Let's do a thought experiment for a moment.Let's say the left wins and the primary consequence is the unlimited migration of peoples into western countries until we see global demographic decline and global south ecomonic improvement to the point that people don't want to leave.What does the west look like during that era, our era of the mid and late 21st century?The first think I can think of is the immense quantity of people is going to create what the Chinese call "Involution"; where everyone has to work to extreme lengths for low prices to compete in a market where the labour market is deliberately oversaturated? Like East Asian societies, it would end up being a world where you have to study for hours on end, only to work 60-80h per week and be less productive than the average American worker today. A world of trying extra hard with mediocre results.
>thinking elections matter
>the left
>>528049787Building on this, I would imagine a more extreme version of some of the problems we have today.As seen in Europe, poorly integrated migrants who won't follow the East-Asian style workaholic economic path would end up becoming the vast sludge of lumpenproletariat we see today. Expect more grenade attacks, drug dealing, and child rape.As seen in Canada, economic problems would persist in spite of the large labour spike. We brought in millions of immigrants (mostly Indians) yet, we had a lost decade under Trudeau regarding GDP, and we had a GDP Per Capita decline, meaning we as individuals literally got poorer during this period. It didn't solve our productivity problems either, as our multi-decade productivity decline continued during the mass immigration period. In other words; crime and poverty will persist while politicians keep trying to gaslight people into thinking that population growth will solve all of our problems.
>>528049882You're trapped in the system so it affects you whether you like it or not.>>528050068The merchant class is leftist until proven otherwise.
It's easiest to look at from a global perspective.You want to consooom a lot? Then someone else has to consume less, like the countries producing goods for western markets. Meaning if this evens out so does consumption.In effect: the world economy has a set size. It's purely a question how that's distributed, both by country and by individual (read workers vs billionaires).Fundamentally nothing changes if the system doesn't change, meaning wealth inequality will increase, which inevitably leads to less consumption and an overall contraction of markets.
>>528049787>What does the west look like during that era, our era of the mid and late 21st century?India
>>528049787>>528050123>>528050222
>Canada
>migration of peoples
>>528049787Killing people who don't speak English en masse, and hanging cops and other (((law))) enforcement personnel for being the foot soldiers of pedophiles would be nice
>>528049787Why must the hand touch a stranger?
>>528050834>Someone get some ice for ICE>both for the snow>and the y'know
I'd also imagine that the politics of the West would look more like Nigeria or India, where you have a large bureaucracy meant to oversee a bunch of squabbling ethnic/religious/linguistic factions. This would be the next step of Intersectional Social Justice; as this repackaged global south, sectarian management strategy matures, it's just going to look like the intensification of existing identities playing the oppression olympics for more money and power. The one wild card is organization, as those who are more organized in a democracy have an advantage in spite of size. While White populations are relatively fractured, religious identity tends to be a centralizing factor at least among North American Whites. Basically North American Whites only function has a cohesive identity group when they are under 1 religion, rather than just prioritizing race.
>>528049787I would also do this to garner the attention of a fair maiden whom I would wish to court whilst on our carriage ride. Betwixt such a mysterious and yet oddly romantic gesture my fine lady would be enthralled. She would have to look upon the visage of the one who hath been so bold. She would turn her head and her eyes would befall me, a true gentleman in service to such a beautiful unwedded dame.
>>528051535
>>528051990real talk that outfit is cool. I wish more women dressed in a modest way, not because of any anti-coomer feeling, but because more clothes is a bigger canvas for fashion.
>>528052077The outfit she is wearing is funeral attire.
>>528052482oh....more people should die then
>>528052610I wasn't trying to lecture you or anything, and I agree. These older dresses for women and suits for men should make a come back.
>>528052482It's fuzzy and being touched by the left hand the poo hand just trying to wipe hand clean of poo on fuzzy white cloth
Another curiousity of a defeated and flooded west is whether any mixing will occur.If migration flows are left unchecked, it might not happen as different identity groups would leverage their global inflows for money and power, thus making their identity useful. If the migration eventually stops, as it must some time in the 22nd century, birth rates, group organization, and ideological toughness would have a disproportionate effect, creating new winners and losers in that society. In that sense, some type of mixing might happen as the group concentration forces no longer exist. It would be like raising the temperature in a room with a bunch of colored ice cubes. When it's cold they can remain separate, but as the temperature warms the cubes will melt and the colors will mix.A strong imperial ideology might speed this along, so America would be brown but mostly united. Europe and Canada on the other hand would be fucked, as there is no Asabiyyah or "Groupfeel" among the inhabitants.
>>528049787Women voted to get raped by niggers, mudslimes and jeets, who am I to go against their will?
>>528049787>asking for a friend
>>528053798Well, I would imagine you don't want to live in a city/province/state/continent with nigger mudslime jeet rapists?
>>528049787>What does the west look like during that era
>>528051990That guy is such an asshole
>>528054263I'm not a woman so why should I care? Also I am moving to asia anyway.
>>528054319People imagine it would be cathartic, but progressive activists, corporate executives, and politicians don't personally want to live in a shithole. They'll invest the bare minimum of infrastructure so they can keep up their standard of living, meaning someone is going to have roads, electricity, and plumbing. What's worse is that the physical decay from institutional neglect will creep up the socioeconomic hierarachy. Everyone ignored when people without college degrees were having a hard time making a decent living, but then it expanded to colleage and university graduates. Everyone is currently not taking seriously the tent cities in urban centres, yet we can already see working people living in cars or living with their parents. They're not homeless, but they have the symptoms of not being able to afford their own shelter.Imagine a world of ruined buildings and tent cities. People living out of their cars, and in trailer parks. The more fortunate would live in a makeshift shanty town, yet all would be constantly harrassed by petty criminals. Organized crime would rise, but the gangs would learn quickly that they can squeeze money out of people by being a proto-state; killing the unaffiliated thieves and sheisters, for a small fee (totally not taxes bro).Imagine the worst of the Favelas, and you have your future.
>>528052077I'm a coomer and I think that kind of old school clothing is way sexier than most of the garbage women wear these days lol.
>>528054611Fair enough. But asians states are tough enough to beat back the progressive corruption. Are we now like the Jeets to flee their societies because we can't fix them? Why aren't we the great liberation army that frees society from the worst excesses of Diversity Inclusion and Equity?
>>528050642More food for thought:If people are "equal" what differentiates, and what changes about consumption?Clearly there'd be plenty of cheap slop for the poor worker masses, but with an economy split solidly between the interchangeable masses and the ultra rich the consumption segment of the latter becomes crucial:>there's only slop and elite productsAnd someone has to make these elite products. These would essentially be the only "middle class" and the differentiation among workers:>do your products go to the cattle slop market or to the elite?They'd literally live in their own world with nothing to do but extremely decadent consumption, and a horde of servants.These people would naturally see themselves as superior than common workers, and lightly receive slightly better pay, benefits or crumbs.>wealth inequality also means consumption inequalityAnd the more extreme and clear-cut this becomes the more pronounced the distinction, with hardly anything in between.
>>528055324Probably best to illustrate this with an ancient example. Compare the commoner's chair and the Pharaoh's chair, the peasant's carriage and the emperor's. There wasn't much in between.Class distinction becomes whether you serve the masses or the few.This might imply that even among the masses differences would be closely guarded, meaning you'd see a lot of izzat behaviour, or people acting like clans, to preserve what little edge, comforts or security they have, since the "state" can't provide for them, with all states being more or less the same there's no surplus that could be spent in this avenue - if the state doesn't atrophy entirely and essentially becomes privatised.So evidently this would extend to corporations - what corporation you work for becomes far more important than location or race. Company town would be the golden land, a little better than you see in upscale city districts today, but all more or less company owned.In that area it would be a lot like Blade Runner, while the worker towns would be more Industrial-Revolution-like.In very rural areas change might be quite limited, being largely agricultural and relatively self-sufficient, but controlled by land ownership. Private farmers would be reduced to poverty on marginal land, while all the good land works as corporate collective farms.
