Ideologically he used to one of the more radical socialists in italy so what went wrong ?

ideologically he used to one of the more radical socialists in italy so what went wrong ?

Attached: benito.png (1604x842, 1.24M)

Other urls found in this thread:


What went right?

We redefined what socialism meant. It used to be about the working classes. Now socialism is something about importing people from the third world.


Childish anarchkiddie detected. Literally only utopian retards and captalists want that type of world


all capitalists want strong borders what are you talking about ?

Hes talking about the capitalists who own global companies that want to eliminate borders to improve their profit margins.

they're a small minority and we should support them in abolishing borders and eventually the state

A big reason why we get criticised is because we have the same goals as giant evil dystopian multinational corporations.

The desires of reactionary first-world labor aristocrats are irrelevant. Concentration of capital and ownership, the destruction of traditional institutions, and the disintegration of national borders must be accelerated if socialism is to be realized.

The problem with that strategy is that by the time you realize you have been tricked in to implementing totalitarian globalist capitalism its way too late to go back.

Look at this ideology-addled retard thinking that capitalists don’t above all desire the free movement of people, capital and goods. They’re breaking down states and creating ever big states, capitalism IS globalism. Capitalism IS white gen.ocide

*even bigger states

The goal is a world-state

ITT: marxists reveal themselves as closetted faggists
like clockwork

We realized that Marxism is a trick to destroy and subvert European nations long ago now here. Remove democracy, internationalism, pro-globalism, anti-religion, race denial and egalitarianism and many aspects are still tolerable


Attached: 6cd.png (680x416, 553.3K)

People always accuse me of being a troll when I use a flag.

I'm 90% sure it's your views that doe before all else and the flag is just the smoking gun.

It could well be that. Im not one of these people who tailors his views to what other people would accept or appreciate.
But nobody says shit if i dont have the flag on. Normally.

Fuck off roastie

Nice attempt.

Attached: obama_immigration.mp4 (466x360, 1.3M)

You’re just a basic bitch roastie. Go back to Zig Forums

Obama identifies as a woman.

Attached: trump_on_israel.webm (1280x720, 973.7K)

Lmao @ this roastie stuck in the red versus blue paradigm

This is me pwning you MRA incel.

Attached: avengelesfilles.webm (636x360, 435.39K)

n-nani ?
user, Porky is the biggest fan of Jamal and his 8 cousins coming here. Even those semi nationalist countries that were socialist in east europe during the 40's till 80's were more isolationist than any right wing government today. Capitalism has done more harm to ethnic nationalism and the white working class than socialism. Libertarians sperg out at me when i point that out.

Redditor detected

Check your privilege MRA volcel.


Attached: feminism.webm (1280x720, 1.92M)

He supported Italy in WW1 instead of decrying war as harmful to the proletariat.

They're spooked and don't read anything but memes.


People get borders. Capital moves freely. Porky only wants Jamal and his eight cousins when they can do specific jobs. Retards worry about mass migration depressing wages, but the wages that they depress would otherwise move to wherever immigrants come from. Off-shoring is the real issue.

Attached: EmpoweringWomen.png (794x782, 518.31K)

Nationalists are spooked as shit and are incapable of doing anything but aligning with capitalism.

Nah, ultimately Capitalism is the real issue and it's not going to stop being shit if you somehow stopped offshoring or movement.

That’s why they should be put in concentration camps as part of the construction of a nationalistic ethno-utopia

Oh yea, just shit on the white working class and dismiss their concerns about foreign migration, that'll work out for you. Not that Porky isn't already doing those things, but you're doing his work for free.

Too bad for them that capitalism censors and deplatforms them, and promotes right wing liberals or libertarians like Shapiro, Trump or Peterson (pretty much accepted opposition from the establishment) Unless you count the useful idiots from r/thedonald, which in that case, you're right about those types of people.

A genuine ethno nationalist movement with actual socialism is capitalism's biggest enemy.

Depriving the global south of industrial development just to keep high wages and benefits in the north is as reactionary as opposing open borders.

Since when did this board become a safe haven for tankies and nazbol faggots? Fuck off back to Zig Forums retards. Go suck Stalin's dick on your shitty board you fucks; this is an anarchist board.

the white "working class" doesn't exist

I see how you misread my post ( ) I meant that it is capitalists who should be put in camps, not nationalists. True socialism is antithetical to globalism, internationalism and all other porky tricks. Really makes me think how Marxists are so often aligned with massive corporations in social views

The synthesis of nationalism and communism is unironically the key to White prosperity.
White capitalists are race traitors

yeah, i think you mixed things up pretty badly Bat'ko…

Sure thing Porky.

My mistake. Got them confused.
Spot on. Modern marxists, especially the ones from twitter circles, or leftypol, are more concerned about good boy points from their immigrant friends, than their fellow man from the working class. A chunk of the ones that claim to be "anti identity politics" are just against white tribalism. Change it to blacks or transsexuals, and see how they shill that id pol.
You're right about white neo liberals and white bourgeois. A traitor will always be worse than an enemy.

I definitely think it is an exercise in ego and virtue signaling for many first-world leftists. What is most disgusting to me is how they will always put the foreigner before the working man of their own country. Illegal immigrants are used as cheap sources of exploitable labor for porky that drive down wages at home and serve as a braindrain on their own countries. It is funny how Marxists think getting demographically replaced by porky’s third world friends SHOULDN’T make people enraged. No one wants non-white countries to be open doors, but when it comes to the west, let them all in! This is why I can never be a Marxist or a leftism. It’s anti-white and I’m too socially conservative, racist and sexist for leftists.

Nice to see more Nazbols on here

Social conservatism I understand. What I don't understand is why someone would willfully be racist or sexist.

Depends on what you classify as "racist". Do i want to colonize the countries of other races ? no
Do i want to preserve the people from my own country ? yes.
If you think that's racist, then it's your call. Both the class conflict and multi racial problem has brought instability in european countries.
I believe humanity can coexist, but only if each has his own place. The middle eastern population that is forced in Europe because Israel is trigger happy in the Middle East (and bombs their countries) is problematic for Europeans and middle easterners .
Ultimately, the capitalist wants a multi racial, and eventually mixed society, with no identity or purpose, just to be another consumer ready to grow fat, be overworked and exploited. A united socialist & ethno nationalist country gets in their way.
As for sexism, i believe women should get opportunities in the work field , based on merit, not their gender. And they shouldn't be demonized for choosing motherhood and family, in fact, those ideas need to be encouraged, not shamed. Hence why, the socialist state's duty is to protect the family structure and to give every member of the nation the opportunity to prosper , for the collective's well being.

Because not everyone is a follower of the church of leftism in which those things are something similar to the islamic concept of haram.

I think this one point where the religious are mentally ahead of the secular; at least they understand that their faith is their faith and not the standard position for everyone.

Good old opportunism.
The right-wingers tried their own mass-movement and it's easier to lead one, when aristocrats and capitalists support you, than fighting against them.

Considering how retarded 'leftists' can be, I'm not surprised some people get pushed that way.
''And please notice that I am arguing for Socialism, not against it. But for the moment I am advocatus diaboli. […] As with the Christian religion, the worst advertisement for Socialism is its adherents
In addition to this there is the horrible — the really disquieting — prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words "Socialism" and "Communism" draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, "Nature Cure" quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.''

Only if you are a capitalist from a developing country.
In a Western country, the borders can't be open enough.

You don't have to be a Marxist to be against racism and sexism. My stance comes from my faith not from any leftist theory or whatever. I don't even like Marx.

I agree that simply allowing every single refugee to mass immigrate to another country is not a wise or sustainable decision, but the problem is "preservation" when used by ethno-nationalists is usually a euphemism for killing or kicking out every non-white from a country despite them knowing the language, contributing, etc. which is also unjust. Also, you personally may not be interested in colonizing other countries, but generally nationalists when in power have been imperialist as fuck since there's nothing stopping them from making the logic leap from "other races should seperate" to "we should subjugate the inferiors".

Fucking anarkiddies

As they usually do.

Racism on the international scale is stupid, being pro-white isn't anti-black, and should be vice versa.

Sexism I can understand. Rosa once said women would dance for reactionism if given suffragism, but I tend to not see that pattern, they consistently vote for things that are detrimental to their country over and over again. Voting should just be across the board illegal because I think most people (and this is across the board) I have little faith in for bringing about what they need instead of what they want, which is what people mostly do. I tend to think people really only care about themselves. But women have a worse track record in regards to this.

Ok Jason Unruhe


Unruhe doesn't care much about race per say, his third worldism is based on geography more than anything.

this is leftpol not leftypol.

Mussolini was never a radical, he was literally on the M15 payroll and got kicked out of the socialist party for being pro-war.

the koch brothers, trump, and other capitalists all want strong borders and lots of illegal immigration at the same time because keeping a large segment of the working class in limbo means they can be overexploited and pressured to accept lower wages. that's how capitalism has always opeated

mental gymnastics much?

I am the "white working class" you fuckwit.
I can guarantee you that porky isn't organizing workplaces or tenants.
They still legally operate and are supported by the police, getting banned on reddit isn't state suppression.
Who will embrace reaction when capitalism is under threat, and give some power to you faggots in exchange for protecting capitalism.
There is no real difference between you and them.
Social Democracy with racist characteristics is completely compatible with capitalism.

Attached: Redmoon.png (398x378, 48.31K)

Holy up what happened to the anfem? Did she (presumably) get so out of hand the mods kicked her out?

Yes, it's in the log.

Christ she didn't strike me as being so bad that she deserved a ban, she may have been a complete idiot on multiple points but she didn't have the level of rabies other's did.

yes, surprisingly enough capitalism is built on internal contradictions.

What's with all the deleted posts? Feels like Mark/v/ in here.

You sure enjoy fucking yourself in the ass
No. He's doing anti racist propaganda. You're simply doing it for free. Thanks , oink oink.
Private property is suddenly good when it owns the racists ? damn, spoken like a red liberal that larps as a socialist. I love how you ignore hate speech laws in Europe, they are state suppression against those that oppose the pro diversity status quo.
Lmao, i want to destroy capitalism, but Porky want to give me power to protect it ? get your fucking figures straight. Shapiro and Peterson are scared shitless of both european nationalism and economic socialism. I'm the anti christ according to their logic.
You mean Trump's fanboys that would privatize healthcare and lower taxes for the rich just to own the left ? i don't think we have 10% in common
oh no no no , look at this dude!
I don't even support private property. I ain't no corporatist or hitlerist. I support the workers of my country owning the means of production, and a socialist state that exists to protect the national interest and well being of the people. I don't know if your ancom autism is leaking or you're just pulling a Destiny with all these false accusations.

Not really, his mates said he was fucking oblivious to marxism.

Yeah, it would. Capitalism would collapse if it were divided into small spheres again, because the rate of profit is no longer large enough to support a large, broad-based bourgeois class.

Nah I'm cool. You can though.

He's a Canadian petit bourgeoisie. And shits on us because "that's what leftists are supposed to do" it's like getting picked on by a three year old. With all due respect his heart is likely in the right place but I doubt his head is.

He works at a gas station I believe.

This. Perhaps a better question, how did pro-war sentiment become so widespread within the 2nd Internationale in the leadup to WWI, when socialism was at the zenith of its power?

Eliminating offshoring without slashing migrant quotas won't get you anywhere, doubledome. They're two sides of the same scabbed coin.

Most of the stupidity in the thread has been appropriately attacked, but this takes the cake. Total illegal alien population in the US has held steady at ~10M since the 90s, but the legal immigrant population has grown by over a million a year, with a cumulative effect since the 1965 neolib explosion of quotas totaling over 70M.

Illegals being suppressed through do-nothing raids and deportations (as opposed to anti-employer policies like eVerify, that actually work) in no way conflicts with open borders, especially considering the vast majority of illegal aliens entered the country legally, then magically vanished from the system to overstay their visas.

austria deserved it tho

Attached: duce.jpg (204x247, 5.28K)

The reformists and bourgeois socdems all took the nationalism pill.

Try to think beyond the nationalist paranoia. Industrial production is not done where the people who consume the resulting commodities are. Instead, it is almost all done offshore, and the reason that it is done that way instead of bringing all the cheap labor to the local factories is to keep the poorly paid industrial workers away from the consumers who are actually capable of consuming the goods that are produced. Wages in the centers of capitalism have to be kept high enough that the consumers remain able to consume, which means that wages there have an effective floor. Consumption is an equal and opposite part of the productive process, and capital stops flowing when nobody can buy. That is why there are so-called "centers" of global capitalism.

Excess human migration upsets the distinction between the centers of capitalism and the periphery where offshoring does not. If the cheaper labor pool from the periphery is entirely mixed with the consumers in the centers of global capitalism then the centers of consumption themselves would cease to exist, and all there would be is workers living hand-to-mouth. That doesn't work for the capitalists who want to produce lucrative luxury items. That is why they keep borders in place which only really restrict the flow of people. Legal migration is facilitated to keep the local consumers from ever having enough income that they can squirrel away a savings, thus taking money out of circulation. Illegal immigration (because laws are for the lower class) can also be done to keep the lowest-paying jobs worked by people who do not make enough to be consumers anyway as cheap as possible. Immigration only impacts those selected areas. It does not target wages as a whole.

KEK, you're the same guy who thinks that migrants are "scabs." Tell me, guy with an ancom flag, what is your opinion of Joe Hill?

That consistency right there should tell you that the system is working as intended.

Attached: JoeHill.jpg (717x840, 76.46K)

Pic related used to be a vegan and an anti-racist. What went wrong?

Attached: anglin young.jpg (630x534, 64.29K)

Do people STILL buy this "porkies want cheap labor!!!" stuff? Has no one realized that it's about having new buyers, not new workers, first and foremost? From the bourgeois perspective, it's great if Africans, Indios etc. work, but it's not really necessary. The Third World is the only place currently producing humans who can buy things. They literally tell you over and over again that they want as many bodies as possible in The Economy.

it's both tbh
porky wants cheap labour and also more people integrated into the globalized capitalist economy

Increasing people's wages isn't going to make them use vastly more clothing, food, housing, electronic devices, media, and so on. You need more bodies, period.

t. has never met a spoiled brat with bourgeois parents

Absolute piffle. Look back to the last Gilded Age, when living conditions in the imperialist centers were largely similar to the typical prole as in the imperial margins of the globe, until organized labor won reforms that improved material conditions, in no small part due to closing off porky's access to the safety valves of free trade and mass economic migration. Indeed, right now, look at the """emerging middle class""" of 3rd-world nations like China, India, and Brazil, conspicuous consumer-ing it up while shoulder-to-shoulder by literal starving peasants. That is what porky wants the 1st-world to look like again.
Staunching the infinite hemorrhaging of fresh migrants, in no way contradicts unionization of the ones who are already here. Quite the contrary.
That was kinda' exactly what I said. Ineffectual performative suppression of illegal aliens (and the blatantly intentional creation of illegal immigration by relaxing enforcement mechanisms that actually work) is done specifically to provide an "under-underclass" to keep legal immigrants fearful, mass economic legal immigrants then doing the same to native workers.

I've never been able to swallow this, because wages and consumption aren't connected in any way, given that most consumer spending in recent decades has come out of credit rather than savings. Read about MMT, and you'll understand that the mechanisms supposedly underlying capitalism completely broke down long ago, and the keystone of capitalism for nearly a century, due to fiat currency, is the ability to create or dismiss credit out of thin air with the flick of a bureaucrat's pen. We are living under actually existing centrally planned economics, but the entire public-facing academic discipline of "mainstream economics" consists of a charade to obscure this fact under the bygone mirage of "sound money" and "the market", to keep the proles from seizing the levers of this machine for our own good.

Attached: McDonald's_India.jpg (800x547, 143.15K)

Is a scam.

For once Jacobin had a good article on it.

Need to Grow(tm) your way out of debt. Only way to accomplish that is more bodies - there is a limit to which the masses can be loaded up with debt, especially with a birth rate of 1.3 per woman (implying a 73% population reduction over 3 generations if I did the math right).

Also, note that the nations that MMT advocates cite as "monetarily sovereign" really aren't, as they have to borrow their currency at interest to conjure it into existence so are ultimately subordinate to a bank, and in practice said countries are run by a small oligarchy rather intimately connected with banking.

Is this some Marxism-Jehuism?

Living in Ohio will turn you against that quick. People here are walking stereotypes.
Reminder bonds have regularly been issued at negative real or absolute interest rates throughout the post-WWII era to the present day (including the majority of US federal deficit "spending" right now), and in spite of porkies decrying it as "fiscal repression", the bond market happily buys them as fast as they're printed.
Gee, I wonder what currency the crushing post-WWI debt imposed on Germany was denominated in?
None of their woes stemmed from fiscal policy as anything other than a symptom of other issues
Reminder Greek debt, taxes, and spending are all on par with those of stronger economies, and the entire problem was the confiscatory interest rates of the debt they were taking on
And perhaps the pièce de résistance of the entire trainwreck, the author literally says:
>The Fed is forbidden by law to purchase bonds directly from the Treasury. The recent episode of quantitative easing (QE), designed to fight the Great Recession, was a partial exception
What an absolutely meaningless, empty, joke of an article. MMT isn't some all encompassing ideological prescription of policy, merely a description of how capitalism actually functions today, the denial of which places any opponent of capitalism in a compromised position.

Jacobin has good articles on lots of things, they also have milquetoast NYT/WaPo gobbledygook like that link, stunningly awful SJW stuff written by some Tumblrina that could be ripped straight from Gawker/Vox, and mercilessly based hot takes that read like an effortpost from this board. I think the mag just has no real editorial policy.

Propagandistic poppycock. Just keep issuing more and more debt, then when the bubble pops, have daddy pick up the pieces with more issuance and keep playing.
And what happens when those banks carry on their retarded behavior to the point where they bite off more than they can chew, and begin self-destructing, as they regularly and invariably do? Who do those "all-powerful" bankers come crawling to, cap in hand, to bail out their sinking ship? Monetary sovereigns, who punch in some zeros, and magically keep the "market economy" from going nova yet again.

Top KEK. Oh, it's you, and you're still pushing that Texas-made high school textbook fairy tale. How do you even wear that flag while pushing for nationist reformist electoralism?

Right, because going back in time to the age when there was a frontier is possible.

You have some idealism on your face.

No it isn't. You are talking about how Porky is trying to change the world back to the Gilded Age, which is silly because the system is already optimized for the present.

Jesus, read Marx.

Do not confuse sovereign debt with consumer debt. Consumers can only take on so much credit before it becomes impossible for them to repay at which point the financial institutions that would grant them credit cease to do so.

this is a fucking dumb cope, you faggots can't ever stop shilling for the policies of billionaires

He says as every single last politician from every mainstream party pushes the "stronk and secure borders" meme.

you mean like the billionaire president who wants a giant border wall?

Pushing for unionization is just as bad as pushing for border walls. You're not only excluding millions of migrants from a chance at a decent life, but also excluding millions of domestic (mostly minority) poor while privileging a narrow labor aristocracy of "unionized" elite. Unions have a long and checkered history of segregation and exclusion, to say nothing about propping up capitalist relations and imperialist wars, and shilling for them in the consumerist core is essentially saving capitalism from itself.

fucking nuclear retarded take

Bitch, fuck the minority poor and migrants. The unionized working class should become the ruling class and send you filthy scabs to the guillotine with the capitalists.

Attached: 20150617-UW_Scabs-3.jpg (400x455, 124.14K)

The Presidency is a figurehead position in the US that has power only when coordinating with the oligarchy. Compare the speed with which the US takes action on, say, Israeli security, bank bailouts, and so on vs. the (never-happening) border wall. If the actual ruling class in the US wanted a wall it would be up within a year. Given the resistance in the civil service and military, rulings in lower Courts, Foundation money directed towards promoting pro-immigration activism in media and academia, and so on, I think it's safe to conclude that the US oligarchy does not want a reduction in immigration. The USG in the 1950s deported a million Mexicans in a summer as part of Operation Wetback, remember.

If capitalists today were hardcore nationalists like you stupid Marxists say they are they wouldn’t be concluding massive trade deals like NAFTA, the USMCA and shilling for immigration even if there was a wall (I want them to come legally! – t. Trumpstein). Let’s also look at globalist policies at work in Europe with the EU where borders are practically non-existent and the free movement of people and capital is assured. To keep the system running the capitalists have to conquer larger and larger markets, destroy borders, homogenize the Earth through consumerism and the multikulti not to mention importing millions of low-skill low I Q third-worlders to destroy the ethnic cohesion, communities and culture of the native populations all to serve the almighty punt and profit.

Globalism = Capitalism. Marx even recognized this as far as the 1840s, but he obviously drew flawed conclusions. From the Manifesto:
While Marx talked about provinces being integrated, the next step is countries, whole continents and then the globe. But the question is, WHO will rule the global state? Hmm

Nationalists are the idiots who believe the stupid shit about volk and culture. Capitalists just keep borders in place to maximize their profit margins.

Capital knows no borders, fool.

I love it. You fucknuts were crowing about how you all got him elected and how you were "winning" two years ago. We told you, didn't we? We told your dumb asses. Zig Forums is right again!

Capital moves freely. People have to get visas which only those with specific career experience get. Even then they only get them so long as they are willing to work for significantly less than the locals are willing to work. Then you dipshits blame them for your problems.

Dumbass, capitalism already spans the globe. All it can do now is consolidate into ever-shrinking centers. The bourgeoisie has to eat itself to grow.

Capital already has no borders, and you can't erect any.

That shit is all the result of capitalism being global. There are no more cultures in isolation. It's just one big fucking world, and "cultures" have become nothing but regionalist facades painted over the same base of commodity production. Read Adorno.

Jesus Christ, you stupid fuck, try learning what things actually are so that you can do some goddamn systemic analysis. Reality isn't memes.

Any state always serves the interests of the ruling class. It does not make one damn bit of difference what culture thaey happen to be from. They will always serve their own interests, which are control over themeans of production.

Marx and Engels confirmed as childish anarkiddies

Look beyond economics you fucking dweeb – there’s the obviously capitalist angle, but the most important and innate dimension that leftists are too afraid to even touch is race struggle – something which, unlike class-struggle just doesn’t go away with changing conditions. People back in the 1880s knew all about race struggle – see Ludwig Gumplowicz:

Attached: Dq2fjdhWwAENM9G.jpeg (666x803, 55.94K)

As opposed to?

Poverty is terrible, the only thing worse is not everyone being poor.

He became a stirner fanboy and realized that the world was nothing but a stage for the musings of his ego.

Colonialism was hardly a prerequisite for robber barons to exist
Then why has porky been working nonstop to dismantle it, ever since organized labor began winning victories in the late 1800s?
Neither fiat currency nor deposit insurance existed in Marx's time, and without such reforms, capitalism would've self-destructed about when Marx predicted.
False. Consumers go bankrupt, banks are bailed out by sovereigns, then the "business cycle" starts all over again.

This. Trump's rhetoric ("big beautiful door" included) is exactly that, just as Reagan talked tough on migration but did retarded things like his amnesty. Trump's supporters are another matter from Trump himself, depending on how much of a rabble of unprincipled bootlickers they (continue to) prove themselves to be.

8/10, bait of superior quality.

Wow, gee, I wonder why porky screeches with autistic fury whenever tariffs, taxes on foreign revenue, or indeed migrant quotas are imposed?
Then why does porky constantly push for deregulation and privatization with such fervor?

Studies have shown that stark inequality, to a much larger degree than absolute levels of poverty in many countries, causes dissatisfaction and political instability. Those countries are playing with fire.

the most important and innate dimension that leftists are too afraid to even touch is race struggle
What a fucking joke. There is absolutely nothing about race that definatively determines a set of material interest. There is no "race struggle," because race does not contain contadictions. Race A does not contradict Race B. No, each of them is entirely interchangable with any other within any given mode of production. It is class and only class that is defined by contadictory interests.

You joke-ass brainlet, race does disappear with changing material conditions. Read some goddamn history. Race gets redefined every time a different ethnic group gets brought into any given system, which happens constantly. The Italians become white. The Celts become white. The Slavs become white. Your supposed "race" has never had any exclusive definition. How can it have a "struggle" when it can't even define itself?

Wow, it's fucking nothing. Where are the contradictory definitions that necesitate inherent struggle? I am drunk off my ass, and I can logic better than you can.

Your imagination. Show them to me.