Can we have one of these?
I saw a thread on /b2/ telling people to dump their best "clown world honkler-tier images". The thread started off with a bunch of anti-gay, anti-immigration shit.
I flooded the thread with LSC images and basically turned the whole thread around into an anti-Capitalist thread by simply posting these. I'll post them here since i've got nothing better to do.
Reminder that making "clown world" threads on /b2/ and flooding it with LSC pictures is best praxis. You should try it.
Late Stage Capitalism Dump Thread
Can we have one of these?
flood detected post discarded
What is /b2/ LSC
/b2/ is new /b/.
Clown world meme has always been our meme. LSC is the best clown world meme.
I think the Amazon Blimp thing was proven fake.
Not like it matters. Plans are probably being drawn up already to make it real.
found this today
what the fuck are even baby boomers at this point
ooo is that last pic legit? i hope one crazy sob sees this.
The idea is that the Bible has secret codes to find oil in Israel
holy fuck I looked it up
end me now
a show in the uk about debt collection officers
Ah yes, this is the kind of shit that makes one lose faith in humanity and become a posadist
So late stage capitalism allows for the poor and downtrodden to be given a boss motorized wheel chair by basically other children with know how? Bad example m8.
I like leftypol but you guys need to learn some terminology if you are going to win anyone over. Capitalism is practiced even in prisons. Capitalism goes on regardless of how society has been organized. Fighting it is futile.
Fight and use terms like "corporate rule" or something similar and you'll get through to more people.
Nah. Maximum knowing what stuff is.
Literally prisoners use anything from cigarettes to buttsex to practice capitalism INSIDE A PRISON. You will never stop it.
You have a body and mind, so do I. That's our capital. We leverage it for production and survival. This can't be stopped.
No one knows what you guys want because you use retarded terminology. Even Marx acknowledges what capitalism actually is.
You want to stop the poor farmer from using a tractor (capital) to grow crops? Or you want to stop a corporation from passing laws and ruling over everyone by force?
Which do you want to stop?
Hurr capitalism is the buying and selling of stuf
I literally never mentioned buy or selling. See how retarded you are? How do you expect anyone to come to your side?
Capitalism uses CAPITAL, in a million forms, to produce a better living situation or "wealth."
Need a ditch to run off water from your crops? Got a shovel? Shovel is capital and you do capitalism when you dig that ditch, thereby making the land more arable and more valuable.
Ever seen a dirt poor welder? What do you think they are using to weld? THEIR CAPITAL.
You aren't fighting against that. Yet you insist that you are in your language. The result? No one fucking listens. Just toss in the word "corporate" at least and people will actually get your point.
I understand you have very little mental capacity. But you will always be a slave unless you at least realize what is enslaving you.
It's not capitalism buddy. It's ACTUAL PEOPLE.
However, populations can collectively demand better treatment and a better deal right? Isn't that probably the general reason you are here?
My point is that blaming and attacking "capitalism" includes all our serf brothers. Attacking it is what the lords want you to do instead of attacking them specifically.
Yes. Tools are CAPITAL. And do you use tools to increase your wealth? Or do you use them to remain the same or destroy your wealth? Newsflash. You are engaging in capitalism if you used them to increase your wealth.
So why attack that? Why not attack specific people and institutions?
So unions or social democracy? The goal of socialists/communists is to abolish private property so that there will b no capitalists to barter with, because nobody will be one - or all to the same degree depending on how you look at it.
this is the profit motive of course
Control and ownership are the same thing in practice and this is why it's always a disaster. You are basically playing semantics while clamoring for a small group of people to control all the resources in a top down hierarchical fashion.
But you aren't attacking slavery or the slave drivers. You are attacking the basic human condition.
What makes you think you are qualified to talk about this? I'm really curios
The other human is your capital. Just like your own body is your capital as well. Marxist leaders literally write books about how the population is their capital. The people are treated entirely as capital. Same as in a "free market."
That's my point. This is semantics and it always ends the same. We need to be attacking specific people and institutions with our rhetoric or it falls entirely flat and misses the point.
I've read Das Kapital and I've read Human Action. So I've literally read the bibles of both extremes. They equate to the same thing generally.
Marxists get hung up HARD on ownership. But ownership and control are indistinguishable in practice. Control is the one that matters.
So marxists go on and on and wrest "ownership" from the rich. But then they give "control" to a top down, hierarchical structure that basically ends up doing the exact same thing.
This is why it's more important to attack people and institutions with our rhetoric and not ambiguous ideas.
name one such book
Imagine having Newborn II or III.
"Doctor washed his hands?"
"Better charge them about three fiddy for that."
You will say this doesn't directly mean what i'm saying. But extrapolation makes it pretty clear. At what point in this magic transition does the person cease to be capital?
And that's just the most obvious first quote that came to mind.
When the social relationship underpinning capitalism are abolished.
When there's no longer production for exchange but production for use; when the private ownership of the means of production is no longer possible; when the (capitalistic) exploitation of workers is outlawed; when money is replaced by labour vouchers; when markets are no longer used for the allocation of goods and so on and so forth.
You are conflating a description by Marx of the inner workings of a capitalist economy with Marx' personal view on how an ideal economic system should work.
A description of "what is" is not a prescription of "what should be".
This exactly what is happening under capitalism. Making the economy democratic instead of oligarchic is the opposite of that.
Who's use? This is my point.
Lord Acton - "Power Corrupts, Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"
I fail to see how centering control in one area is going to help. Needs to be more thought into dispersing power in the system you are talking about.
Yes. But then people clamor for even MORE power in even FEWER hands. How big is the committee deciding where all the resources go?
I just think there needs to be more thought into this control vs ownership idea.
There is a reason these things have failed over time and I think generally it's because everyone focuses on ownership, while forgetting that control leads to the exact same issues.
What is the first chapter of Capital about then lad? Sum it up in your own words. I highly doubt that you have any fucking clue otherwise you wouldn't be so retarded to give a definition of capitalism that applies to essentially all hitherto existing human societies.
It's a long discussion on commodities. I couldn't remember Mises first chapter either. These are long books with lots of ideas.
You are hitting on my point. Capitalism is a condition that exists in all human societies. Marx acknowledges this and wrote clearly that capitalism would LEAD TO his system after it inevitably failed.
That's why I'm saying in this thread. Attacking the ambiguous terminology is getting you nowhere and never has gotten us anywhere. It's literally just attacking a very general state of affairs and addresses nothing specific that people can actually stand up against and fight.
You are transhistoricizing Capitalism, which is how I know you haven't read anything, because even if you thought Marx was wrong (nevermind that many others also abide by similar definitions as him re: different types of societies), you'd at least be able to put forward what the key components of a Capitalism, Fuedalist, Slave etc Economies were, and yet I haven't see you even be capable of approaching the discourse from this perspective. If you don't understand something, how can you critique it? All we're getting from you is weasel words.
Tell me, what did you read before you read Capital?
This stupidity is why liberals get the bullet too.
Oh god, how dare this billionaire try to research and solve the homeless problem with his money?
This is unacceptable. The only one who should spend money on this is our glorious government using our tax payer money - they are the only ones who can solve the problem, just like they did in San Francisco, because they are wiser and they have the population's interest in mind.
What causes homelessness? Well gee let's have a fucking think:
Or maybe it's just low Autism Level combined with no favorable genetic traits and the possibility to do jack shit. I doubt most of them are fit to normal society and would rather just leech off social benefits(paid by workers) if they could.
Reminder that homelessness didn't exist in soviet union, because they were forced to work and if they didn't they were forcibly sent to work camps.
Also most of the problems are the fault of themselves and I can't really get my head around why would anyone support this kind of filth, they belong in camps along with kulaks. And fuck me with that PTSD shit, people had their whole families shot and villages burned in WW2 and after the war they re-adjusted, but now we have some yet another kind of parasite, who leech off workers yet again and go kill random other people across the world and then the little angels somehow manage to get depressed. L M F A O
Honestly the "it's their fault argument" makes no sense when homelessness widely varied based on economic outcomes. If most homeless were predestined to be homeless the homelessness rate wouldn't change with how the economy is doing/how the welfare state works.
The homelessness problem got dealt with in this period by massive public founding of cheap as fuck appartment blocks… Not because each family ruined by war rebuild their little individual house with shovels and bootstraps.
Give me $30b, and I will have the answer in one word: rent.
imagine being this retarded
and btw, namedropping the Soviet Union wont fool anyone, bourg apologist
Retarded or not, apologist or not, they are factually correct. The poor don't want to work, simply and clean. They don't have to be poor, they choose it.
All poor? every single poor person doesn't want to work?
if only they got off their lazy asses, walked into the nearest buisiness and gave the manager a firm handshake, all their problems would be solved
I guess 40% of Spanish people under 30 just "choose" to not work then. Makes sense.
They choose not to go over to places with jobs. B/c they too stoopid. Think about it like this:
A stupid person doesn't stay "here".
ok ok, but what if they go "there"
bet you didn't think bout' that one
They get a job, duh. More places than not have not automated away their clerks or burger makers or whatever. They'll manage.
Get a PO box and some confidence. Of course, you can also get several of the myriad welfare benefits there are out there. Have a psych check you out, diagnose you, and apply for bux. In lots of places you can get like $800/month just for having the 'tism.
The (real) poor are made up of retards, disabled, addicts, and elderly. Yet we look around society and see the retarded, disabled, addicts, and elderly working. . . You tell me what's the difference between two people with the exact same condition!?
Holy shit you're dense bruv.
As opposed to fake poors who eat once a day but at least work a shitty part time?
Not gonna post everything I have since it'd just be the same shit as what I posted last thread. Would love to see more new content
Ok, prove it.
the benefit of a capitalist system is that people rarely stay below poverty. Only a few classes of people remain their, hence the list and label.
How do you know you're really in "late state capitalism"? From a Latin American perspective, this is just regular capitalism.
well you're in the periphery
society and capitalism in the core countries (esp succdemia outside of america) looks very different
I agree, it's just shorthand for "especially wacky shit capitalism is doing right now" at this point
prove what, cuck
not a single company is going to hire a homeless person
and the 1000 years of experience for an entry level position bullshit requierements exist to turn down any outsider applicants and hire their buddies and family
sauce on 2nd picture??
here is some shitty art and art-related stuff
Well one thing the aut-right was correct about, we do live in a clown world, they were just wrong on what the joke was…
shove your eugenics crap up your ass nazi
I swear liberals are going to get us all fucking enslaved when they start letting the current lobby-occupied government decide who's capable of defending themselves.