Lefy boomer whines about pop culture, says nothing of value.
>>23314186Overrated. Blur's track The Universal says it all in under 5 minutes, and complements it with music.
Every leftist who doesn't have the balls do be fascist should do what Mark Fisher did.
>>23314229well here's your lucky day
>>23314244But how does fascism help? I feel like fascism keeps thing in a sort of stasis, with its conservatism and all. Imo communism moves thing forward. Hitler and Mussolini led their countries towards ruin, Franco allowed his country to stagnate. Stalin led his people to the stars.
>>23314386Fascism isn't conservatism. Conservatives are liberals in slow motion.
>Stalin led his people to the stars.Germans won both sides of the space race.
>>23314386The runaway train is capitalism with its two disastrous modes, fascism and liberalism. The only escape is something which eschews the mindless scapegoating of fascism and the evangelical worship of the market which comes with liberalism.
>>23314386>Stalin led his people to the stars.By stealing German scientists like the US did. Humans would have been on the moon by 1955 if Nazi Germany had won. The Soviets never did anything on their own. Communism is dysgenic and cannot reproduce genius.
>>23314186https://youtu.be/cNyUx1CBv6Y?si=qmuvBvFOtjIsuf8nI made a video explaining it and refuting it chapter by chapter. Basically I agree with the thread so far
>>23314244underaged /pol/kid from the discord>>23314386tranny from leftypol
>>23314386Fisher describes two types of people who form the dialectic around capitalism. The first is “Liberal Communists” like George Soros and Bill Gates, who combine unrestricted pursuit of self-interest and globalization with rhetoric about humanitarianism and climate change. The other is the “immobilizers,” like the right wing protesters in France who want to hold back Capitalism in order to keep France “the same.” I imagine fascism is an extreme version of the immobilizers that Fisher describes. He criticizes this dialectic because, obviously, both sides have conceded that capitalism is here to say, and it can only be restricted in certain ways based on their right- or left-leaning dispositions. But is that a bad thing? Should capitalism be treated solely as an enemy of the state rather than a tool to be wielded or restricted based on the national interest? My immediate reaction is that the immobilizers are correct, but I’m trying to read more Marxist literature to see if I’m missing something.
>>23314386>Your brain on communist ideology
80 pages of seething about the fall of communism.
>>2331495 do you think the immobilizers are basically the militant farmers in Houellebecq’s Serotonine? The argument about austerity is a stale one in Europe, but I’ve recently come to understand it in terms of novel forms of hyper-consumption supplanting more traditional ways to find meaning and identity, so the idea that (for example) the Italian government should bail out Covid-struck opera companies no longer seems like an imperative thing to do. The idea is the role of communal life is being supplanted by the atomized individual who has to turn to consuming products to fill in the cavity where his identity used to be; that is what Fisher blames for making us all depressed. Do you remember which essay you’re referencing?>>23314661Dude do you just wake up every day and search for new Fisher threads on 4chan while you drink your coffee
>>23315130Meant as a reply to >>23314957
It's a work of artI don't care about philosophy, economics nor politics but it was one of the most soulful books I've ever read
>>23314186The Bible of a sociopathic cult leader
>>23314401Sadly this is the case. That’s why one should be a reactionary
>>23315136You’re brainwashed
>>23314401>>23314423>>23315012And yet none of them disputed my point.
>>23314683god i hate him so fucking much>>23314386Stalin was based. Converted gommunism into nationalism. Wasn't a sneaky fox and wielded power like a lion chad.
>>23314186he was right about everything, i think he's more relatable as someone living in the UK though, its especially grim here.
>>23315158No
>>23314386>Hitler>FascistTell me you have no idea what Fascism is without even saying 3 words.
>>23315167He didn't convert anything. Marx and Engels already said that the proletariat should be the national representative and that international union can only exist between nations.
>>23314186Leftcoms btfod this loser:https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2020-06-15/reflections-on-mark-fisher-s-essay-on-capitalist-realism>>23314386Stalin wasn't a communist>>23315012Communism isn't an ideology
>>23314661>quotes ayn rand in the first part of the videooh this will be good
>>23315196Leftcoms haven't done anyything. Marxim-Leninism is the true and sole Left.
>>23315201>Marxim-Leninism is the true and sole LeftI agree. It's just that the Left has nothing to do with communism or the working classDo you like Fisher btw? Do MLs generally like him? Just curious
>>23315136Have you read Ghosts of my Life? You oughta
>>23314386Chuddies seething in replies lol
>>23314386fascism doesnt keep things in stasis, just look at any fascist regime, they collapse within a couple of decades, communism lasts a bit longer but also collapses. anything that purports to oppose capitalism turns into a tyrannical nightmare and destroys itself.
Is this the online lefty equivalent of what Evola's Revolt Against the Modern World was for online chuds?
>>23314683lmao look at these fucking tween dorkscraziest thing is that even flanked by literal children, fuentes looks like a baby
>>23315255cool nick is the future sorry tranny
>>23314386>But how does fascism helpBoogeyman cart eternally put before the Red Horse to endlessly self-justify any ill conceived violent pipedream that fancies them. >>23314423Securing Objective Freedom in Law would require debriding 'capitalism' - superficially distinct from its antipode, Bolshevism - from the notion of "free enterprise" as such.
>>23315259Nick is a faggot. AHe's moving the Overton Window and making kids question Jewish control in the US. The problem is that he's stupid and is like 3 months away from straight up supporting wignat third worldism.
>>23314423Unironically describing democratic socialism
>>23315276literally the only person pointing out jewish control of both parties, especially the republicans
>>23315278>the way to escape capitalism is to do capitalism + charityGENIUS!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>23314186in the ccru book they mention Fernand Braudel and how they took his inspiration that "capitalism" is maybe separate from "market economies". Market Economies being good and something that leads to efficiency, competition, and leads to creative destruction of dying industries, etc. What usually hurts people is "capitalism", which is usually not about efficiency or competition. its primarily about accumulation. I'm still sort of thinking about this I need to find other sources to read about this idea
>>23315216Many such cases lmao. Unfortunately.
>>23314661>says something completely off the mark from what fisher is saying>but i digresskek
Misuse of frequent antimony. Need quasi establish faculty deification? (maladaptive sarcasm)
>>23315314>Misuse, :/
>>23315297Capturing the production of capitalism by incentivizing innovators and industrious people but also capturing the power of the means of production to ensure basic standards of health, education, and opportunity for all citizens.
>>23315402delusional because capitalism is ultimately anti-human, most western democracies are doing what you are saying and are going to continue to do so but all its creating is a vast underclass of disillusioned consumers
>>23315425This is because it's not focused on liberating citizens. If you look at the Scandinavian countries, they have it pretty correct, they just needed to limit immigration. Places like the USA are more focused on forcing the citizens to be serfs of capital rather than be self actualized, healthy, educated citizens.
>>23315447>If you look at the Scandinavian countriesOpinion discarded. The Scandinavian counties benefit from imperialist expansion by way of NATO. In addition, they have the very same problems capitalist realism speaks about. Alienation, dismantling of community, a collective schizophrenia developing amongst its native population, increasing use of SSRI’s and other mood altering drugs in order to cope with the realities of capitalism. The ironic thing is, that the immigration problem is BECAUSE of capitalism and its constant need for upward growth. That’s Fisher’s entire point, is that while critiquing the aspects of capitalism itself, you find yourself being absorbed by it, seeing no alternative.
>>23315549You can acknowledge all of Fisher's points while also realizing there is a tangible difference in well being between the Scandinavian countries and the USA. There is a massive gulf between rampant Capitalist grindset extracting maximum shareholder value out of every citizen and a culture where basic health, education, and national identity are the overt goal of society and the government. Immigration in these countries has been driven by a form of weaponized compassion (particularly around the Syrian migrant crisis for example). I found a lot of insight and value in Fisher's work, but if you buy his thesis wholesale, there basically is no alternative to killing yourself, it is maximum cynicism and doompilled. I retain at least a modicum of hope for the spirit of the human creature to find a way, if not to ultimately conquer the poisoning influence of Capitalist Realism, at least to mitigate and domesticate it, as we have done with some small degree of success with violence itself.
>>23315703the scandinavian countries are resource rich, majority white (for now) and have low population density. to what extent is the overall better situation in scandinavia the result of decisions made on a human level or just circumstance. i cant see scandinavia getting better with time if the current trends continue which they will.
>>23315213No but I will eventually
>>23315210No. His nihilism is on par with the western leftist wankery that is thoroughly disconnected from the working class.
>>23315227The soviet union didn't "collapse", it was first destalinized by Khrushchev and then later illegally dismantled by the CPSU.
>>23315938What do you think collapse looks like?
>>23315171i'm relieved he didn't live to see picrel
>>23315216>>23315311You two should fuck
>>23315284That’s great but as soon as he puts on the turban I’ll say “told ya so” also NTA.
>>23315234No, it's only 88 pages long and is basically just a compilation of substack articles. It's more like the Bronze Age Mindset for lefties if anything.
>>23315305I actually have a book by him I’m supposed to begin sooner or later
>>23315175>No u!
>>23316077
>complains about disney movies criticizing capitalism for you or some shit>does the exact same thing with his bookso this is the power of /lit/erature...
You have to put a book like this in the context of when Fisher was born, when he came of age, what his cultural touchstones were growing up and how that postwar social democratic modernist optimism died on the vine as the years went on. As a kid he would have gone to sleep after watching experimental British TV production and sci-fi series, he got to adolescence just as electronic dance music was coming to the fore, back when it possible to conceive of new sonic forms. His writings work best as cultural critique and not frameworks of political economy. I'm not a lefty but I have sympathy for his frustrations, his disdain of New Labour bureaucracy and the moral priggishness of what counts for the Left today.
>>23314186anyone, especially a lefty, who doesn’t understand that muh capitalism is just an appendage of the state can never understand, or offer any meaningful insight into, the modern world.
>>23317536Oh dear, the early 2000s libertarians aren't sending their best.Capital is the sole agent of history, we are simply its victims or privileged witnesses. This is something Fisher, an unremarkable figure really, understood thanks to a Deleuzian education and Nick Land.
>>23314186I read this book a couple of years ago and it seemed really profound at the time however ultimately didn't leave a lasting impression other then how naive I was living in the materialist tunnel vision
>>23317560the two competing definitions of “capital” can be generalized as>1>economicsthat is to say, “the free market” or simply the observable realities of supply and demand, etc. in which case it could be argued that biology, geography, or technology is the sole agent of history just as easily as arguing that “capital” is.>2>Corporate America as in crony capitalism, corporatism, etc as practiced today in the west. and this phenomenon is entirely dependent on the privileges, protections, and often times just straight up free money the corporations receive from the state, without which they would not exist at all. I’m entirely unconvinced that “capital” in the way fisher or land conceive of it exists at all. what they are afraid of/worshipping (in fisher/land’s cases respectively) is nothing more than a shadow cast by the state.
>>23317463He gleaned the impotency of the left and looked into the abyss and saw that fascism was the only way out. Everything he had lived for was a lie.
>>23317665>crony capitalismYour perspective is too narrow, and frankly I don't know how anyone has reached this point and can think "crony capitalism" has any theoretical heft. When has capitalism (or any economic system) not had an issue with cronyism? During Reaganism, or perhaps the Roaring Twenties? Maybe when the East India Company's flag stood over Mumbai? Is it that you have a clear, shining *idea* of what capitalism ought to be and are comparing present arrangements with *that*? Also, I called capital the agent of history because that is the mechanism/interest which now dominates. In reality corporations and the state cannot be neatly separated in the way you half-way seem to think. It wouldn't even occur to materialist historians - I'm thinking Tooze and Edgerton - to divvy them up in that way. They have evolved together and that is why we need to bring in the "secret third thing" to better understand what drives them.
>>23317780>In reality corporations and the state cannot be neatly separated in the way you half-way seem to think.no, I agree completely. corporations are appendages of the state.
>>23315938>The soviet union didn't "collapse", it was first destalinized by Khrushchev and then later illegally dismantled by the CPSU.>illegally dismantledStalinists calling everything they don't like liberal while deferring to fundamentally liberal attitudes and norms of "law" and processes never stops being funny to me. It's part of what made Yeltsin possible -- he used that process against the state, which he could only do because of existing institutional support for nominal federalism and elections. Not the primary cause for the fall but definitely accelerated it!
>>23314186Pretty nice.
CCK Philosophy just uploaded a vid on hauntology, come watch it with mehttps://youtube.com/watch?v=5vNLaPnEoqI&list=WL&index=1&pp=gAQBiAQB
>>23318561Its the same video but just in vhs. Hes based to and i want to take this opportunity to say: What are the actualizations on this video? was there any changes? are we practically the same in our cultural impass? yada yada and is there a map of historical cultural evolution i could get?
>>23314401>Conservatives are liberals in slow motion.I've conjured this; they were liberals 10 years ago, but now they are confused about their own ideology.
>>23315758Isn't Sweden predicted to be 30% Islamic in 2050? If so, then Sweden's eternally fucked. These are dark times...
>>23318888When foreigners openly degrade me for being a burger I start to not care after awhile. Oh well. Fix the sexual reproduction problem and then we’ll talk
>>23317780It does because crony capitalism is the hegemonic ideology of the west. So it’s obviously working as intended.
>>23315185Could you elaborate upon this?
>>23314957>He criticizes this dialectic because, obviously, both sides have conceded that capitalism is here to sayNot true. The Kingdom of Italy nationalized pretty much the entire economy.
>>23319547NTA but fascism is very diverse and possibly fictitious, ideologically paraphyletic. Hitler was first and foremost a National Socialist, and National Socialism is different from Italian Fascism in many ways. For example, Italy was practically anti-capitalist, whereas the National Socialists were, for the most part, tolerant of capitalism as long as ethnic Germans were the capitalists. Not uniformly. Strasserists are a subdivision of National Socialists who are explicitly anti-capitalist.
you guys have to accept that:1/ all societies decay2/ the democratic republics by the bourgeois will not be exempted from decay3/ the new society will not have the bourgeois at the top, ie it will not be a republic4/ if the new model of society is so obvious, the bourgeois will nip it in the bud, in order to keep their republics alive5/ the new society will NEVER EVER be created by any civil servant or businessman=>The solution will never come from any media products like Zemmour in France, nor from a business product like Trump in the USA, nor from an academic product like Milei (in democracy, academia is part of the entertainment industry), nor from a woman because, in democracy, women are products of bureaucracies and marketing.The solution will come from somebody who is not part of the republic. Only an external element and/or an external event to the republic will destroy the republic and the fake dichotomy bureaucrats-businessmen for good.The point is that it will be so strange that westerners won't see it coming
>>23319547I have a degree in history. Fascism is not a left/right thing. Nor is it a "strong man" thing (Hitler was Nationalist/Socialist only when he came to power, he adopted Fascism later as a way to keep it). Real Fascism is an ideology that was created by a militant Socialist named Mussolini in Italy with his cohorts called the Fascista. It is constantly changing, forces people to believe in its own brand of "science" (this is considered as "progressive" to those who take part in it) and has a religious nature to it as it is meant to eventually replace all religions in favor of worship of the state and it's leaders. It censors the opinions of others and discredits them, has no value to the unborn or elderly or infirm (and eventually kills them off), insists that the public first register their arms and then later surrender them to the state, and has henchmen in uniforms attack those that it has a problem with (in the US these henchmen are Antifa and BLM) using perceived injustices as a means to control them so they can be sicked on their neighbors in an instant. They have a higher ranking group that ignores the rights of their citizens and uses the state to punish those who do not get in line (this is now the FBI in the US). It doesn't matter which side of the cultural perspective you are on. The left in the US has been adopting Fascist tactics while claiming conservatives are the Fascist ones for decades now. They are even calling Christians (who have done nothing for the last 50 years here) Facists for no good reason. Why? Because they plan to kill them and others in the future and need to make them seem less human, just as the NAZIs did to the Jews in WWII. I really don't care if you are insulted. It is happening here right now, just in a different way. If you want to come over and participate, go ahead. You were warned.
>>23319582>For example, Italy was practically anti-capitalist, whereas the National Socialists were, for the most part, tolerant of capitalism as long as ethnic Germans were the capitalists. I see. Could you elaborate upon how "corporatism" is relevant to both of these situations?Thanks for the explanations thus far.
>>23318888>>Isn't Sweden predicted to be 30% Islamic in 2050?I read that in germany 25% of the population are migrants or kids of migrants originally important in the 80s
>>23319590The word "corporatism" is widely misused, or has at least developed a neologic meaning not used historically that creates confusion. The old idea of "corporatism" was viewing a nation as a corpus, IE Latin for a body, and the classes and professions and whatnot within it as organs within a body that all need to cooperate and function together for overall health. It's a collectivist way of looking at things and it and similar points of view have been advocated by fascists, socialists, Christian democrats, and advocates of so-called "welfare capitalism". The word "corporatism" is also used to refer to de facto rule, or at least governmental power, held by corporations. A good example of that would be the "Banana Wars" bullshit that the U.S was up to during the early 20th century.
>>23319588I appreciate your explanation, it's very clear. What I've been able to derive from it is that fascism is a power structure/framework, rather than a political ideology which espouses particular *moral* goods, and denounces particular moral wrongs. You can impose whichever 'rights' and 'wrongs' you please, since it's a framework to project, and, as you mentioned earlier regarding Hitler, consolidate power. It's in the eye of the beholder, essentially.Hitler, again. He derived his 'political morality' (crude phrase) and presumably the economic organization he favoured from the *political ideology* known as 'National Socialism', whereas 'fascism' was merely the framework which he deployed in order to consolidate and retain the sociopolitical power he'd accumulate thus far. >I really don't care if you are insulted.No worries, I can see exactly what you mean. It makes a lot of sense when you put it that way, even in IB European History through high school, 'fascism', 'Nazi-ism', 'national socialism' was never explained particular well, or even just defined along philosophical/political lines whatsoever. Sure, you learn about how the Americans took inspiration from the German public works projects, and how the NSDAP bureaucracy was constantly cannibalizing itself, how Hitler was quite lazy relative to, say, Bismarck. However, there's never any kind of specific definition of how the economy was actually structured, how trade was organized, the relevance of 'crown corporations' (government corpos) following nationalization, how capitalists responded to nationalization of their firms and factories, the economic relevance of precious metals, labour organization, etc.I asked the other poster to explain corporatism, and how it's relevant both in Germany and Italy, presumably there were structural differences rather than purely superficial ones. I would greatly appreciate if you could explain that, as well as what's listed above. Thanks again either way.
>>23319617>You can impose whichever 'rights' and 'wrongs' you pleaseThat's true regardless of ideology. Those who have power get to decide what's permitted and not permitted, and no genuine moral arbiter exists that can be appealed to, either in the form of some hypothetical individual like a deity or a syllogistic framework.
>>23319614>or has at least developed a neologic meaningI see, explains a lot of the arbitrary definitions I keep seeing.>and the classes and professions and whatnot within it as organs within a body that all need to cooperate and function together for overall health.So essentially, instead of overthrowing the capitalist class and creating a 'dictatorship of the proletariat', National Socialism promotes class cooperation.>"Banana Wars" bullshit that the U.S was up to during the early 20th century.Might be a bit of a long shot, but do you know to what extent these economic conflicts and military interventions created the Venezuela of today? What I mean is, how much of the 'eat the rich' attitude that **SEEMINGLY** destroyed Venezuela is 'real' vs foreign interference?
>>23319627I understand that ultimately it's just a game of power, mass marketing to constituents, though there still exist guidelines to particular ideologies. China, for example, seems to be "communist" in name only, a misnomer. There's certainly no strict black or white, just shades of grey. Even then, there are situations where a particular, say, proposed piece of legislation, leans 'more X' or 'more Y' in ideological consistency. You can't appeal to an omnipotent arbiter, but you could still try to logically deduce yourself how XYZ something is or isn't, if that makes sense. What I mean is that there's a difference between a *set* of moral rights and wrongs (determined however) which are applied to state governance, and a power structure employed to retain influence.Sure, that set of rights and wrongs might deny you the right to employ said power structure, but as you said, it's up to those in power to decide. That's what I meant with 'different shades of grey', you're gaining something and conceding another. Third-party analysis, me, you, whoever, can then determine to what EXTENT you are 'faithfully' following a particular ideology, to what EXTENT it's morphed into something entirely different from the original goal. But ultimately, the book listing out techniques to bully and gaslight a population is different than the book explaining how to organize an industrial economy, trade, the judicial system, favourable demographics, etc.
>>23319672>So essentially, instead of overthrowing the capitalist class and creating a 'dictatorship of the proletariat', National Socialism promotes class cooperation.Yes. They used a paramilitary organization called the Sturmabteilung or "SA" for protecting their rallies and intimidating rivals during the 20s and early 30s, and a lot of its' members were working class in origin, with a lot of them formerly being in communist and socialist groups, and believed that the NSDAP should be more anti-capitalist in policy, emphasize economic equality (at least between and amongst ethnic Germans), and enact land redistribution and stuff like that, and they were led by a guy named Ernst Rohm, who was gay, very controversial at the time, and anti-capitalist in outlook, having his SA dudes support striking workers and fight strikebreakers and stuff like that, but Hitler had a lot of big corporate backers who didn't like that, and the SA's utility as streetfighters was no longer needed, so they had Rohm and a lot of other members of the SA killed and the organization downsized and sidelined. I find Rohm to be a pretty interesting figure, and he was ballsy to the very end.>Might be a bit of a long shot, but do you know to what extent these economic conflicts and military interventions created the Venezuela of today?AFAIK Venezuala's economic issues revolve around the crude oil industry, with declining prices, sanctions on their exporting of oil, and declining production due to the state tapping the funds of their state-owned oil company to keep the lights on.
>>23319590NTA but that’s not what Corporatism means
>>23319740Thanks for the quick review, I remember touching on Rohm in high school. Guess I'll have to look deeper into Venezuela. >>23319869I never alluded to corporatism having this or that meaning, I asked how it, as a concept, was relevant to both situations.
>>23319585This is interesting but quite vague. Could you tell me more about what this external threat would be?
>>23314186what i find weird about this book is that a lot of its arguments would also be used by right-wing libertarians. he spends a lot of time criticizing how capitalism has become too bureaucratize and procedural. but the question is, is that bureaucracy caused by too much capitalism, or too much state intervention in it? fisher would say the former whereas others would say the latter. after all, we have a "mixed" economy with heavy government involvement and regulations.
>>23319588>Real Fascism is an ideology that was created by a militant Socialist named Mussolini in Italy with his cohorts called the Fascista.Mussolini was a socialist but it's important to note he supported Italy entering WWI, which caused splits among socialists at the time. There were other influences including Georges Sorel, a French political theorist who had been an orthodox Marxist but distanced himself from the materialism of it for belief in myths and passions to inspire people to take action. They also, unlike Marxists, rejected class struggle for corporatism (different social classes playing their part in a unity), while also transfiguring class struggle to occur between nations. Italy was thus depicted as a "proletarian nation" struggling against "plutocratic and reactionaries democracies" in Mussolini's speech declaring war on the United Kingdom.>has no value to the unbornThat's incorrect. Fascist regimes including Italy were pro-natalist, outlawed abortion, believed that it was people's duty to their nation to have as many children as possible, and they introduced a number of measures to increase the birth rate. In Italy, they called this the "Battle for Births.">in the US these henchmen are Antifa and BLMThe Blackshirts in Italy were mainly war veterans. Antifa in the U.S. really emerged in the 1980s in fights between racist and anti-racist punks (usually with anarchist ideas). In the 1980s and 1990s they called themselves ARA or Anti-Racist Action. BLM traces its ideas to Ella Baker, a civil rights activist in the 50s and 60s who opposed vanguard-type politics and charismatic leaders, and advocated for a Christian-inspired grassroots democracy-type thing where people throughout the society would make their own decisions. To be honest, I don't really get "fascist" vibes from much today. The closest equivalent would probably be schismatic, state-worshipping Stalinist cults like Infrared which try to recruit alt-right guys with the idea that socialism will do what "fascists" only talk about (and, ironically, call everything they don't like "fascist"). Russia as like a "proletarian nation" fighting the West. Fans of Dugin and Heidegger. Enemies of "Anglo-American imperialism." Stuff like that.
>>23319588>The left in the US has been adopting Fascist tactics while claiming conservatives are the Fascist ones for decades nowI challenge you to list these fascist tactics and provide examples of contemporary left-wing Americans engaged in them. (And no, your PragerU degree don't impress us)
>>23320749>is that bureaucracy caused by too much capitalism, or too much state intervention in it? fisher would say the former whereas others would say the latter.Or some mix of both, like some global capitalist gigantism intertwined with the state. Hierarchies collide, in other words. This is the argument against state socialism for many years where if you dismantle the existing economic hierarchy by creating a more powerful state, resources will flow toward the power, and the people who constitute that state will be at apex of a new economic hierarchy, enforced by unprecedented powers. Consider China, for instance. Then others say, let's have "free market" capitalism of people like Ayn Rand. But virtually everyone who has traced the origins of capitalism agree that its rise is bound up in the modern nation-state, to national currencies, to regulated equities markets, and so on. The sort of capitalism we have now is dependent on the state and intertwined with it, nationally and internationally. The idea that you can wield state power to control capital or capital to control state power is a completely ahistorical ideology shared by the left and the free-market right. Again, gaze upon China.
>>23319588>>23321257Fascism originates from the Anarchist tendencies in the 19th century. Mussolini said he wouldn't have adopted his ideology were it not for his Anarchist-Bakuninist father. Marx and Engels fought anarchists all their lives.Anarchism is anti-communism.
>>23321277What do you make of Georges Sorel and his followers then? A nexus for Marxism, anarchism and fascism
>>23321264>The idea that you can wield state power to control capital or capital to control state power is a completely ahistorical ideologyWhat do you think SIOC and socialist patriotism were all about? There's a reason why the USSR and China are not affected by financial crises hat western capitalist democracies undergo.
>>23321289Sorel was never a Marxist and Syndicalism is not Marxist.
>>23314661>he believes that the semi-arbitrary classification of mental illness and subsequent formation of a market capitalizing on this classification has nothing to do with politics/capitalism and ignorantly handwaves it as "oh well that's nature I guess"Terminal midwit take
>>23321307His theory is based significantly on Marx. Sorel wrote a whole book attempting to show Marx wasn't in the Western progressive tradition
>>23321306living in a communist state is it’s own type of perpetual crisis.
>>23321319Sorel rejects the party form which is anti-Marxist. A lot of the early anarchists/syndicalists turned into fascists for a reason.Same with Kronstadt rebels and Spanish anarchists who later would become fascists. The tendency is clear and that's because anarchism is anti-communist nonsense.
>>23314249You are mistaken— the present is awful and the future is dark as a central African nigger.
>>23321637Dark women are hot
>>23321310Source: a pun
>>23321306>There's a reason why the USSR and China are not affected by financial crises hat western capitalist democracies undergo.China is experiencing a financial crisis right now, or is at least desperately trying to stave one off after major developers and shadow lending firms (we call these "money market funds" in the West btw) started collapsing like Turkish apartment buildings in an earthquake. China's financial system is not very different from Western ones and the relationship between the banks and the government is very intertwined in both cases. Government guarantees and credit regulation are similar in both cases, and both are subject to financial risks which can ripple out to the wider economy. There are some differences on account of China's system being overall less developed but it's only a matter of time until it comes to even more closely resemble that of Western economies.The USSR, okay, "financial crisis" is a problem because they didn't have a financial system to have a financial crisis, but the Stalin era was actually extremely chaotic and the reality for most people was less the state providing everything (which as a well-informed communist like yourself would know, they didn't seek equality of outcome), but an unrelenting struggle to secure basic necessities from housing, food and clothing through pulling strings of working one's connections, because scarcity was a permanent defining feature of the system at all levels. That's a fact and quite interesting, but that doesn't imply that a significant number of people didn't support Stalin at the time or weren't optimistic about the future.
>>23314211So it's "lit before lit"
>>23315227>anything that purports to oppose capitalism turns into a tyrannical nightmare and destroys itself.Capitalism is destroying itself, although slowly. Feudalism hasn't been tried again since monarchies died after the French Revolution. Maybe if we undid all our atheist materialist brainwashing we would actually create a economic system that has the salvation of the human race as a human goal, directed towards God and a monarch as the mediator to God, instead of rotten godless ideologies.We don't deserve it though, so capitalism is indeed the only system that works with our delusion about a individual-centric (increasingly narcissistic and selfish) worldview.
>>23314186You let capitalism play out and read land, is that shrimple.
Richard Ferdinand Kahn, Baron Kahn, CBE, FBA (10 August 1905 – 6 June 1989) was a British economist.Kahn was born in Hampstead into the orthodox Jewish family of Augustus Kahn, inspector of schools and former German schoolmaster, and Regina Schoyer. He was brought up in England and educated at St Paul's School, London. He attended King's College, Cambridge.[1] Kahn took a 1st in Mathematics, Part I, at Cambridge, followed in 1927 by a 2nd in Physics in the Natural Sciences tripos. Taught economics by Gerald Shove and John Maynard Keynes from 1927 to 1928, he gained a 1st in Economics, Part II, in 1928. In 1930, he was elected a Fellow of King's College.[2]Kahn worked in the Faculty of Economics and Politics from 1933. He became Director of Studies for economics students at King's College in 1947, a post he held for four years. Kahn was appointed professor of economics in 1951, and succeeded Keynes as Bursar of King's College.[3] He served in numerous other government and agency positions, such as the research and planning division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in 1955 and the UK National Coal Board in 1967.[1] Kahn retired from Cambridge in 1972, but continued to live at King's College.
>>23322961This jew is the economic thinker of Keynes.>Kahn was one of the five members of Keynes' Cambridge Circus. Kahn was also one of Keynes' closest collaborators on the creation of Keynes' General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.[7]>Kahn was made a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in 1946[8] and became a Fellow of the British Academy in 1960, and was created a life peer with the title Baron Kahn, of Hampstead in the London Borough of Camden on 6 July 1965.[9][10]
>>23322815if the only way you can think of stopping capitalism is somehow erasing the last 500 years and going back to feudalist christian larp then i have to tell you its been over for a long time already.you're making the same mistake communists make and thats assuming that the economy, "capitalism" is some kind of ideology that can be adjusted to suit your own purpose. capitalism is just what happens when you do everything in the most efficient and productive manner, thats the only justification it needs to completely BTFO every potential economic system no matter how much it eventually damages the quality of human life. the market doesnt care about that and never will.
It’s like the modern Communist Manifesto. Misguiding and unimportant compared to the writers other work. However, it’s short and seductive. So, you get people on board for your cause. The only issue being that they’re retarded and would get filtered by anything too substantial. That’s why this book’s language has infested Reddit boards and YouTube videos about this “capitalist dystopia”. It’s contents have been watered down to interesting phrases or words that idiots don’t need to probe further because people agree with them anyway.
