liam and ozma auth left yen and cure moscow lib left ody and huchi auth right

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Verification	Security Check: URL detected. Solve to post.
Select	File / Embed / Oekaki
File	Spoiler All Images
Embed
Oekaki	[Oekaki logic integrated]
Password

Piteå Bern, Bern 09/17/26 (Thu) 03:50:30 No. 299150 [PM]

liam and ozma auth left

yen and cure moscow lib left

ody and huchi auth right

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:16:28 No. 299151 [PM]

File: 1789618588170-0.png (1.42 MB, 1100x1545, g_14847932 - a56d26f8bd521….png)

Uhhh but are you really so left, I mean, do you like, I dunno, Soviet union or Yugoslavia or how are you authoritarian left

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:17:31 No. 299152 [PM]

Yes on us you literally grew up around a direct democracy so that's based
And I grew up in a socialist insurgency
Huchi will probably be joining us soon because his country has been buck broken by eu

Chino Reloaded in Eloquent Jazz Chihuahua City, Chihuahua 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:28:07 No. 299153 [PM]

File: 1789619286982.jpeg (673.16 KB, 896x1193, sqiqkl.jpeg)

Piteå Bern, Bern 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:34:56 No. 299155 [PM]

File: 1789619696380.png (458.4 KB, 1000x1000, tongue.png)

>>299151
dat pic was more abotu geopolitics

but yeh more like i'm just authoritarian, and fine w/ both left and right. tho both have their pros and cons, left is better and more humane. i still prefer fascism to capitalism, libertarianism, anarchism, neoliberalism etc. yes u can argue fascism is just extension of capitalism or reactionary capitalism or sth, but it provides some critical accountability, there's national values and goals etc that the capitalists can't go against, and an upper limit to how much wealth they can accumulate

I want to take it easy!ds8De64mpw 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:35:38 No. 299156 [PM]

>>299152
> And I grew up in a socialist insurgency

Lol

Fortune
Real programs don't eat cache.

I want to take it easy!ds8De64mpw 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:36:30 No. 299157 [PM]

>>299153
Chino you epic poster :DDD

Fortune
I just know I'm a better manager when I have Joe DiMaggio in center field.
-- Casey Stengel

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:46:02 No. 299160 [PM]

File: 1789620362357.jpg (39.21 KB, 460x276, omaghnew460.jpg)

>>299156
Am I lying alan

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:46:47 No. 299161 [PM]

>>299160
Alan what us the good Friday agreement

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:48:07 No. 299162 [PM]

>>299161
What you rage about are liberals they're not left wing people
You murdered you left wing in the 50s

Eyes of the Night Moscow, Moscow 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:49:14 No. 299163 [PM]

File: 1789620553742.jpg (718.1 KB, 1306x1702, 172470148326.jpg)

The other day I thought that I might be Identitarian lol, though perhaps not exactly, and I wouldn't consider myself right-wing (or left-wing for that matter)

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:50:58 No. 299165 [PM]

>>299163
Well I'm a stalinist

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:51:41 No. 299166 [PM]

>>299165
Apart from him recognising the Zionist entity that was cringe

Lolitsradan Cardiff, Cardiff 09/17/26 (Thu) 04:52:43 No. 299167 [PM]

>>299156
Really fucking annoyed me ngl

Piteå Bern, Bern 09/17/26 (Thu) 05:04:39 No. 299169 [PM]

File: 1789621478957.gif (1.58 MB, 498x278, 1780373800443562.gif)

>>299163
the pic was more about support of sides in global conflicts and how those roughly map on the political compass chart, not necessarily politics of posters

tho it's kinda troll engagement b8 chart w/ kosovo war thing and claiming every1 supports usa over iran except for auth left

ur anarchist which doesn't differ that much whether it's left or right. tho imo both r just capitalism and u eventually get 99% of ppl living in haiti like squalor and 1% in opulence. w/ government there's at least some accountability and oversight, some minimum standards of living that must be provided to everyone. tho think it would work nicely in low population density high trust culture

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 05:25:48 No. 299170 [PM]

File: 1789622747766-0.jpg (122.52 KB, 1500x1500, g_14416395 - 4319c342f679e….jpg)

>>299155
No, thats incorrect, in fascism class differences are growing and the capitalist class is not subjugated. In fact, in Nazi Germany, Nazis have come to an agreement with capitalist class and let them extract value free from restraint so long they pose no political danger. There is simply no accountability isnt there, business under Nazism was hilariously corrupt especially in the war industry and that is one of the reasons why soldier's conditions at the front lines were so dismal

Fascism is all about unlikely alliances. Nazis had to give capitalists ways of extracting value so they wouldnt rebel, thats exactly wat they did. It is the precondition of capitalist ambivalence towards Nazi rule that Nazis wont bother them. So, no, both in DVCE Italy and Nazi Germany, no capital and no capitalists were held accountable to nothing at all. They just rebranded as fascists and dat it, and fascists were fine with dat so long factory owners allowed fascist party to come and propagandize/eulogize their leader or the party. Fascist states not just tolerated capitalism and capitalists, they were aligned with it. Its true that some capitalists were fascist in the sense that theyve believed in the ideology, but overwhelming majority of them were just opportunists who understood their power and used it to the best of their advantage. That is why business is more than complicit in genocide, not only that the business wasnt opressed in any way, capitalists willingly choose slave labour and liked death camps for wat theyve provided them. It is nothing but a fantasy to think dat fascists can bring any accountability, for the reasons that fascists have to forge and maintain alliances in order to work at all

Eyes of the Night Moscow, Moscow 09/17/26 (Thu) 05:29:26 No. 299171 [PM]

File: 1789622964077.png (12.95 MB, 2800x3080, 17254895886.png)

>>299165
Bro you don't seem like a Stalinist lol
Well, to me Stalin seems like a Machiavellian thug and you're far more liberal.

>>299169
Ah. Yea that chart's a mess
>imo both r just capitalism
Capitalism isn't a political ideology IMO, it's somewhat of a non-term used by mostly communists referring to economic liberalism and the economic (not political) mode of society aimed at extraction of profit and reinvestment with a goal of creating more profit - or something along these lines lol. I myself do not think of ancap as something real (capitalist mode of production cannot really exist without state-like institutions IMO, like essentially recreating a megacorp which can by itself protect its huge property and trade connections/routes/etc would be akin to creation of a state).
>u eventually get 99% of ppl living in haiti like squalor and 1% in opulence
Likewise, I do think that the state is more promoting of that state of affairs, no pun intended, and that the state is a poor equalizer - like too awkward, too weak etc, the best it can do is just bully, and charity exists without the state putting itself into picture

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 05:54:37 No. 299174 [PM]

File: 1789624477057-0.jpg (782.28 KB, 1500x2200, g_14467955 - 89681c05e1af0….jpg)

>>299171
I dont think "communists" separate between political and economical

Why should people exist on charity? All people work jobs, theyve earned by work services that the state must provide in good enough quality. The state is choosen to do this job out of historical conjecture but there were examples where people organized themselves and lived mostly equally without depending on the state, Russian revolution before it was seized by bolsheviks were just dat. People seized power at places where theyve worked and established worker run places. The problem that leninists saw in this anarchistic organization is efficiency, it is just not efficient enough organization. Leninism was scientific after all, so, the centralized command structure would be the most efficient according to the leninist thought and it would result in better production. Leninism is obsession with scientific progress, but those theories ignored almost everything on the ground, history, humanity, that peasants could be right. So, any way, democracy and equality is possible without the state, but everyone is convinced that those organizations are unable to provide garangutan production quotas needed for things like army and watever, so, centralized power structures are deployed instead

Piteå Bern, Bern 09/17/26 (Thu) 06:08:28 No. 299175 [PM]

File: 1789625308126.jpg (383.8 KB, 2048x1440, 1786203892639343.jpg)

>>299170
yeh i know aldat but obv they were able to dispossess the jews and plenty others, so this meme that they were purely an arm of all capitalists, who had zero accountability or reproach, is inaccurate. the capitalists were still allowed to keep extracting pretty brutally, but politically they followed state, which was the relevant part to me

russia and china have the same. there's brutal oligarchs, but they still have to act according to state politics and interests. dats wat i mean when i say i prefer it to some system that also has those oligarchs, but they each get to be some little king, free to force their world on others, legally protected from ever being dispossessed. that's wat i'm arguing against, not against there not being anything better than fascism, which i don't believe like i've said

>>299171
wel for me it also implies belief in property rights, that ur able to own a piece of land, grow it, pass it to ur progeny etc. on small scale it's wholesome, but x centuries from that point onward, w/ multiplied population, it becomes pretty gross
anarchism doesn't mean anything if it doesn't address property rights. almost always it'll affirm them, so it's almost always anarcho-capitalism
>recreating
recreating from wat? is the premise to ur anarchy that every1 would have to start over, all property destroyed and land is evenly distributed and everyone is some settler or wat ?

state is poor equaliser but there's no better alternatives. besides some war that equalises everyone in poverty or death. charity even now when it confers some tax deductions is pretty ineffective. it's also gross as hell idea that some ppl would have to depend on charity whims of rich ppl

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 06:46:46 No. 299186 [PM]

File: 1789627606229-0.png (818.04 KB, 1331x2048, g_14405950 - a0f06c131fb7e….png)

>>299175
People who believe that fascism is just a form of capital at its logical conclusion are comintern communists, which is not me

In fascism, life is impossible without the state in a peculiar way. Because the community or race is put front and center, the state guarantees safety of this community. In theory. In practice, fascism, wherever it was practiced, pushed societies to destruction

Under fascism, the state and the people are actually separate. Because individual must be part of the whole, it was structured in such a way so people will have appearance of choice, in DVCE Italy you vow to be a fascist and it wasnt just an empty gesture, it was legally binding in one sense and testament to faith in another. So, naturally, people have choice but they choose fascism because of mostly mystical reasons

So, capitalism flourishes under fascism for the same reason capitalism flourishes elsewhere, unrestrained accumulation and extraction of wealth, if allowed, will happen. But did capitalism under fascism benefit people? No, it was the state which benefited people. The state promised welfare, not capitalists. Capitalists actually couldnt provide anything to workers, only work places, and in fascism people were mostly incorporated into state/party clubs, structures, watever

But the state, paradoxically, has own intentions different from the people. The fascist state is both intent on saving the nation/race and fighting eternal war of regeneration

Capitalism under fascism was tolerated by the party because it was useful and because they cant do much about it. But it wasnt under party's control. It is only vaguely benefited the society in forms of employment and taxes. The business wasnt aligned with fascist goals at all, the business worked for own sake, and only could be driven by profit and fascists could not do anything about it

However, there was huge state capitalistic structures. It is most striking in Nazi Germany with Luftwaffe and its boss. There was plan in Nazi Germany, but how it was achieved is not how plan worked in Soviet union at all

So, Russia is this little king that is unable to be overthrown and legally protected. Russian state is a captured mafia state and it works this way, it is different from a fascist state. In Russia, there is no paradox, the state doesnt claim to exist for the welfare of the people but for the state itself

China is different from dat. In this case, you are right

Eyes of the Night Moscow, Moscow 09/17/26 (Thu) 07:03:02 No. 299192 [PM]

File: 1789628582177.png (2.13 MB, 1248x1824, 172489496294.png)

>>299175
IMO property rights are not really about "belief" but more about enforcement, and property can be "redistributed" by really "unlawful" means too lol (oof) as well as whatever unstable power structures there gonna be, they will no guarantee any kinda "generational wealth", which I see mostly as a plus. Likewise, without state, laws/courts themselves might be more "unstable" in a sense of becoming somewhat less formal at least, so whatever "property rights" there might (or not) be, they will likely differ from the modernity era (capitalist/individualized) rights.
>recreating from wat?
It's more like an image or something. There is a long, perilous road to walk from a private entrepreneur (clearly no-state territory) to a large-scale organization which spans far beyond your immediate community and surroundings. I'd say it's impossible to walk that path without murder, oppression and/or mistreatment. So yea, everybody walking this path would try to create a state and likely will create one (monopoly on violence), starting from tyranny.
>is the premise to ur anarchy
Anarchism is essentially removal of all "rulers" from the picture. Power structures are unstable and situational, violence is likely more chaotic but not necessarily all-out war, laws are only as enforced as there are agreements of some sort (because nobody can come and beat everybody down to submission and force to comply). It's quite possible people won't even agree on the common currency, so NO, amassing wealth like capitalist do is going to pretty hard in the general anarchist case IMO. No huge civilization and extensive trade network (to my knowledge) existed without massive efforts for enforcement that state of affairs - like police to protect property, army to protect trade routes etc. Not all anarchists are pirates, but quite likely all pirates are anarchists ww
>state is poor equaliser but there's no better alternatives
To me, it's either humanity evolves towards a better society without violence (i.e. no state) or it's literally death. State isn't "lesser evil", IMO it's quite the opposite, it is a monster that will undo us all xD
>charity even now when it confers some tax deductions is pretty ineffective
IDK what that statement is about but taxing isn't charity. It is state related - state STOLE someone's property and redistributed it how it saw fit - not necessarily to people who needed it, not necessarily by public demand either - it JUST happened because some social group decided so.
>it's also gross as hell idea that some ppl would have to depend on charity whims of rich ppl
To me, in an order of desirability:
1) charitable and philanthropist society people may disagree but ethically bound to listen and help each other at the very least rainbow ponies blah blah blah
2) people can steal and kill for property redistribution as they please (kinda oof but it won't necessarily be as crazy as most people are likely rather tame, especially if they consider it's THEM who are gonna have to do the heavy lifting and suffer all the consequences of unjust/violent choices and not some magical omnipotent "just" agent) (also, despite states trying to tame it, humanity seems absolutely wild still, so perhaps what i hate is essentially impotence of the state)
3) some magical schizoentity appears and takes over all affairs of humanity (statism)
As you can see, my hatred runs deep UwU

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 07:27:44 No. 299195 [PM]

File: 1789630064562-0.jpg (118.9 KB, 1425x1397, g_14416734 - d170dced786e8….jpg)

How philanthropist society can exist and be just if philanthropy presupposes that some will be more wealthy(hence more powerful/unequal) and decide, out own ethical reasons and will, to give it away?

In the native american societies, some more egalitarian societies had inequality of wealth but it was ameliorated by ritual sacrifice and lavish ceremonies. Some just destroyed wealth on death. The only way a native american society could be equal is if wealth inequality to exist at all, it must be destroyed. Generational weath is the root of all inequality and native americans understood it all too well

So, no, no amount of philantropy or charity is gonna make any justice at all because it presupposes that injustice is in fact natural and dat some are just naturally more wealthy, which is untrue. Charity is enemy of just society, because it implies that people are always deficient without some dependent structure which is in fact untrue. People, throughout all history, all time, had worked and earned things. They didnt just receive it by charity or they ever wanted dat

Effective altruism is bizzare ideology. But much more bizzare is to think that humanity can evolve when it can only change

I want to take it easy!ds8De64mpw 09/17/26 (Thu) 07:33:58 No. 299196 [PM]

>>299195
> In the native american societies, some more egalitarian societies had inequality of wealth but it was ameliorated by ritual sacrifice and lavish ceremonies. Some just destroyed wealth on death. The only way a native american society could be equal is if wealth inequality to exist at all, it must be destroyed. Generational weath is the root of all inequality and native americans understood it all too well

You are honestly retarded hon

Fortune
Captain Penny's Law:
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and
some of the people all of the time, but you Can't Fool Mom.

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 07:39:05 No. 299197 [PM]

File: 1789630745418-0.jpg (1.33 MB, 1451x2032, g_14415869 - d2d76b79ac12f….jpg)

>>299196
Where am I not right? Point it to me. But you cant because you are a glue sniffer

Piteå Bern, Bern 09/17/26 (Thu) 08:10:39 No. 299199 [PM]

File: 1789632638762.png (932.7 KB, 1448x2048, 1750167116359295.png)

>>299186
>pushed societies to destruction
fascist states have destructive goals, which is also y i'd strictly prefer communism. regardless, to me any goal is better than no goals (or just "economic growth" like we have, and maybe "maintain our global dominance, except when it's too hard"). the Zionist entity is good example, tho i think they're evil, they have a purpose at least

>It is only vaguely benefited the society in forms of employment and taxes
what's vague about it ?
capitalism gets to exist under fascism bc balance of power like u said but also because it's genuinely efficient. especially when there's constraints on it. same dat china does
there's little political aspects to how the companies are run, other than that they do it efficiently, +whatever labour and workplace laws the state has forced on them, + x amount of propaganda. state directing them happens more thru taxes and procurement. esp when state is the only customer. i wasn't implying anything more mysterious

>So, Russia is this little king that is unable to be overthrown and legally protected
so, authoritarianism has one guy at top. it's not ideal, has incredibly risky failure points, but it's again better to me than having 200 oligarchs ruling. maybe weird to call rusia or china fascist but they're definitely authoritarian right
>the state doesnt claim to exist for the welfare of the people but for the state itself
weird claim. there's no ethnic component to current russian or chinese authoritarianism, in propaganda, since they're imperial agglomerations in post-colonial era, but the state still postures about society's welfare and development. maybe during wartime there's further emphasis on sacrifice of the ppl to the state, and russia in particular may word it bit more grimly, but it applies to any other state under wartime too
>>299192
think i call it "belief" bc anarchism has some natural state of being vibes, and anything on top of that, that doesn't exist in nature, is some belief that makes it a political ideology. also laws and courts ? wtf

it's just very profitable and efficient to band together and go take all the anarchist ranchers' property. most ancaps i think don't find the idea of some state-like corps existing that unpalatable because your interaction with them is still theoretically voluntary. they'd only span beyond ur community if they were more efficient (better) than the alternatives, in ancap belief. but dat again requires property rights, so some land where u have the right to violence and right to control others, or at least to expel others

i think ur advocating for some very economically simple agrarian sustenance life, which i don't really see dat many problems w/, other than u would not have niceties of technology, consumerism, modern medicine etc. ok if ur healthy, but genetic load has increased so much that most ppl do need modern healthcare few times in their lives, or u get africa life expectancies

>IDK what that statement is about but taxing isn't charity
i mean there's incentive in our society for ppl to donate to charity, bc u get it deducted from taxes. but still they're at pretty sorry state. tho i get it's lot easier on communal scale, where u can actually see the ppl in need and the kind of needs they have
>As you can see, my hatred runs deep UwU
i think it's influenced by u living in russia, and maybe some autistic intolerance of hierarchies on any level. ur dream could work, but u would have to go on some other planet w/ all the other like minded ppl and hope ur children aren't too different lol

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 08:41:15 No. 299200 [PM]

File: 1789634475000-0.jpg (599.19 KB, 2589x4096, g_14487555 - 72cf524565688….jpg)

>>299199
It is vague because the state assumed care for welfare of the people and the companies contributed little to it. At least thats how it was in Nazi Germany. You could buy Cola in Nazi Germany. But does dat improve welfare of people? Not really. The state guaranteed services and generous welfare to Germans, and it extended to things like meaning of life, clubs, organizations, …, so benefit of capitalists is kinda vague on German population

I dunno wat it means, maybe Im not knowledgeable enough, but Russia is a state for the state's sake, not welfare of the people. China is on other hand is ideological, it is one party state that prides itself on getting immeasurable number of people out of poverty. China and Russia are not comparable

(You gotta understand dat since the shock therapy, Russian state exist only for itself. Thats how it was designed by liberals, there are only vague remains of soviet past now. No one respects the constitution here)

vampX Meppel, Drenthe 09/17/26 (Thu) 09:10:54 No. 299202 [PM]

File: 1789636253776-0.jpg (264.83 KB, 1448x2048, g_14429420 - 3870e24806fca….jpg)

>>299200
(In the moment of soviet disintegration, there was really only one thing on people's minds: how to prevent a complete collapse? So, liberals wanted the state only for the state's sake, that would stabilize economy and enable wild west reforms that theyve been writing up. Liberals, (neoliberals), didnt believe that the state should be providing anything to the people and thats how theyve wanted Russia to be, theyve imagined Russia as a free, democratic, capitalist country that is modelled after western democracies. The only reason why we have in our constitution mention that Russia is in fact a social country is because communists wouldnt allow them otherwise. Liberals understood just how popular and how important universal healthcare and services were for people, so it was an concession to communists

However, then the state was captured by mafia and since then all we have is an informal system of government. Russia is an oligarchic state, but it is bound by the Puta as the chief mafioso which keeps his gang under leash. He is exactly like a real mafioso don, he decides who is right or wrong in problem situations, so the system cannot survive him as the whole reason it works is his arbitrage

There is really no consideration for people's welfare in modern Russia. There are no safety nets, nothing, no welfare of any kind. Russia is just not a social state, because thats not its purpose. The purpose of the state is the state itself, it is not bound by any thing. It is afraid of own people, sure, but people cant do anything about the state either. So, Puta is not really a tsar, he is a gangster and thats how Russia is)