/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>476857
post pdf and what chapter's we're reading

>>476833
>Why do countries that reference socialism in their constitution not function as socialist in many ways?
Maybe the spell doesn't work because we haven't figured out the right incantation. Or maybe the working class being insufficiently organized means that its less socialister.

The US is not constitutionally dogmatic in any sense, and no state is actually "ideological". The Nazis were one of the few examples of an ideology-centered state where they squeal like faggots for it, and that was still at heart a continuation of Weimar under permanent and institutionalized total emergency order. Constitutions are not ideological documents, and belong to a stage of history where the concept of law had any spiritual authority in the minds of anyone. The US does flagrant acts that violate the constitution in the most basic ways and never states its "real" ideology in any government propaganda or by a persistent channel by which such a thing would be promulgated. So much of what is taken for granted today flagrantly violates nearly every part of the amendments to the constitution with the intent of doing exactly that, and anything at all in the constitution is a brittle farce that is wholly incompatible with what the US became in the 20th century. Only parts of the facade still exist from the Constitution. They even hint at violating egregiously post-1947 constitutional amendments and rulings. For example, using the 25th amendment as a "medical coup" is not only completely against the intent of that, but would obviate any pretense that there is a law, no matter how much this decision is in the hand of Congress or the executive. The wording of it is intended to only be used if the President is actually incapacitated and wouldn't be able to step down or speak at all. Suggesting its use for that purpose shows the disdain liberals and conservatives have for any pretense of law, because it would set a precedent that expert opinion for a spurious medical reason overrides the institutions that write any law. If it happened, it would effectively be the end of the country and any possibility that there even could be a different constitution. It would make clear that eugenics is the only law left. That's why it's pushed by the vanguard as a talking point. If the charge of incompetence or maladministration is the purpose, impeachment would be the constitutional answer, and that was done to Trump. Incompetence, maladministration, pretty much openly treasonous acts that Trump would brag about doing, should have been enough to remove him, with the official pretexts for impeachment being only the start of a laundry list of offenses against Trump. But, the liberals don't ever want to actually remove Trump. Why would they get rid of something that gave them Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>476833
Because they believe that socialism is when the government does stuff but unironically.

>>476840
Because you believe that socialism is a destination not a process. That's why you cry about "not real socialism" but also can't explain what you would have done differently.

So to make this clear - degrowth/growth are red herrings. No one is convinced that in of itself is the point of contention. This is about shrinking the wage fund and shrinking any productive enterprise that meets the wants of the people, with the eventual goal of enclosing everything that isn't already taken. If you go along with it, you're going along with the "historical progress" of PR firms that want you dead, and you're an asshole. But, the real pushback is not this fake war, but everyone in society that has no interest in this program or watching everything they care about cannibalized for the sake of the ruling interest - eugenics.

>>476774
>Optimally we make the switch to communism before doing what I'm talking about here
If you lower what marxists call the organic composition of capital, you recreate the material conditions for capital accumulation. Even if Socialists controle the state and political institutions, that will very likely cause a regression to capitalism.
<The organic composition of capital, c/v, measures the difference between the rate of surplus value, s/v, and the rate of profit, s/(c + v) – the higher the organic composition of capital, i.e., the more capital-intensive the industry, the lower the rate of profit.
>Basically people wanna make the oil no longer useful as fuel by putting bacteria down there so no one will wann pump it up or frack for it.
The idea of "poisoning the oil-well" with a bacterial infection, will not work anyway, simply because no life that we know off can survive inside the conditions of an oil-deposit.

>I mean the use of trucks and busses instead of trains, trams, ect.., though I get how you read it like that lol.
The reason to prefer rail over roads is because it's got less friction and slower capital depreciation through wear and tear. However it is very unlikely that if we can do land transportation exclusively via rail system. If you want to extend good transportation to everybody you need to service low demand areas too, and i doubt that you can scale down the capacity of rail systems enough to make that viable. So cars and trucks will probably retain that niche.

>I guess I'm more looking at what is the rightkind of growth. It's not enough to just extract and consume the planet's resources, but to actually use them in a non-stupid manner that's actually useful to future growth. When you're drawing, somethimes you gotta zoom out, zoom back in and erase a thing or two, avoid doing everything all on one layer. Temporary degrowth is key to proper growth.
I'm gonna be honest with you this sounds like a Motte and Bailey debate tactic.
If you don't know what that is check out this brief explanation: https://farside.link/invidious/watch?v=OaTNCkDgPR4Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>476785
>I think that upholding degrowth will lend ideological cover to people who really do want to undo industrial society.
That's fair actually. A lot of what I said has been pitched to me as degrowth stuff, but perhaps there's a better term for what I'm going for here. Bookmarking that video, thank you for it. I've seen arguments that struck me something like that but I couldn't quite piece it together or put a word on it.
>No, my computer is ancient.
Ah ok. I remember having to put my old laptop right up to the air conditioner to keep it from cooking with a create focused minecraft modpack my friends would play. Probably why it broke down lol. (well it can run voidpuppy but I dunno how to use void.)

>>476790
>perhaps there's a better term for what I'm going for here.
Maybe the correct way to do these kinds of politics is to just describe the changes you want to see without giving it a special polit-brand-name. That way it's much harder to have your stuff co-opted.

But if I had to invent a term i would call it biosphere compatible industrialism.

>I dunno how to use void
search for void linux tutorial on YT

>>476792
>(…) without giving it a special polit-brand-name. That way it's much harder to have your stuff co-opted.
true
>biosphere compatible industrialism.
I like it
>search for void linux tutorial on YT
I'm always so stubborn to figure things out from the docs and wikis, but yeah if I'm getting stumped I shouldn't underestimate youtube as a resource.

>>476725
Why not ?
What is the reason to object ?

We're probably going to build artificial people at some point in the distant future, with artificial bodies and artificial minds, that are at least somewhat similar to ours, maybe with some aspirational qualities. We would be doing this to animate dead matter by making it alive, because that's what living matter tends to do.

This has nothing to do with "regulating AI" because AI is super scary and will make Skynet real. This is about taking back anything independent of the state. They don't want you to have a single processor of your own, and want the "internet of things" - this Satanic contraption that has always been a liberal delusion. But mostly, they just want to make people suffer and make another entry to destroy private life of any sort. It's a long, long "Jehad" to impose eugenism or whatever system they plan for us. Eugenism or no, humanity is consigned to despotism. They don't know anything else.

The actual quality of AI isn't much better than it was decades ago. Humans have a few interesting algos but they are always human-designed and a competent programmer will tell you what they do. Bad programmers who were taught to just copy the examples from the textbook - that's your Fabian/Germanic education for you where they literally have no concept of mechanism or scale - believe in these mystifications. No one who thinks about this for five minutes or maintains some connection with reality believes any of this hype.

What is different is the processing capacity of information, and the balance of state or institutional information control against the information available to our native faculties as human beings. In short, information control is a proxy for enclosure and dispossession. We are under a psychological assault, and this assault is not merely informational but entails violent imposition of the Germanic thought-forms among other poisons. A favored class is sheltered from this, and given absolute impunity to introduce this poison ad infinitum. If we try to resist it, we are viciously attacked and denounced. If we persist, unlimited torture awaits. Eugenics knows no other way.

That all said, I doubt these pushes to "censor AI" or "regulate AI" actually lead anywhere. This is mostly about seeding the narrative of information control. The objectives I hear coming from the government are more about making an internet Real ID, after they implemented Real ID for most state-issued documents. Basically, they want to make you use your name and ID card for any online activity, like how China regulates things. This is a continuation of many filters to keep "bad people" disconnected, and so that started a long time ago and has already perpetuated itself enough. The Real ID will be imposed, just as Trump was able to shatter net neutrality and many of the older regs that primarily constrained internet providers more than end users. Many of those regs existed less to protect you, but to clear out any independence of the private sector until the ruling institutions could consolidate their information holdings. That was a big thing Obama pushed - it was a huge part of the ACA, all of these medical records being collected for eugenic purposes. You already see the eugenic filtering and screening in every area of society, and COVID was a test to see how far they can push it / create crisis to drive the true believers to the full eugenic creed above all other law. This has produced a resistance, playing out now, but eugenics as I say cannot fail. It can only be failed, and so, eugenics has no play except to continue what it has always done, and eugenics was designed with this in mind.

>>476758
I see. And do these eugenicists ever speak or talk to you. Do they tell you they are eugenicists, or is it something you just know?

>>476648
>fermi paradox isiabout them being undetectable, not just staying on their home planet
You are correct but don't bee too harsh on OP, there is considerable overlap between undetectable and non-space-faring

>>476648
>He doesn't even grasp how consumerism works or forms

Can you give me a quick rundown? Is this about commodity fetishism?

>>476647
>Because it just takes one species and roughly 10K years to conquer the hole galaxy with technology we could already build.
Even at the speed of light with a species arising on a planet in the galactic center, no. The diameter of the Milky Way is something like 87,000 light-years.

>>476651
Yeah sorry, brain fart
It's 10 million years to colonize the galaxy with 1% light speed ships and the assumption that your colonization effort only moves for about half the time, while the other half is spend building up solar systems along the way.

https://farside.link/invidious/watch?v=FpXwyDWDww8

>>476650
>Is this about commodity fetishism?
Well that's at the core of it yeah. Like it's a broad thing that I'd have a hard time bundling into a quick run down but generally it all revolves that.
Like for example, things like games can be made as genuine enrichment and be beneficial, just like music and other forms of art, but the economics around it creates games that are like opium and waste time by design. The economics around it makes the food poisonous, or in such abundance it becomes so, ect…

I agree that capitalism is quite likely be what's game-overing all the aliens, but hyper-focusing on the results of consumerism rather than it's cause (capitalism) is a weird underscope that seems to be trying to dodge the capitalism question.

>>472720
Compare to now where "The Science" is dominated by legalese, mystification, institutions with Star Chamber-esque laws and policies, and obfuscation. This is possible because pedagogy is designed to retard children from an early age. They don't teach children to "read", but to digest language. They brag that the majority of humanity are not "really literate", because any time we demonstrate literacy, we are beaten into submission and bullbaiting by this Germanic culture, which was designed to destroy anyone who wasn't an aristocrat and uphold their racist bullshit. Then the Krauts project their failed race-theory onto the English or American. Every other culture in humanity asks themselves, individually or collectively, if they are the assholes. Most ordinary Germans, being reasonable people, do the same. Not the aristocracy though! It's so fucking insufferable.

>>472719
>The Retarded Ideology
Absolutely based. Is this the complete book?

>>472778
First part of what I plan to be eight books. Maybe I never finish it, but I'm pretty far into Book 2 which is much larger.

Good website with virus debunking articles:
https://viroliegy.com/

bump

Interesting thread, but wouldn't a hypothetical USSA immediately annex Canada ?

The Canadian bourgeoisie would feel threatened by an immensely powerful socialist country next door, even just the example of it existing. They'd try to make all kinds of military arrangement with other capitalist powers, which would set off an escalation chain where the USSA probably would conclude it had to conquer Canada before other capitalist powers could turn it into a battering-ram.

>>475284
What is a Canada?

>>475284
let us not forget their inevitable quest for military alliances with fellow capitalist nations. One can almost hear the frantic phone calls: "Hello, America? It's Canada. We've got some pesky socialism next door. Fancy teaming up for a bit of anti-communist camaraderie?" Diplomacy at its finest, I'm sure.

>>471861
assuming the OP came true this would be the result: a whole continent of caramel babes

>supposedly hates him
>even though he is one of them
>even though he most likely doesn't even exist
>even though they agreed to give him the xbox controller to dronestrike browns for 4 years
>even though they hyped him up more than anything in histary has been hyped up for 7 years
NPCs are so tiresome, thinking they can vote their way out of actual praxis. Unless someone brings me trump's severed hand I will not beleive that he is real. Presidents are an illusiory choice that will do the same thing regardless of which one they agree to convince the poors they voted for.

>>476559
If you want to do protectionism to build up domestic producers, in present conditions.

The best way to do it is start funding the creation of a industrial base as dynamic public sector industry. Private investors can't into heavy industry anymore because it's too capital intensive and too long term for them. Next put protective tariffs on specifically those industrial outputs. Once the private sector secondary industries start using those as inputs, you can expand the protectionism to include their goods and so on. That way your protectionist tariffs grow outwards like a tree that mirrors the shape of the industries it's supposed to protect.

You don't want to put tariffs on goods you can't make your self yet, because that's just raising the prices of commodities for no reason. You have to realize that other countries will treat tariffs as an economic war and retaliate with counter tariffs, and for that reason you also want to avoid using more tariffs than are needed.

You also probably want to do something to raise wages to increase demand for all that stuff you are making, and of course you need to invest in infrastructure, you need lots of railways and roads to transport all that stuff.

>>476563
State-run shit always sucks and fails because there is no penalty for failing. The funds keep coming.

Self driving cars, reusable rockets, LLMs, modern touch screens, etc. All of these were created with the support of friendly economic policies, sometimes with funding through state contracts, not through direct state funding and development.

You can claim that somehow someway more stuff would have been developed faster if only the state took over the reins of production, but you have zero evidence for it. It's just speculative faggotry, which you seem to be an expert in

>the great American tradition of Hamiltonian political economy
So giving bankers blowjobs and trying to establish a monarchy?

>>476564
>State-run shit always sucks and fails
Well pretty much all current large industrial bases on the planet resulted from a big public sector, including the American industrial heyday after WW2.

>there is no penalty for failing
I think you are talking about Wall-street too big to fail.

>Self driving cars, reusable rockets, LLMs, modern touch screens, etc.
Virtually all of the technology that makes these possible was developed in the state sector. The private sector is good at turning an existing technology into a product and then iterate on it to improve it's features. But fundamentally new, paradigm breaking stuff usually comes from the public sector. Private capital is not willing to take risks on radically new shit. Consider that neural network machine learning technology, that llms are based on, was developed in the 80s.

>You can claim that somehow someway more stuff would have been developed faster if only the state took over the reins of production, but you have zero evidence for it.
No it's the other way around. Virtually all recent historic periods of rapid technological progress have been driven by public sector activity.

For example in the west where most of the economy is privatized you see massive stagnation, while China where the industrial and technical R&D is state led, they see massive changes.
China today, versus China 20 years ago: massive improvements
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>476545
>>476544
>>476543
I haven't been to Amerikwa in a while.

Did they really make it so that mobile carriers are allowed to offer bundled packages with 'free' data for shit like Facebook/whatapp?

They do that in some countries, and it's ghey af.

>No, I don't care about being able to use zoomerbrain Snapchat for 'free.' Please just provide reasonable flat rate data plans that treat all sites equally.

>>476546
AFAIK, no, they didn't do that yet. I forget how they broke it, it might have just been a legal thing. They do that in Colombia though.

>>476547
>They do that in Colombia though.
The current president of Colombia is Gustavo Petro, which is a leftist and former Guerilla fighter. Why aren't they fixing that ?

>>476548
The simple answer is that most of leftism is performative moral grandstanding which primary serves to stroke the ego of those who profess it, and once leftists gain power, they rarely make societies better (and instead focus more on holding onto power).

>>476549
But he's done lots of based things, like doing land-reform that gave land to the rural poor. He reversed health-care privatization with a political crowbar. He called the Zionists "Nazis" , compared Gaza to a Holocaust extermination camp and cut off diplomatic relations with Israel.

Hoes mad at the economist:

<The president got off to a good start, forming a moderate coalition government filled with seasoned ministers. They sailed through a tax reform in record time. They negotiated with ranchers to redistribute land to the rural poor

<But that was not enough for Mr Petro. In April, when centrist ministers opposed a health-care reform, which would have handed control of health-care funding from private providers to the state, he dissolved the coalition and fired a third of his cabinet. He then turned dogmatic and packed the new cabinet with left-wingers.

<Earlier this month Mr Petro shattered Colombia’s policy on Israel-Palestine, too. After Israel retaliated against Hamas by bombing Gaza, the president let loose on social media. He accused Israel’s government of “Nazism” and compared the Palestinian territory to Auschwitz.

https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2023/10/26/gustavo-petro-colombias-left-wing-president-is-floundering

Y-you too.