of corporatist means of "fixing" this system, from social democrats to nazis.

Actual socialist ideas are widely misunderstood or seen at best with suspicion or at worst as a circus of idiocy due to intersectionality hijacking of anti-capitalism.

It kinda is tho.
Fascism relies almost entirely on spooks and they can create spooks out of nowhere to justify whatever atrocity they want to. Groups of people can be targeted, persecuted and genocided, ideas can be forced down the throats of the population like obligation to follow a specific religion, dress only in some particular way, be very "nationalistic" and snitch anyone who doesn't follow in line, basically 1984.
While "freedom" is a core component of neoliberal ideology.

The same is true of neoliberalism. They use "freedom" to justify invading and robbing Iraq blind. They are using "democracy," hilariously enough, to justify invading Venezuela. Oh, and remember when they used "women's liberation" to say that the invasion of Afghanistan would make Afghan women's lives better?

Still not seeing a difference. Do you think that shit isn't going on right now?

Ah yes, the American spook that is vague enough to be used to support absolutely anything like, ironically, building up the military and lowjacking everybody's computers.

I've decided to disengage politically, besides the occasional imageboard shitpost i suppose and habitually voting for the lesser evil.

It's better not taking part in the political shitshow and sacrifice my well-being for the sake all those self-serving insufferable cunts around me who doesn't even want the world to improve. I'm done with bashing my head against the concrete wall.

They don't want me, and I don't want them anymore. I'll do better than most of them while they fester in the piss world they propagated themselves. Got mine, fuck you. It's what they all wanted, even the 'leftists'. So they can have it.

Lmaoing at this defeatist negroid, smoke a blunt ya runt

I disagree.
If people only have the ideas but not the ideology behind to support it then what they'll do is to either just continuing doing what socdems have been doing for almost a century that is to try to amend and "fix" capitalism which just increases its life support or they'll do like it has already been stated in the thread and go full fascist.

People will do what is in their immediate interests regardless of their ideologies. The bourgeoisie did not need Hobbes or Locke to overthrow the aristocrats, and they were all singing "God save the king" right up until they chopped his head off. What matters is that the lower class has the means to take power. When they do, they will.

How about all day every day and every time all the time?
The 'left' is full of LARPers, autists, psychotics, cointelpro, radlibs and fascists. There's no hope. The left will keep ruining its own reputation and cranks will be ever more attracted to it.

Attached: sufferin.png (800x450, 514.95K)

when it comes down to it, "neoliberalism" is just what socdems and other reactionaries call late stage capitalism because they're incapable of conceiving a post-capitalist system, the most scary thing about it is it's inability to deal with climate change but apart from that it really shouldn't be "scary" to anyone with a basic understanding of marx

Didn't you learn you lesson with Obama?

While all neoconservatives I'm aware of are also neoliberals, not all neoliberals are neoconservatives, as for instance many lolberts are (at least putatively) isolationist minarchists.

Only on capital.

LOL no. Neoliberalism is a top-heavy police state.

Those are neoliberal. You can't have any kind of liberalism without those.

And private debt. The shit runs on workers owing their souls to the company store.

Is that some liberal term that means bailouts?

Attached: police-state.jpg (981x627, 234.08K)

Lolwut? Neoliberalism requires an overarching aristocratic regime that taxes the poor to shit and reaches its tentacles to every corner of the earth.

Neolibs have a general preference for non-state solutions, including transnational corporations, private mercenaries, and privately owned infrastructure that gives responsibility for the collection of what amount to taxes to private bill collectors, essentially a revival of Gilded Age sovereign businesses like the East Indies and Hudson Bay companies. This is where their central focuses on strangling government domestically and abolishing borders internationally comes from, the creation of a power vacuum for "entrepreneurs".

Neocons, on the other hand, are entirely comfortable with using big government to directly redistribute wealth into the hands of the wealthy, directly using state soldiers to engage in imperialism, and funding it all with massive debts toward the elite establishment firmly controlling this state.

These differences stem from the origins of the two ideologies. Neocons, remember, originated among butthurt Trots, and ended up ideologically enforced most inside the military, so their behavior naturally looks like a funhouse mirror image of the typical ML dictatorship. Neolibs originated from bitter Autistrian economists cast out of heaven by Keynes, and mostly sheltered within the airy reaches of corporate bureaucracy (aside from the mostly separate classcuck endorsement by a significant minority of the masses in the John Birch/survivalist/prepper/sovereign citizen/lolbert/black helicopter/etc crowd from the 1970s onward), only reaching into policymaking through various "public-private partnerships" and lobbying efforts, so their ideology tends toward the technocratic and corporate. While there is extensive overlap, this contrast remains evident today, e.g.: Between the firmly neocon Heritage Foundation and firmly neolib Cato Institute.

Attached: neoconhistory.gif (1000x503 568.01 KB, 87.97K)

The state is always despotics, and borders are only ever for people, not capital.

For one thing, "big government" is a meaningless term. Corporations are just states. For another, neocons love using non-government soldiers. The military adventures of the second Bush administration utilized no small number of corporate-owned mercenaries, and Iraq and Afghanistan are still full of the unaccountable thugs.

Attached: Neoliberal.png (595x593, 380.67K)

Attached: qmm.jpg (800x679, 59.8K)

Yes, corporations are states. They are identical in both structure and function.

A common piece of recycled neolib propaganda seasoned to suit the palettes of New Left shitters. It neatly fails to explain tariffs, and the death spiral of scabbing that drives mass economic immigration. Borders can only be safely abolished within socialism.
As opposed to "small government", i.e.: Local and/or "night watchman" government, both idolized by infantile lolberts.
No, they are now mostly dependent on states to enforce their "property" and "contractual" "rights", and so are vulnerable to regulation of their activities by those states. The primary room for unfettered corporate domineering exists in arbitrage between stronger and weaker states in transnational business, a power vacuum they seek to enlarge.
True, but as part of a state occupation. Also, as I conceded, there is substantial overlap between the two.

Ooh, I like this framing.
States are corporations
Corporations are states

I live in the state of Ikea then

Why do fascists like corporatism so much?

Tariffs do not hinder capital. They only limit who invests it. "Scabbing" only refers to participating in strike-breaking. It has exactly fuck-all to do with mass economic migration, which is driven by war and poverty.

No, that is also a bullshit term. What exactly makes it big or small for you?

Corporations are definitively states by both marxist and anarchist definitions. You mentioned the East India Company and Hudson's Bay Company earlier. How would you define "state" such that the term does not apply to them?

I see no vacuum. Both states in question are merely respectively tools of different segments of the ruling class. The bourgeoisie does not need for them to be weakened to have their way.

They are hardly restricted to official occupations. Case in point: Yemen.

For the entirity of the time that you are working there, yes you do.

Tariffs and migration controls have the effect of limiting the ability of capital to undermine a given state's regulation of capital. Absent such protectionist measures, capital will pit strong regulatory regimes against weak ones, profiting off the arbitrage in human rights. Open borders also allow capitalists to incentivize states to engage in imperialism and other meddling to weaken rivals, deepening the inequalities that fuel predatory arbitrage.
That statement was meant to imply exactly the opposite conclusion, that such crown firms truly were states. Because, for instance, they held exclusive sovereignty over territory, could engage in war or ratify treaties to annex or sell further territory, monopolized trade in that territory, and held absolute authority over the lives of that territory's population. No modern transnat has anywhere near that much power, yet.
Oh please. You can brush off legal reforms won by labor against capital as mere appeasement to head off radicals, but you can't ignore just how hard-fought those reforms were, the constant effort capital puts into attempts at rolling those reforms back, or most of all how much easier it is for leftists to engage in radical action thanks to such reforms.
Saudi Arabia is acting as an imperial vassal, moreover, one that is in large part a throwback precapitalist bronze-age theocratic monarchy.

Again, tariffs do not limit capital, only those who may invest it. What tariffs do is to raise what it costs for a certain group of investors to do a particular kind of business. That does not mean that capital will not be invested at the same rate. All it means is that the investors who do control the capital will belong to the local group of the bourgeoisie.

I am not sure how you figure that. Borders have never been much of a barrier to imperialism.

Don't they? Consider:

As do all land owners.

They definitely do that. Just ask the State Department.

What's the difference between a treaty anda business deal?

Come on, that one is obvious.

Fear of Lenin and the IWW did more to win those than any reformists playing electoral politics did.

I was talking about the mercenaries who also happen to be in Syria, Libya, the Ukraine, and elsewhere.

Attached: triple_canopy.jpg (600x300, 76.92K)

Who, foreign capitalist activity, are subject to domestic industrial regulations.
The primary end goal of imperialism is the transmission of plunder from foreign lands. When controls are placed against such flows, this denies imperialists their reward.

It's kind of part of the definition.

I do not understand what this is saying.

This is not mercantile capitalism that we are talking about. This is global capitalism. Economies are not delineated by imperial borders anymore. British companies do not need for gold stolen from Africa to go to Britain in order to profit from it. It is just like how Haliburton does not need to ship Iraqi oil to the United States to profit from it.


Sorry, typo.

Attached: play_with_a_full_deck_b.gif (950x640, 160.99K)

I don't work there, I mean do Ikeans have a unique culture and language? If not then they shouldn't exist.

That's the spirit. Destroy the human race