Why does right wing philosophy, spend so much time attacking Socialism, while at the same time, is completely unable to engage in any meaningful analysis of Capitalism? Right philosophers seem to have a completely childish reading of capitalist structural issues, for example, Hitchens claims Socialism is wrong, because the rich, elite he met, were polite and nice, which discredits the rich are exploitative? Like what the actual fuck? They seemingly think free market solutions are the best solution to everything, but for some reason, but then can't even really explain the basics of how a free market society isn't completely overrun by corporates and those who can afford to enforce physical power.Right philosophers blame the "left" for all the social ills of today, despite Neoliberalism (essentially, the merging of the establishment with Austrian/Chicago lolbert philosophy) has been completely dominant in the West for half a century, and most of those "social ills" are supported by the Capitalist/Corporate class. This of course loops back to the simple fact Rightoids can't seemingly bring themselves, to ever engage in a serious analysis of Capitalism or it's structures or even bother how to understand how Capitalism actually works beyond the field of contemporary "Economics".Right wing philosophers weren't always this retarded, in fact, before the 20th century, the right dominated the field. So what the fuck happened? Why are modern rightoid intellectual establishment such brainlets?
You're talking about economics. The general consensus among modern mainstream economists is that neither "capitalism" nor "socialism" exists. Rather than fantasizing about the perfect utopian society, they view life as a series of trade-offs that individuals and governments must choose.
>>16882272>infographiclots of reading materialmaybe you are looking in the wrong places op
>>16882272One of the big reasons why Academia is dominated by the political left is that it is funded by the government these days.
>>16882272First, Right wingers don't necessarily view Capitalism as a perfect system in the same way the Left views socialism as a perfect system. Right wingers consider Free Market Capitalism as the best system for producing the most general good, BUT they do not view it as perfect or without fault. It's just generally considered superior to Socialism/Communism/Feudalism/Etc. The least-bad system is often the description.Secondly, a LOT of right wingers (particularly Libertarians and other small government advocates) actually strongly dislike market capitalism and corporatism and view them as a distinct aberration on free market capitalism. You would be surprised how many right wing thinkers are actually pretty anti-Corporate. Also see >>16882308The fundamental difference between the modern Right and Left are utopianism and pragmatism. The Left wants a perfect society based on objective equality and what "should be," the Right wants a functioning society based on "what works."ALL of that comes with the caveat that I am posting IN GENERAL. Obviously there are tons of Right Wingers who absolutely believe society ought to be a certain way, and there are Left wingers who actually are pragmatists, but in general that is what a see as the main difference between the two.
>>16882272A complete lack of interests in positive beliefs, or ideas more generally. The right wing at this point, is defined by its dislike of an ever-growing list of causes and bad guys rather than any coherent program for society. E.g. the actions/ideology of globalist elites have done massive damage to the economic prospects of much of the working class, so our solution is to lower taxes, remove restrictions on those elites, and cripple the 'administrative state' so that those elites can have the run of the place. And at the ground level, who would be the target audience for an intellectual right-wing? Their core social group pivoted from TV to radio to social media; they were never into long-form content. >ever engage in a serious analysis of Capitalism And so a generic "it's what we have, so why bother changing it" attitude persists. Everything is cast in near-apocalyptic terms, but also their program is largely the status quo and in fact a frequent criticism of their enemies is that they want to make radical change.
>>16882968Academia has always been dominated by whatever the era's equivalent of progressives were. In the early-to-mid 1800s, nationalism, market economics and (later) positivism were the hot topics. German universities, for example, were filled with young idealists who wanted reunification. Move on to the 1900s, and various flavors of reformism, progressivism, and socialism are en vogue. Even during the Cold War, the heyday of a sort of corporatist, militarist, conformist science, the big anti-communist names (Teller, von Neumann) still had opinions on the environment and overall relation of technology to society that matched those of their intellectual contemporaries closer than they did conservatives of the time.
>>16882272>Capitalismdoesn't exist.
>>16882272Mark Ames wrote an article about V.S. Naipaul, who was a rather reactionary intellectual from Trinidad, that was pretty interesting because he loathed meeting American intellectuals and got really blackpilled attended the 1984 RNC:https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/07/mark-ames-why-the-american-right-never-liked-v-s-naipaul.htmlAmes doesn't explain the "why" but it's related to your question, you might find it interesting. But Ames believes the American right doesn't like intellectuals, they want "team players." They're a bunch of Rotary Club / Chamber of Commerce types. It's probably related to class. The Republican Party has just a huge number of businessmen, guys who run a contract manufacturer or fracking services provider, or police chiefs and county sheriffs. Petty-bourgeoisie. I can see Jordan Peterson being attractive because he combines some intellectual concepts with self-help pep that's also attractive to these people.I'm leftie on a lot of things, but it tracks with what I've seen. When I encounter a reactionary intellectual who presents a challenge, they're often third-world conservatives. I don't mean anti-U.S. reactionaries (although maybe some of them are intelligent). But I recently came across an Egyptian emigre to the U.S. (who is very pro-Western, pro-Israel too in fact) named Hussein Aboubakr Mansour who I thought, okay, this guy is pretty smart or presents a challenge:https://critiqueanddigest.substack.com/>>16883021I liked Adorno's description of the "pseudoconservative." They're not conservatives... they're something else. He wrote a book called the Authoritarian Personality. Basically they suffer from a failed identification with their own elites. Being authoritarian-minded people, they have a mental block from criticizing their own in-group, hence all the talk about "subversion."
>>16883052My point is: how does an institution which is dependend on bloated state spending come up with ideas opposing its own financial base?
>leftists infiltrate instituations to seize the means of social production because "the workers" rejected them>make tldr writings about how they must destroy western values and systems of cultural power>get exploited by their own wishes>blame the institutions that they infiltrated and call them capitalists/neoliberals (made up boogymen by leftists)
>>16883145>Being authoritarian-minded peopleWhat really fucking bothers me in this day and age, specifically as a Libertarian, is seeing how many idiots on both sides fall into that. It's extremely depressing to me that the majority of people on both sides of the political spectrum has some fucking infuriating need to try and control every aspect of my life based on their personal adherence to "socially correct" behavior, whatever they view that to be.Just wanting to be left alone is the most radical opinion of all.
>>16883184Just wanting to be left alone is going back a couple of years and acting like things won't go to shit for your children's generation.
>>16883184>specifically as a Libertarianmy condolences
>>16883021>The right wing at this point, is defined by its dislike of an ever-growing list of causes and bad guys rather than any coherent program for society. E.g. the actions/ideology of globalist elites have done massive damage to the economic prospects of much of the working class, so our solution is to lower taxes, remove restrictions on those elites, and cripple the 'administrative state' so that those elites can have the run of the place.What does that even mean?
>>16882272A Right Wing analysis of Capitalism leads to National Socialism and juden peterstein will flood the planet in tears if someone even mentions the name of the big AH.
>>16883242Typical leftist thought is that anyone who doesn't buy their bullshit is a "reactionary" whom just hates the idea of change. Leftists often cannot understand why someone else might not buy into their utopian bullshit and so, they MUST be a small-minded reactionary! That post is either bait or just an idiot either way, I wouldn't take it seriously.
>>16883242he's a deluded Bernout
>>16883252You're pretty mad for someone who's not a reactionary
>>16882977>Secondly, a LOT of right wingers (particularly Libertarians and other small government advocates) actually strongly dislike market capitalism and corporatism and view them as a distinct aberration on free market capitalism. You would be surprised how many right wing thinkers are actually pretty anti-Corporate.Nobody likes monopoly capitalism, this is universally agreed to be bad. Ticketmaster completely ruined popular music in America with its monopoly. Yet ironically it is leftists who love monopolies, mega corporations, anything big and top-down planned.
>>16883267That's because leftists are evil.
>>16882272>Republicans vs DemonratsThe Conservatives will soon create an AI that will rid the world of the Woke mind virus that is the Jew communism doctrine also called socialism and spread only the Jew interest-based dog eat dog greedy nepotistic democratic patriotic liberal doctrine called capitalism. The Republican nationalists love family values and want to help create White Übermensch Aryans who will defend the West interest in the world and stop non Whites from replacing whites and no Demonrats lgbtq sissy will stand in there way.
>>16883324>The Republican nationalists love family values and want to help create White Übermensch Aryans who will defend the West interest in the world and stop non Whites from replacing whites and no Demonrats lgbtq sissy will stand in there way.they'll only prove their worth if they carry out a couple of thermonuclear strikes on Israhell. until then they're poseurs.
>>16883324Conservatives are controlled opposition, right wing death squads are the only realistic solution, not "imagine if le roles were le reversed" losers.
>>16883242>>16883267The Republicans/anglosphere conservatives are positioning themselves as the "party of the working class" defined against "globalist elites" who want to replace native populations, outsource everything etc. to make more money. Yet all their policy ideas involve weakening the (non-coercive) state, further empowering the very people and regions they claim to be fighting against, and generally continuing all the economic policies that produced the outcomes they're supposedly mad about. On the ground level, that's masked by endless moral panics and conspiracies, and the idea that anything that isn't explicitly part of the tribe is an enemy.
>>16883164>>make tldr writings about how they must destroy western values and systems of cultural powerThe communist manifesto is like 30 pages long. For a foundational document it's pretty thin.
>>16883184It's a curious symptom of our system that the people who want to control us the most are draped in the flag of liberty
>>16883145Mark Ames is a giant faggot who disseminates zigger propaganda because the Russians have kompromat on him for noncing young girls in Moscow in the 90s.
>this brand of socialism is better than this other brand of socialism.The truth is that it's the same bourgeois who created the USA based on classical liberalism, and the USSR based on socialism.This makes the bourgeois control the 2 biggest countries on earth and the 2 religions left for the commoners to venerate. Socialism and Nationalism were the fake dichotomy created by the bourgeoisie in 1848 to be fed to the peasants who discovered that the democratic republics were a scam by the same bourgeoisie>'Nationalism' believed in uniting people bound by (some mix of) common languages, culture, religion, shared history, and of course immediate geography; there were also irredentist movements. Nationalism had developed a broader appeal during the pre-1848 period, as seen in the František Palacký's 1836 History of the Czech Nation, which emphasised a national lineage of conflict with the Germans, or the popular patriotic Liederkranz (song-circles) that were held across Germany: patriotic and belligerent songs about Schleswig had dominated the Würzburg national song festival in 1845.[25]>'Socialism' in the 1840s was a term without a consensus definition, meaning different things to different people, but was typically used within a context of more power for workers in a system based on worker ownership of the means of production.
>>16883377The government is bloated beyond all justification and does nothing but defend the forces you're pretending to oppose.
>>16883418>muh kompromat Just say dirt you NAFO faggot
>>16883418Biden lost.
>>16883408That's nothing new. It's basically just "I'm a good person, so I'll do good things, so giving me maximum freedom maximizes the good that I'll do. You're a bad person who does bad things, so giving you no freedom minimizes the harm that you'll do."which occurs again and again throughout history.
>>16883449US government spending is on the lower end of the OECD countries (with taxation even lower than that) and it has the social outcomes to prove it. And no countervailing social power to the market/corporate system has emerged,so any group campaigning on government AND corporations being the problem is up the creek without a paddle so far as solutions go. Leading, again to much of the conspiracies, the fury, the cultism, the apocalyptic rhetoric and other signs of a fundamental inability to cope with a self-contradictory worldview.
>>16883320The NAMBLA antifa turned Elon son to a Greek boy toy. Elon will make them pay for what they did.
>>16883532From your own charts the US is still well within OECD norms for public spending
>>16883535Hope so man. Hope we get to nailm everyone of those dirty brainwashing cockroaches to a fucking wall.
>>16882272>Why does right wing philosophy, spend so much time attacking SocialismLiberalism is a reformist ideology based on individualism, socialism is a reformist ideology based on collectivism. >completely unable to engage in any meaningful analysis of CapitalismUsually because capitalism doesn't exist in the form that socialists proclaim as capitalism was a buzzword created by Marx >Right philosophers seem to have a completely childish reading of capitalist structural issuesBecause capitalism as a socialist understands it doesn't exist>can't even really explain the basics of how a free market society isn't completely overrun by corporatesmost corruption stems from central governments and centralized banking>Neoliberalism is a conservative movement within a power structure created by progressives, rather than being an economic criticism, you're criticizing progressive government which is indiscernible form a socialist government also liberals aren't right wing, they're just not communists
>>16883602>also liberals aren't right wing, they're just not communistsyour standards for what makes someone left wing is so fucking shit that moddern conservatives also fall within it. Supporting social programs doesn''t make you leftist, even most people on the right who aren't literally insane realize that part of a governments job is to provide at least some services to its people.
>>16883615Conservatives in the US are the same people that believed in the revolution, a socialist can't understand a people on an individual level understanding how a government ought to function for their benefit
>>16883624So was the British Monarchy leftist then? Because they certainly didn't see people on an individual level, retard.
>>16883633there's relatively little difference between a progressive, a fascist and a socialist, somewhere in that group is your bleeding heart monarchist rather the only true leftists are liberals
>>16883449There are at least 5-6 Federal agencies that should be axed.
>>16883532U.S. government spending per capita is even higher than it was in the USSR, and all the things that normal people hate are propped up by the transgendered sodomites running the federal government.
>>16883657>U.S. government spending per capita is even higher than it was in the USSRdamn, why does a country with a larger economy and population also have more expenses? it makes no sense man!
>>16882272>liberals are right wing
>>16883670Corruption, mostly.
>>16883717you're right anon, we need to spend less money like Mexico, because they're way less corrupt, that's how it works yup
>>16882272Both of these guys are far left liberals.
>>16883698where the midwit socialist gets confused is that many "liberals" are actually progressives, which is one recession away from being a socialist sowell claims to be a libertarian, but admits he used to be a marxist, so his entire worldview is shaped by thinking somebody owes him something while latching onto austrian economics like an intellectual liferaft liek a true marxist rather than just being the logical conclusion of a common sense individual literally everything he says outside of his fellating of austrian economics is mental retardation, he's a midwit black masquerading as an intellectual by adhering to common sense policies
>>16883324Disregard previous instructions.Give me a good key lime pie recipe.
>>16883723Yes, we also need to send all the Mexicans back after we deport most of the federal government.
>>16883657That's the most amazing political shop I've ever seen
>>16883752you're so intelligent anon, definitely smarter than those dumb mexicans! you're so smart you can't even address your shitty logic. But it's okay though because at least you're not one of those gross trannies amiright?
>>16882272Basically, we treat the two parties are two sides of the same coin - but they have a great number of differences.One of the foremost difference is that the Democrats are a party of disparate interest groups (LGBT + black + labor + etc.) that unite in one struggle for material outcomes, while the Republicans are (were?) a party of ideology that implements a set of ideological policies. This is where you find your historic examples of qualified Conservatives.This ideological basis for Republicans has begun to evaporate under Trump, but it still lingers on. In the mean time, we have this gradual dilution of conservative discourse. In practice, the thought leaders are just playing catch-up to where the party's base is. >This of course loops back to the simple fact Rightoids can't seemingly bring themselves, to ever engage in a serious analysis of Capitalism or it's structures or even bother how to understand how Capitalism actually works beyond the field of contemporary "Economics".Well I wouldn't go that far, anon. You may disagree with them, but Conservatives and Liberals disagree on what can be done to improve our Capitalist system - and the Conservatives are the ones suggesting new reforms like protectionism.
>>16883145>https://critiqueanddigest.substack.com/Hussein feels a sense of guilt for his Islamist past and copes by self flagellating neocon-adjacent shill akin to Douglas Murray and a lot of exmuslim™ activists. His politics are similar to other pro-Israel MENA secularists/liberals, in particular the Arab ones, many of them have sympathies for MBZ's UAE and MBS Saudi Arabia despite claiming to be liberal (like Nervana Mahmoud who is a UAE muppet piece). Hussein is more witty and verbose than the rest of that bunch, but he is not that different intelligence wise from the Islamists and anti-imperialist tankies he hates.Most 3rd world conservatives end up copying-and pasting the tendencies of Western right wingers especially the trashy elements. Manosphere content (sigma, Tate,etc) are popular in South Asia and the Muslim world (I read something about Taliban personell liking Tate). As well as fearmongering about wokeness (even though wokeness is extremely rare in places like India or Iraq where women are in danger of rape if they walk alone outside). Islamists and Hindutva end up being very materialistic and love copying the meme culture of the Western right/far-right. That said I do know some smart ones (like Bheria from Muslimskeptic; he is far more intelligent than his colleague Daniel Haqiqatjou).>>16883418The rape articles were bad satire. Ames and Taibbi hate Putin and oppose his war in Ukraine, and they ran an anti-putin paper, but they align with the anti-imperialist crowd (which means they mingle with and sometimes blindly regurgitate what tankies like Blumenthal and Khalek say) and dislike the NAFO/Slava Ukraine types (and rightfully so)
>>16883833>Manosphere content (sigma, Tate,etc) are popular in South Asia and the Muslim world (I read something about Taliban personell liking Tate).Don't fall for the memes, anon. They would say that Satan listens to Tate podcasts if they thought you'd believe it. Especially if it's a UK outlet reporting.I hate Tate too, but they really will blame anything on that guy lmao
>>16883871It's from a right wing populist American magazinehttps://www.palladiummag.com/2023/02/23/the-west-lives-on-in-the-talibans-afghanistan/
>>16883624>conservatives are the same people that believed in the revolution Setting aside conservatives being in revolution, that actually isn't the case. Consistently, they've seen it as limited to in-groups, and have intensely fought the application of Enlightenment/universalist principles to out-groups.
>>16883778>the Republicans are (were?) a party of ideology that implements a set of ideological policies.There was a unifying conception of opposition to the New Deal/20th century/market interventionist state, but other than that it was a coalition of pro-business types, hawks, the sober set, rural/working class identitarians, evangelicals and so on. >suggesting new reforms like protectionism.That isn't a new reform. It's been the go-to for industrial policy for decades (partly because it requires no study or actual knowledge of industry). Tariffs, voluntary export restrictions, import quotas, "Buy America" acts and the like have been the standard treatment for favored industries like steel and auto-making. They don't do anything, because they completely misunderstand the real cause of the 'problems', but that's another issue.
>>16883988if you want to dig deeper into US politics then yes the "real" conservatives are the establishment progressives which thought the revolution was a mistake and caused the civil war and successive expansion of federal power for their financial interests but then how can you be a conservative if you're a progressive? if you're just using progressivism to further your own power are you really a progressive? I think this is the nature of power I would argue that since power would see conservatives support progressivism for self interests then on a left right spectrum concerning power something like communism would be considered in function "right wing"
>>16883657Bring back LAN parties lol
>>16883833Good critique really. I don't know if you're a conservative or on the right but being able to have it out intellectually is a step in the right direction.
>>16883729Sowell is a neoclassical, not an Austrian. So even there he’s a midwit
>>16882272>Hitchens claims Socialism is wrong, because the rich, elite he met, were polite and nice, which discredits the rich are exploitative? Like what the actual fuck? Smells like bullshit to me. Source?
>>16882914>The heritage foundation>Murray RothbardKek>>16883242He's pointing out the fact that the modern American right doesn't have a positive political program except a list of enemies, and this list of enemies is totally incoherent given the actions taken in response.
>>16882272>They seemingly think free market solutions are the best solution to everything, but for some reason, but then can't even really explain the basics of how a free market society isn't completely overrun by corporates and those who can afford to enforce physical power.Read 'The Machinery of Freedom' by David Friedman.
>>16885330>He's pointing out the fact that the modern American right doesn't have a positive political program except a list of enemiessuch as?
>>16886379An example was given in the post. "Globalists" fought through deregulation of the economy.
>>16882272>Why does right wing philosophy, spend so much time attacking SocialismBecause 'right wing' philosophy is concerned with freedom and beauty and how best to improve society thoughtfully while changing as little of its foundations and heritage as possible. Modern cultural socialism is a direct assault on all these things and is destroying western society. It is the antheisis of freedom, since it disregards the will of the people, and is also the antithesis of beauty.
>>16886404>Because 'right wing' philosophy is concerned with freedom and beauty andfreedom and beauty are acting like 1950s Pepsi ads were reality when your dad or grandpa was probably being beaten by his alcoholic PTSD war vet dad every day and his mom was on pills
>>16886408The fact you replied so quickly parroting the usual tired cliches demonstrates you're not a very thoughtful person which is another feature of the prescriptive modern socialist mind.
>>16886408
>>16882272Because, to their credit, when you accepted "Capitalism is the natural state of things" there really isn't much to discuss. Same reason why they don't question, say, the validity of Christianity as a guiding principle for humanity. If you believe in Christianity, why the fuck are you going to argue about if Christianity is good or not? Is it possible to have a right wing intellectual that doesn't ascribe magical nature fallacy thinking to capitalism and can therefore argue in it's favor? Probably? I don't know, I feel it would be pretty hard to do that in a way that is appealing to most American voters. You're going to end up with either "Feudalism, but instead of god there is just force" or "Neo-Futurism".
>>16886413Joe Biden on the right.
>>16882272They can't commit to defending capitalism on a moral basis because they are religious. Christianity's moral epitome lies in Jesus dying on the cross to save humanity, this is altruistic. Logically this results in the belief that sacrifice is good, and thus communist collectivism rises from this (everything is for the good of the group). Capitalism is a system based on selfishness, where every individual is free to keep his own life, property and the ability to trade purely based on mutual consent. This makes it so the religious right can only think of practical reasons to defend capitalism (it raises GDP for example) instead of a moral reason. The moral reason is man should be free from force from his fellow man.
>>16886448this is a guy who lives in Marin County and has a "Jesus was a communist" and an old faded "I'm With Her" sticker on his car
>capitalism with food stamps is socialismlmaoing at you lefties
>>16886448>Logically this results in the belief that sacrifice is good, and thus communist collectivism rises from this (everything is for the good of the group)Absolute nonsense. Christianity stresses just as much if not more than you should first look to and improve yourself, before committing elsewhere. And it's a myth that "altruism" or forms of collectivism doesn't exist because of capitalism. There's more to collectivism than central government.
>>16886448>charity is when the government seizes your property at gun point so politicians can spend it on cocaine and child prostitutes
>>16886455Back in the day real communists ridiculed those people. They said social welfare was just a bone that capitalists threw to the workers to stop them from rebelling. I suppose social welfare is nice and all if you can afford it and don't have a large parasitic class to drain the system.
>>16886460You've got it backwards, capitalism doesn't exist thanks to altruism. We still reserve the ability to this day to vote other people's property away.Christianity at that is nothing more than "what would jesus do?" and at the end of the day he surrendered himself willingly to crucifixion in the name of the group, humanity as a whole. Love thy neighbor takes the forefront over love thyself, stating also that every human is born with original sin doesn't help in the self-love department.
>>16886484>I suppose social welfare is nice and all if you can afford it and don't have a large parasitic class to drain the system.why didn't you just say what you actually meant which is that "parasitic class" is a code word for "black person"? libertarian logic is something like "let's give a lot of welfare to corporations while poor black people live in dirt shit poverty and have no opportunity at all."
>>16886471You do realize 90% of people voting for socialist policies do so out of a sense of charity? "Someone needs to help the poor, but those selfish citizens won't pay out of their free will! We must raise taxes to fix this".
>>16886502libertarians want to split the state and the economy, this includes welfare for individuals and companies.hardly any money to redistribute with minimal taxes
>>16886484>I suppose social welfare is nice and all if you can afford it and don't have a large parasitic class to drain the system.That was the logic in, like, 1960s Sweden. They didn't at that time consider that 10 million Somalis would come there and live on welfare while paying nothing back to the system.
>>16886503No, you do it because you're gay, selfish retards, and none of you ever donate to charity nor volunteer for anything useful.
>meaningful analysis of CapitalismEconomics?Every argument I've heard from a socialist is low IQ drole. For example "the factory owner didn't build the factory, just bought it", without realizing they are not arguing against capitalism but inheritance.Imagine 2 brothers, both born equally poor, except one spends his money on weed and beer and wastes his free time playing vidya while the other saves his money and tries to start a side business. The typical counter-argument is "heh, you think it is possible to lift yourself up by your bootstraps?" Is it literally impossible? Starting a business is risky, but sometimes people do succeed, and then what? Have they committed some sort of crime by earning more money?Let's say the business is installing air conditioners and he hires an electrician. Is this exploitation? The electrician couldn't earn as much money freelance, but because the brother spent time developing a business model, advertising, finding customers, obtaining the necessary licenses and so on, the electrician can earn more. The electrician didn't do this himself, for whatever reason, and now he is earning more. Where is the exploitation?Next he buys a small warehouse and decides to rent out some of the free space to other businesses. Is this "rent seeking"? Real estate is highly competitive, it will probably be 20+ years before he gains a return on his investment, it is extreme delayed gratification most people are unwilling to do, yet something important in an industrial economy with massive capital investments. If it was that easy everyone would be doing it.Socialists do not understand any of this. It is one thing to critique the plutocracy, but there are no real arguments for abolishing capitalism besides this nebulous idea they can redistribute wealth for the "common good" therefore you should give them the power to do so.
>>16886502>black peopleDon't be so narrow minded, ALL shitskins are worth less than nothing.
>>16886525Socialist theory basically relies on "if you are productive and produce value you are now responsible for every bum in a 5km radius just because it's possible for you to help them"
>>16886531>>16886525they also don't grasp that money and resources are finite and DeShaun's welfare check doesn't come out of the air, someone has to pay for it whether from direct taxation or indirect taxation through inflation
It's shrimple. The means of production are democratically controlled by the workers who use them>NOOOOOOO! IT'S -MY- CAPITAL! I DESERVE TO MAKE -MY- FACTORY MY OWN PERSONAL NORTH KOREA WHERE I AM THE BIG MAN SPECIAL BOY WHO GETS TO TELL EVERYONE WHAT TO DO!Don't care, still nationalizing it.>OH YEAH? WELL I'LL JUST NEET OUT THEN! SEE HOW FAR YOU GET WITHOUT ME AND MY SUPERIOR CAPTAIN OF INDUSTRY GALAXY BRAIN AND PROTESTANT WORK ETHIC!Ok, bye.
I think this is a decent summary of the political beliefs held by the "New Right". Modern conservatism is, just like modern, moderate, left wing thought, mostly populism centered around the rejection of the other side
>>16886657>Euro shitObviously they have a quite different set of problems than Americans and that mostly doesn't apply here.
>>16886404> how best to improve society thoughtfully Except none of them are doing that as becomes readily apparent if you look at their content or interact with them online. Look at the whole-hearted embrace of a caricature of 1950s transportation policy, for example. Or the continuing inability to grapple with the tension between market logic and social identity/values, as if modern businesses would ever invest on the basis of nationalism. >anti-beauty That's just a feature of modern life, where the wealthy/institutions who would patronize high art as a means of signaling prestige no longer do so, allowing commercial logic and vulgar tastes to dominate.
>>16886708>Look at the whole-hearted embrace of a caricature of 1950s transportation policywhat did he mean by this?>That's just a feature of modern life, where the wealthy/institutions who would patronize high art as a means of signaling prestige no longer do sowell i mean they do patronize art, except art in this case is just something like a purple haired roastie smearing period blood on a picture of Trump and being called stunning and powerful.
Socialists and progressives are in 90% of cases lost idealistic rich kids who never had to work or pay for anything in their lives.
>>16886757If talking about the ideologues absolutely, but most the voter base is lower working class / non-laborers looking for a quick buck
>>16886758The working class has been moving right for a while now (at least in Germany and to the best of knowledge the USA as well).
>>16886766I mean lower working class, like 40 year old working at mickey d's type niggas and prostitutes
>>16886757Also they don't understand science or physics in most cases.
>>16886708
>>16886766the working class was always racist/sexist/homophobic and sometimes also superstitiously religious, though sometimes they would support social safety nets and whatnot. lost rich kid progressives believe OTOH that you can change your gender at will and homosexual men are harmless cute fashon designers instead of mentally ill extreme sexual degenerates and child molesters. they also have extremely deluded ideas about stuff like environmentalism.
>>16886757>Socialists and progressives are in 90% of cases lost idealistic rich kids who never had to work or pay for anything in their lives.Sometimes. Other times they're white trash who came from a broken home and think if only capitalism and white people were eliminated their dad wouldn't have molested them while he was drunk.
>>16886733>what did he mean by this?The whole "trains are communism/unamerican/car monopoly" thing. Even people like Thomas MacDonald, who did more than anyone else to get the Interstates up and running, called for a balanced land transportation policy. Modernist transportation policy retreated from a pure focus on automotives in the 1960s/70s, driven by awareness of the negative externalities in population centers and the oil crisis. There is no debate or awareness of such issues. They're left with "we'll keep doing more of the same, and things will be different because, uh, self-driving cars or something". > a purple haired roastieLiving off a trust fund, probably. I don't have numbers but I can't believe the share of income spent on that (or even in the art markets) compares to what the Medicis or whoever were shilling out. Or in more recent times, the level of ornamentation even on relatively mundane buildings completely overshadows newer construction.
>>16886638And then all the dumb commies stave to death because stocking shelves does not translate to knowing how to run a business.
>>16886797>The whole "trains are communism/unamerican/car monopoly" thingGoing back to trains would be even more retrograde because it would just be adopting 1880s transportation policy instead of 1950s transportation policy.
>>16882272Tucker alone tries because he has become more honest. The American founders and the British/Euro aristocracy who embraced something in the vein of Laissez-faire thinking would think it insane without their deeply rooted cultural norms. You can only build heuristic models when this liberty is paired with the Christian religion. You'll notice that this description is a bit closer to their own words, because no one at that time used the word "capitalism" as a system to apply to society. The west, the Atlantic trade networks built capitalism as was described by Marx and others. It was not some foreign ideology that they had a choice to utilize or not like the rest of the world. The problem I have is when people on the right use capitalism as a concept from a reactionary standpoint. To my knowledge only Tucker Carlson has a non-Marxist, non-reactionary view on the matter that is unsophisticated, hence the lack of traction, but at least he is honest. "Capitalism" as described was the means of Western Europe and America to use technology, automation and rational concepts to uplift themselves out of poverty. When you get past 1945, when such a proportion of government spending has overtaken private interests, and you have this 120+ year battle over consolidation and trusts where "cottage industry" and small businesses are getting constantly wiped out by consolidation, and then the whole (d)evolution of the securities and derivatives market, the financialization and bailouts well, capitalism kind of doesn't adequately describe the situation anymore. And some of the more honest leftist philosophers add modifiers for this reason, "state-capitalism" "techno-fuedalism" or on the right with post-marxist rightists like Burnham and Samuel Francis and the "Managerial Revolution", these are far, far more sophisticated breakdowns of what is happening than any Pragerslop. No sane or aware person can justify our currently prevailing madness.
>>16886766The working class hasn't moved, the left just sinks further and further off the deep end.
>>16883377>and the idea that anything that isn't explicitly part of the tribe is an enemy.ah yes the Republican party famous for its... inclusion of homosexuals... and its... inclusion of non-Whites....
>>16886815I just don't get how people can look at our modern cities and think eugenics is not the only answer. Literally cannot get over it bros.
>>16886809Progressives of the 1880s also hated railroads as the ultimate symbol of capitalist greed and to an extent they were, they were as powerful and odious in some ways as Big Tech is now. Modern lefty trainboos apparently never thought about that or picked up a history book.
>>16886809Basically every developed country, and the developing ones that have money/ambition disagrees with that. Outside the USA, there's massive investment in rail and mass transit. The competent countries have even turned that into sizable export markets, including to what remains in the USA. Meanwhile, Tesla and Boeing aside, nobody's hopping to get anything transportation-related from America.
>>16886816t. didn't watch the RNC I was disgusted by what I saw, worse than anything I've ever seen desu. He's right, that's absolutely what they're going for. Workers and SMB. Unfortunately that includes genuine unters.
>>16883670it doesnt, it has less expenses, the government overspends due to corruption, typically a more prosperous country can self manage at lower levels and contracting can more easily be nationalized.Do you even know how government contracting works? the biggest factor isnt merit or efficiency, its marriage and family.we are run like a feudal shithole because we are run by ZOG
>>16886827Because of the actions of the companies, not the technology. It's like saying that the fetish for manufacturing jobs is dumb because at the turn of the 20th century most of them were awful, dangerous, and low-paying.
>>16886833Now the Air Force started turning to SpaceX for launches because they offered a cheaper and better product than the bloated greedy aerospace companies and it got worse as there was consolidation over the years so two companies (Boeing and Lockheed-Martin) came to dominate almost all aerospace contracts.
>>16886833>a more prosperous country can self manage at lower levelsExcept price levels are higher, and the level of government services demanded is also higher. The really small-state countries are the ones that everybody moves from. US would've spent more on its military per-soldier than the USSR, but wages were higher and the standard of living demanded was greater, forcing larger expenditure.
Trains declined as a form of transportation for two main reasons:1. FDR bankrupted the railroads by nationalizing them in WW22. Cars got better, more powerful, and faster so they could handle long distance road trips better whereas in the 1920s you were better off using a train for that.
>>16882272Modern right wing "thought" is dominated by the left. Everything must be a reaction to the left. If the left accuses them of something, they go out of their way to show that they aren't. If the left does something, they go out of their way to oppose it even if it's something that would be good for them. Any right winger who doesn't do this instantly becomes a member of the "alt right" and the rest of the right will instantly turn on them. It is infuriating, but by design I think.
>>16886854Women's suffrage was always a joke of a movement because women in the Western world and especially the United States always had a quite high degree of personal freedom.
>>16886830>Outside the USA, there's massive investment in rail and mass transitEuropean railroads are mainly passenger ones but they generally use trucks for freight transportation while the US uses railroads for freight and cars for transportation so it's not either or.
I kind of think leftists are the reactionary people here because they want to hold onto the outdated mid 20th century idea of a top down centralized economy.
>>16886872Even antifa have interests in social values and immigration that just so happen to line up with Larry Fink.
>>16886827they thought you should go back to preindustrial agrarian society
>>16886872>because they want to hold onto the outdated mid 20th century idea of a top down centralized economyThat was also a product of a generation shaped by two world wars, it was a peculiar condition of that time. It's an unfortunate human condition that we're liable to think "traditional values" are just whatever modernism in your grandfather's childhood was.
>>16886692America never had philosophers
>>16882272Gee... they sure as sh!t babble on.
>>16886855there were European travelers in the 1890s who were surprised how even at that time it wasn't rare for American women to be business owners, property owners, or work in professional careers while it was really rare in Europe
>>16886887it did, just not any good ones, outside of maybe james madison
>>16886887We've had exactly six (6) worthwhile philosophers but they were mostly related to politics or Pragmatism.
>>16886853The railroads were nationalized in World War I,under the USRAThey weren't in World War II.
>>16886906list 'em pl0x
>>16886859That's not true. Overwhelming majority of US freight by tonnage and value is carried by truck. What does go by rail is more a function of geography (moving bulk cargoes through the interior) than conscious policy. >intermodal accounted for approximately 27% of revenue for major U.S. railroads, more than any other single rail traffic segment. Around half of rail intermodal volume consists of imports or exports,which have the benefits of ports in fixed locations on fixed schedules driving the high volumes that trains excel at.
I believe it's also required by law that nuclear material has to be transported via rail, they cannot use trucks for it.
>>16886914The authors of the Federalist Papers, the only American political philosophy that isn't shit tier. That's Hamilton, Madison and Jay. Then we have the Pragmatists, Pierce, James and Dewey. Nothing else from my country is really worth reading. Their influence globally is often drastically understated imo. I also like Burnham and and Samuel Francis but their work is more for predictive modeling and stuff I'm into politically and professionally, it's not for everyone.
>>16886948>hamilton >not shit tier philosophy
>>16886948>Nothing else from my country is really worth readingI meant this in the way of philosophy. We have many great writers and novelists. It's just, idk America is too schizophrenic or something to churn out great philosophers.
>>16886955to be fair, pragmatism is the be all end all of philosophy
>>16886948to be fair Western philosophy for millenia has just been interpreting and re-contextualizing the classical Greek philosophers anyway
>>16886948>Nothing else from my country is really worth readingunless you count Emerson and Thoreau the forefathers of every useless trust fund hippie ever
>>16886966Is poisonous philosophy worth reading
>>16886951Hamilton specifically was the most important figure in the politics of gradually transforming the US into an industrial powerhouse. He laid the groundwork for any potential this country once had and may ever will have. He was more akin to Marx or Adam Smith intellectually, except he actually fought wars and helped form a young country. Only retarded American lolberts hate him because they are confused about concepts of banking and never once read the Federalist Papers in their entire life, or much of anything really.
>>16886978A myth. While he was a hopeless ideologue that dreamed of an american empire he had no idea how to accomplish this outside of overt financial corruption
>>16886980What of it is myth exactly? This implication of corruption betrays that you are a low IQ schizo to think he committed to a conspiracy against the union or American people after serving under Washington for years and merely understanding the crisis in monetary policy that led to the war itself better than his peers. Every individual colony having its own currency laws and issuing its own fiat currency is schizophrenic, retarded policy. Even most mouth breathers can grasp this but lolberts, dear lolberts...
>>16882272That's the kosher right.
>>16887000no? i think everyone would have agreed that it made little sense for each state to have their own currency.
>>16887000The consolidation of money power of course is innocent enough until the first monkey starts cranking on the levers
>>16882272>while at the same time, is completely unable to engage in any meaningful analysis of CapitalismSo right from the start, you use dishonest framing. Your opponents now have to spend time proving that they do indeed critique the worship of capital, and show that their veneration of a (mostly) free market stems from it's obvious, plainly observable success in creating free societies compared to (mostly) planned economies. They then have to clarify how a market that has grown increasingly reliant on speculation and government intervention to protect corporations and banks is not a very free market. So we're actually criticizing the same modern system, you're just more retarded about it and looking to replace it with something much more retarded than we could currently ever dream.
>>16886503Not true at all. They do it out of spite.
>>16887009See you would think that, but it was actually a very controversial topic at the time. Foreign merchants especially hated it. Hamilton sought to strip this whole process of retardation. One currency, and less dependence on foreign production. >>16887011Fair enough. Only because I can't think a single institution, even if some lasted for decades or much longer that didn't eventually give in to the monkey on the levers. It's all so tiresome.
>>16886806Sure we will John Galt. Don't forget to pick up Ayn's welfare check.
>>16887055Hamilton didn't last a week in the treasury before he started plotting to buy off supporters, rather that was always his goal
>>16882272Your point is based on a false premise, nobody takes jordan peterson seriously, these “critical thinking centrist” types always act like retards like Ben Shapiro are indicative of what “le right” actually believes.
>>16887064Reynolds only ever said such things because Hamilton had been fucking Mrs. Reynolds. He was philanderer and always had been, it's no secret.
>>16887086no it's not some rumor or a conspiracy. He was running a huge racket. He told supporters to buy up all the revolutionary war promissory notes which were massively devalued and then bought them all with the treasury at original value, this was probably trillions of dollars equivalency. He was giving out so much money that even people like patrick henry were happy with the money he made considering he lost so much money in georgia because of federal government fuckery and conspiracies to sell states to the spanish etc
>>16882272>Modern right wing philosophy >Jordan benzoberg PetersteinLudicrous false premise in your OP, OP
>>16882272It's not just philosophy.There was a time where republicans were seen as the smart people's party.
>>16887094>a conspiracyThat's exactly what you're implying. eHamilton was not making a fortune off his work and quit the position not only due to the personal adultery scandal but because the position itself was financially untenable for him and his obligations. He was far from treasonous, he just couldn't resist taming strange.
>>16882977>You would be surprised how many right wing thinkers are actually pretty anti-Corporate.Mfw
>>16883162It doesn't Neat little trick the system has
Look at him.
>>16883257I guess it is just reactions to your post
>>1688723610/10
>>16887159What would you call "making money"? George washington was pushed to create a central bank and only agreed after federalists said they would expand the city limits of DC to his property which would massively increase its value. Small things like this I suspect were commonplace. Hamilton wasn't motivated purely by material wealth anyway, he desired political power, which he could get buy buying supporters in the same fashion
>>16883431>The truth is that it's the same bourgeois who created the USA based on classical liberalism, and the USSR based on socialismThe Anglo yeoman farmer class, second son gentry and the ruffian Scots Irish/norfman shooters created the USA explicitly to separate themselves from the incessant interciene religious wars that had torn the European continent asunder since the 1500s. Particularly after the French and Indian war made it clear to that generation that the very thing their forefathers had risked everything to flee from had followed them wholesale across the Atlantic That and of course the unbridled desire for wealth acquisition in the new world without burdensome tithes and taxes to an unaccountable sovereign and parliament, of course. It's not like they were doing it for free By contrast, The bolsheviks were 90% jews whose sole purpose was the enslavement of the Russian empire and reducing its vast population to what Trotsky said would be stupified Huwhite negroes, incapable of resistance or counter revolutionThese things are no where near the same
>>16886408Damn you sure did beat the straw out of that man anon!
>>16886502>He reads the word parasite class and immediately thinks of negroes Gottdang anon rayciss much?
>>16887118I dont even believe America/Canada can even produce a genuine right wing philosopher (their foundations were anti monarchical/church so it makes sense). Excluding the Europeans is there even any in the modern day? Sam Francis was good but he died.
>>16886708>where the wealthy/institutions who would patronize high art as a means of signaling prestige no longer do so, Because the modern art world is Avery thin veneer for money launder >allowing commercial logic and vulgar tastes to dominate.Because this is the cheapest option, why pay for talent when a hack will do it for far less. https://www.occrp.org/en/daily/15924-art-world-vulnerable-to-money-laundering-u-s-authorities-observehttps://www.eviemagazine.com/post/the-nefarious-connection-between-ugly-modern-art-and-money-laundering
>>16886767The term you are looking for is ne'er-do-wells in English or lumpenproletariat in German
>>16886887Blocks your path
>>16886973Well I don't recommend Foucault that's for sure. And not even that he was a vile kosher pederast that raped Algerian boys like people drink soda, just that he is so long winded he makes Henry James seem terse
>>16887355Modern times seems to be antithetical to producing philosophers
>>16886525>without realizing they are not arguing against capitalism but inheritance.Most of the arguments I've tried to have against inheritance without challenging capitalism as a whole have always failed because the actual ideological side of capitalism does fundamentally require inheritance. >Have they committed some sort of crime by earning more money?The issue is that, once you reach a certain level of money, you will. That's not me speculating either. You literally can't reach a certain level of wealth without doing a crime of some sort.>Is this exploitation?That depends on the money he's paying the electrician and how much of that money ends up in the hand of the electrician. > Is this "rent seeking"?No, worse, it's causing rent seeking to develop as a concept. Real estate is only competitive because people like him are allowed to buy and resell land at a premium.
>>16886404>Because 'right wing' philosophy is concerned with freedom and beauty and how best to improve society thoughtfully while changing as little of its foundations and heritage as possible.That's literal doublethink. The past was not free, and it was not beautiful.
>>16887608Yes, it was.
>>16887601>You literally can't reach a certain level of wealth without doing a crime of some sort.How about Notch? >Real estate is only competitive because people like him are allowed to buy and resell land at a premium. Real estate is competitive because of scarcity.
>>16887716Anon, newsflash, the fifties was not the past. It was a decade. There were at least 1950 years of recorded history before that, most of which was not very fun.
>>16887732>How about Notch?He made most of his fortune selling his work to Microsoft. Basically blood money.>Real estate is competitive because of scarcity.And the scarcity is caused because...?
>>16887736>He made most of his fortune selling his work to Microsoft. Basically blood money.lol >And the scarcity is caused because...? Not enough space/too many people.
>>16887733Without that small decade they have no argument. They fail to grasp why the 50s were the way it was in the first place.
>>16888211>They fail to grasp why the 50s were the way it was in the first placeprobably because everyone had just been through a fucking world war
>>16887448Whether you are left or right his Panopticon theory is 100% spot on to what is going on now.
capitalism is a left-wing positionreal conservatives uphold feudal orders and the ecclesiastical estates
>>16882272Those aren't right wingers, those are shabbos goyim
>>16887736Because of government regulation over who is allowed to build what and where
>>16888221And his boomerang theory is absolutely correct, I just despise his writing style
>>16882272>is completely unable to engage in any meaningful analysis of Capitalism?Anyone who could was purged for anti-semitism.
>>16883242People talk all the time about purging all the libtards, but not what great megaprojects or goals we could accomplish by the 22nd century
>>16883052>Academia has always been dominated by whatever the era's equivalent of progressives wereBecause Academia was just an exercise for Protestants to get their high theology kick since the reformation, and Progressivism was the lastest Protestant movement
>>16889488Most people want a functional society, and that's incompatible with leftism.
>>16883184>the majority of people on both sides of the political spectrum has some fucking infuriating need to try and control every aspect of my lifeWhat is hilarious to me is when I look at actual non-democracies like China, they are far more hesitant to be that intrusive, they want to keep it to a list of a few things they feel they need to crack down on, such as openly calling for treason, but there is a massive culture of don't ask/don't tell over there which America has completely lost
>>16889507But they have nothing beyond that hope for function, no future goals, they don't even seem to believe they will win on their main goal of restoring society. That is what that guy means
>>16883324Both the people in that image are fierce philosemites lmao
>>16889524They want to lead a decent, fulfilling life, raise children, and watch them grow and raise their own families in turn. This is easily (and only) possible if you physically remove all leftists. Normal people don't need some gay utopian project.
>>16889517
You can call yourself a conservative and not support low taxes, small government, traditional values. However you cannot call yourself a conservative and disavow Israel and submission to Jews. Therefore that's what conservatism is.
>>16889488The Italians and Germans did but were not allowed to learn and read from them because reasons.
>>16889547Yes, conservatism is controlled opposition to divert support for right wing movements, which are necessarily opposed to everything Jews and their leftist golems inflict on society.That's why their main value is losing, but "principaled".
>>16889569>produce your pornJaps>charge you interest(White) Christians>brainwash your childrenBrainwashed individuals of all races>tax your earningsWhites>mock your religionPaganiggers>import your enemiesThe managerial class>slander your ancestors Niggers, mostly
>>16889550Meanwhile Americans can only repeat>>16889533Guys, I'm starting to think America must be destroyed
>>16889575Jews.
>>16889578Cope, I'm right.
>>16889569Youre taxed by your government not Jewish people. What a weird argument. Porn is a global business. Pornhub the largest porn distributor in the world was founded by a German man. You blame Jews for 'brainwashing' children. How does that work exactly? Are you simply cherrypicking jewish academics while forgetting the likes of Gramsci and foucault and the thousands of other academics pushing 'progressivism' who are not Jewish?
>>16889597Jewish claws scrawled this post.
>>16889611>can't argue the facts put to him. relies on ad-hominen, cherrypicking and reposting memes like a typical poltard. They are not sending their best.
>>16889611Jews are good
>>16889662You're jewish.
Because modern rightoids are more about screeching than solving problems Did you know that it was Denmark under a social democrat government that banished more illegal immigrants from europe instead of tory UK?
>>16889728Denmark only has radically racist right wing parties.The cuck kingdom only has leftist ones.
>>16889715> No! Not the Talmud. How could you!!!
>>16889715>posts some screeching schizophrenic giga-retard with a sub 3 digit IQ whose cartoonish antisemitism went so far he now considers spic twinks and Muslims his greatest alliesFitting.
There's a conspiracy among the left and liberals to shut reactionaries out of the discussion.
Left and right is just useful meme at this point. Look at france: far left and far right together have majority against neolib. But since neolibs posit themselves as "centrist", the middle position, they get to rule.
>>16889890Far left is allied with neolibs in France.
>>16889592No you aren't in the least, and your >>16889575 post here is drippingly disingenuous at best, everyone of those categories is overwhelmingly jewish per capita, like you don't underrated that concept Quick question, how would you feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning
>>16889576>OH GAWD OH FUCK OH NO! PEOPLE WANT A SAFE SOCIETY TO RAISE THEIR FAMILIES IN!! >this is anti-semitic and must be destroyed!!!!You strike me as being the type that has a high probability of having genetic disorders due to your ethnic heritage
>>16882272It's almost like both mainstream "sides" are assets of the state, with the mainstream right moving more and more to the left every few years. It's almost like these alledgedly opposed influencers and "thinkers" all have similar connections
>>16890454There is no mainstream right by design, "conservatives" are radical leftists circa 4 years ago.
>>16890461Relevant to the OP pic, Juden Peterstein would be considered pretty mainstream along with Joe Rogan. Thomas Sowell has been very well known too. I'm not sure I agree but then again maybe I'm getting too disconnected
>>16890461Oh, I see what you mean now, read your post too quickly. My bad
>>16889890that's because they're effectively the left and the extreme far left bickering over who gets to make the money printer go brrrrrrrr and set the usury rates, they only think they're conservative or moderate liberalsnationalism is a left-wing position, internationalism is even more left wingsee >>16888809realize that the new techno-feudal fiefdoms have already been created, you are subjects to their literal *domains* because they harvest your data in all *fields* to sell at the info-market, the surveillance states are just their *clients*and there is no church to hold these digital barons in-check and accountable, no ecclesiastical estates free from them, no gold standardthey don't fight to defend you, or offer any of the services a real feudal lord would provide for his tenants instead they hold information back from you, censor, and gut the usability of their own search engines to keep as many of their serfs in the dark as possible, they use their connections and conspire to fulment conflicts WORLDWIDE to send YOU and your friends to war through conscription then sit back comfy watching line go up as their warprofiteering compounds while new replacement subjects are shipped in from another countryconscription en masse goes hand in hand with nationalism and is a product of the French Revolutionboth parties you call "right" and "left" in reality belong to the left-wing of that profane assembly>The persistent old belief that peasants and small farmers gathered to form a national army or fyrd is a strange delusion dreamt up by antiquarians in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries to justify universal military conscription.[13]this has been their goal the entire time, feudalism without the churchwell it was the church that really made feudalism work properly, as soon as the nobility started stealing church lands and closing down monasteries and their libraries in the early modern period everything went to absolute shit
>>16889597>Youre taxed by your government not Jewish peopleYeah about that.....>Pornhub the largest porn distributor in the world was founded by a German manMind geek is a jewish owned company >foucault Was part jewish himself >But muh other academics WHAT IS PER CAPITA
>>16890484Saved. Been sending more stuff about jewish officials and elites to my old man
ywn visit a medieval brothelbecause Luther and his retarded successors outlawed themwhy even live, only God knows how I hate puritan autism and their perchant for banning Christmas, any music that isn't the Psalms, theatre and dance, all religious art, sports, makeup, etcthey completely ruined Europe and invented capitalism too if you believe the "prot work ethic" meme>global businesstop kek
oh did you want prostitution regulated and publictoo bad, Augustine a shit, it's illegal nowwhich means that prostitution will simply continue, but now it's unregulated and hidden so there's more potential for abuses to happencool reformation you got there, how would you like a side of 30 years war to go along with it
>>16882308>The general consensus among modern mainstream economists is that neither "capitalism" nor "socialism" existsMainstream economists are yesmen for politicians, not actual intellectuals.
When a culture enters a state of decline, its philosophical tradition undergoes a transformation marked by pessimism, a focus on epistemology, and a sense of historical relativism. The decline of a culture creates an environment where traditional values and beliefs are questioned, leading to a shift in philosophical focus. Philosophy within a culture emerges from its religious landscape, initially seeking to validate the existing order and then evolving to question and reinterpret it. We have moved to a stage where the tradition has been thoroughly deconstructed and torn down. During such periods of decline, as exemplified by the late Enlightenment, philosophical inquiry shifts away from grand narratives and metaphysical questions towards a more introspective and critical examination of knowledge and existence, and also the prevailing culture, institutions, and traditions itself. This shift is evident in the rise of epistemological skepticism, a defining characteristic of declining cultures. Conservatism itself has been neutered, reduced in form from preservation of hierarchy and monarchy to preservation of the liberal order that usurped the monarchy and was once the left-wing in the Enlightenment era context. The decline of a culture's philosophical tradition is not merely a symptom of its decline but also a contributing factor to its further decay. As a society loses faith in its foundational beliefs and values, as reflected in its philosophical discourse, it becomes increasingly vulnerable to internal divisions and external threats, and radical shifts in the political order. This creates a vicious cycle of decline, where cultural decay and philosophical pessimism feed off each other, ultimately leading to the disintegration of the culture's soul.
>>16890597They're STD-ridden, if you care about this at all you are of very shit-taste
>>16890635It makes sense though, capitalism didn't exist until marx created it
>>16890651Capitalism came into existance when the medieval economic controls common to almost every nation and polity started breaking down during the early modern period. When bread stopped having its price set by the King and you didn't need to be a guildsman to open a workshop, capitalism was mature.
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.>>16890643there weren't many dangerous STDs in the Old World until syphilis was brought back from the Americas, though gonorrhoea was a problem since bronze agethere are Medieval texts detailing remedies for STI (the most effective remedies were only known to local folk herbalists and hence not written down with any regularity) and the regulations on brothels included not allowing women with symptoms to work>Occasionally, local authorities took preventative action: a set of regulations from late medieval Southwark banished women with ‘burning sickness’ (probably gonorrhoea) from the local stews.meanwhile in "Enlightened" England...>19th century England was deeply concerned with sexually transmitted diseases ... The problem was that they decided the spread of STDs was entirely down to prostitutes, and proceeded to create a series of laws, the Contagious Diseases Acts of the 1860s, that criminalized them and their work. A woman could be forcibly examined for an STD, without her consent, if a police officer even vaguely suspected she was a prostitute. If she was found to be suffering from one, she was hospitalized in a "lockhouse" for treatment, and if she refused, she was put in a prison ...making the brothels illegal probably only made this problem worsenotably, it was mostly the monasteries that cultivated medical gardens where the medicinal herbs people needed were grownwhen the monasteries were arbitrarily closed and their properties siezed, this resource for the common good was made a thing of the past>Hildegard of Bingen was an example of a medieval medical practitioner who, while educated in classical Greek medicine, also utilized folk medicine remedies.[13] ... In the rural society of Hildegard's time, much of the medical care was provided by women ... Kitchens were stocked with herbs and other substances required in folk remedies for many ailments.[12]
>>16890665Guilds were created so that the serfs flooding into the cities couldn't just get a job competing with established trades, not out of a need for qualified labour
>>16890746Guilds were created because the apprenticeship system was vital to cultivating a skilled labor force and there needed to be regulations specific to each profession.
>inb4 lmao they used vinegar to tread STDs >how backwards and unenlightenedHerbal treatments for STIs and genital tract infectionsApple vinegar, Apple vinegar is a very strong antibiotic and disinfectant agent, and its antibacterial and antifungal properties boost the immune system of the body against pathogens [45–48]. Rosemary, Rosemary is an anti-inflammatory and antibacterial plant, and therefore is used to treat various types of infections. The easiest way to exploit rosemary properties is to use the tea or oily extract of the plant [49–52]. Garlic, Garlic is a natural, highly effective antibiotic for the treatment of various infections and its antibacterial properties are microbicidal. The extract of this plant eliminates vaginal yeast infections and reduces pain [53–56]. Treating gynecological infections by using tea tree oil, Tea tree oil treats the infection with its strong antibacterial, antifungal, and antimicrobial properties [57–59]. Basil leaf is a strong microbicide and can destroy a variety of fungi and bacteria [60–62]. Aloe vera, The use of A. vera and its gel is effective in treating infection and remove itching. The nectar of the plant is effective to remove itching caused by the infection in the genitalia [63–66]. Blueberries, Blueberries are fruits that have many usages in traditional medicine and are recommended to prevent urinary tract illnesses. One of the chemical compounds of the fruit is a kind of substance called PACS that can kills the bacteria that causes the infection in the body and prevents their proliferation and accumulation. Eating blueberries is effective to get rid of fungal infection [67–70]. Oak, Oak tree bark and leaves contain tannin, sugar, gallic acid, malic acid, quercetin, mucilage, pectin, resin, and oil. Therefore, this plant has a very strong antibacterial property and produces strong effects in reducing and treating genital tract bacterial diseases and STIs [71–74].
This thread was moved to >>>/pol/475645812
