/b/ - Random

Anything posted here are autistic works of fiction, only a fool would take them seriously.

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Email
Subject
Comment
Password
Drawing x size canvas
File(s)

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

Expand All Images


(42.40 KB 503x720 image.jpg)
Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 17:30:14 [Preview] No. 35709
Whenever you hear the word "Capitalism" replace it with "the private individual ownership of person and property", whenever you hear the word "Communism" replace it with "the public universal ownership of person and property".

In one case ("Capitalism"), you have exclusive ownership of your body and belongings, and other people have exclusive owner their bodies and belongings, "ownership" means "control", which means that any interaction with your person or property requires your permission, or it is illegal.

In the other ("Communism"), you have exclusive ownership of nothing, everything (and everyone) is instead owned communally by all people, everything is decided by the majority, and any interaction with anyone or anything must be based on what is most commonly agreed upon in order to be is legal.

Socialism is the stage in between, which most communist-aspirant countries never seem to get out of, und socialism, everything (and everyone) is owned by some central governing authority (they hate calling it "government), which represents the most common will of the people, but in actually just wields absolute authority with no interest in ever running out of excuses to give it up.

If Communism is direct democracy, then socialism is the representative variant of it, tyranny with the very transparently false image of "governance by the governed", much like our own government, to be frank.

Night-Watchman State Minarchism is the absolute extreme of capitalist government, you can't go further beyond this without going into anarchist territory, people who support it feel like the name should just be "Capitalism" since everything else falls short of their ideology, and NWS Minarchism is simply a label adopted for ease of communication, speaking of which...

Anarcho Capitalism is to capitalism what communism is to socialism, there is where ownership , instead of a representative body being charged to guarantee and enforce the principles of ownership and consent, these principles completely replace government, and instead everyone just agrees to only interact with the person or property of the others, or the interaction is illegal. AnCaps tend to think that this is a hard reset on civilization back to the first way people governed their interactions, like the Minarchists, these guys have a word they prefer, "Voluntaryism", but use the name they are known by here for communication-clarity purposes. They also tend to respond to the idea of feudal states eventually emerging from the implementation of their ideology as something they have little problem with.

Which leads to the concept of Neo-Monarchism, the idea that a return to monarchy is a good idea because when the government and it's people are someone's personal property, inherited from their ancestors and to be passed onto their descendants, then the leader would have more interest in maintaining it in good condition, many AnCaps who think about their ideology and where it might lead can just make the leap to this concept, and many did, even creating their own board for it, they also tend to cross-pollinate with the other ideologies mentioned here.

Egoism (or AWA - "anarchism without adjectives") is anarcho capitalism and communism without regard for consent (communal or individual), allowing all interactions based solely on their physical capability, and equates ownership solely to possession, basically, everything is a free for all, associations can be voluntary (as in the most nationalist/isolationist forms of capitalism) or coerced (as in the more globalist/expansionist forms of communism), it's just straight up "no rules but the rules of nature/reality". These guys disagree with the AnCaps and think they TRULY represent the primal order, as an irony, they tend to be simultaneously the most anti-government (even looking down on moral restrictions in addition to laws) and the most pro-government (since they tend to believe that their ideology is always in play, it is what TRULY governs everything already, and what we see is the end result.


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 18:41:35 [Preview] No.35710 del
(5.53 MB 480x361 icecream.gif)
thats cool and all, but this icecream is cooler
(:


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 19:20:16 [Preview] No.35711 del
poor schizo OP thinks mandatory vaccination exists lol

if you want to be vaccinated against covid then don't get a vaccination, OP. there are no laws that say you have to get one. nobody will call black flying vans to come get you.

>>35710
HOW THE FUCK DOES LID JUMP BUT CUP DOES NOT?!?!? HOLYYY SHIIIIIIITTTTTTTTT!


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 19:33:47 [Preview] No.35712 del
>>35711
Fuck off with your shitty buzzwords retard. You will never see laws explicitly forcing people to get the vaccine when coercion works just as well and completely eludes most people's awareness. You won't be forced at gunpoint to take it, but instead required to take it for most activities. Schools, cruise ships, and even employers require vaccinations RIGHT NOW, and I'll bet you $500 more places are going to start checking for it too.

"Take this vaccine or you'll cripple yourself and won't be able to participate in society :^)"


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 20:21:29 [Preview] No.35715 del
National Socialism and National Capitalism are variants where the rules they follow only apply to a specific people:

National Socialism is socialism where the communal will that is represented by the government is only concerned with a specific group (White or German-Gentile Men, etc.), this can mean in the most extreme forms that only one group are considered persons, which is "being more Hitlerian than literally Hitler was", or you can go Adolf Hitler's route, which was the surprisingly tame one of the National Socialist distinction of "citizen" and "civilian", with associated differences in rights, privileges, and protections, A German Jew was still a German, and was still offered protections and rights, even when interned in a concentration camp (which protected them from being killed without charge, hence why the holocaust as a genocide never happened, however they would lack specific things given to the Aryans of Germany, most notably the ability to participate in the political processes, or being given government loans for reproduction, and other such things (read up on the list, and you will see that I mean).
National Socialism was originally a lot more tame than what the media Jews of Hollywood would have you believe, however, the media portrayals gave a lot of /pol/acks ideas, and the community now rejects the historically accurate picture of the ideology with regards to how it treated it's Non-Aryan Germans, the Ideology started out relatively tame, got demonized, then that produces effects on imageboard which evolved the ideology into the WigNat-isms it is now associated with on most /pol/ boards, even Hitler thought there were good Jews and didn't want to gas any of the Kikes, he had nothing against Blacks and would oppose the idea of a "Day of the Rope", and for him EthnoNationalism was about German Aryans having political sovereignty, not about kicking out everyone who wasn't Aryan out of the country, if he started posting on /pol/, the mods and anons would crucify the guy as a fed or shill.
However, this is changing, as a lot of the NatCaps grew older and became more restrained and closer to the historically accurate characterization of Adolf Hitler's concept of what "EthnoNationalism" implies, that and a lot of NatSocs, ended up meeting a Females and Non-Whites (especially those who aren't Asian, either) who they genuinely liked and didn't want to see come to harm, or they just thought about things in more philosophical or compassionate terms, and decided that hurting innocent people wasn't a good idea, or they actually buckled down and read the words of their ideologies primary historical representative, and realized that Adolf Hitler was nothing like the way he looked on (((TV))), and the thing about him that made people object to him was not related to his attitudes on race or ethnicity, but on his perspectives relating to money, banking, business, and finance.


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 20:21:57 [Preview] No.35716 del
>>35715
Despite the claims of Adolf Hitler being a devout Catholic his whole life, and being inspired by the German tradition of Catholic and Protestant Christianity (apparently moreso than the actual leaders of those religions), in reality, he had the view of religion in a similar fashion to the early USSR, as something to be co-opted and then eased out, a dangerous distraction from what the government's leaders saw as being most vital and essential, which they aimed to make the prime focus of their people, his "Positive Christianity" was similar to the "Christian Communism" in that it usurped the church from it's authorities and gradually replaced elements of the religion with elements of their own state ideology. He had to present himself and his ideology as Christian for the sake of power, but it was his beliefs regarding the German "volk" that truly occupied a strong place within his heart, and he ultimately saw Christianity as being incompatible, Islam would have been more in line with his ideas than the religion of the majority of Germans, in this way, he was "strongly, devoutly religious, but also thoroughly anti-Christian, and hostile to the church and it's teachings", which he saw as being a "Jewish" source of "weakness" that cost his people so much in the previous war, If his regime had lasted longer, he would have continued to increase the Anti-Christian angle and his ideology would have become known for being State Atheist, like Socialism/Communism is today, the fact that he lost the war is the reason his Christian following has not left him - "The Man in the High Tower" was based on Heinlein trying his best to portray the ideology of National socialism as accurately as he could, he did extensive research on the subject, and that included predicting where it would have gone if given the chance (by looking at the evolution of similar regimes), for example, In the book, the Axis powers win the Second World War, but they don't invade the rest of Europe or America, instead, the Axis countries become so successful in the Post-War era, that they inspire these places to adopt similar forms of government, which talk about Germany as an inspiration similar to how the Americans used to talk about France and vice versa, it's a cultural conquest, not militaristic, and the economic conflict between Germany and Japan was due to how they would both have been having golden ages (Japan for the same reasons as in our timeline, as they were looking for modernization even before the war had ended, and Germany due to the fact that Hitler's "Blitz economy" would have never been ended prematurely), and their markets would be in conflict for their hold in the economies of other countries.

Fascism is where the state is put before the specific group of people, but the group of people is still put before other groups, the idea being that the government is essential to protecting the interests of the people. This means they introduce the element of class and power into the equation as an additional hierarchy. Despite being the poster boy for this ideology in most people's minds, Hitler actually was personally disgusted by fascism, which was more accurately represented in Italy, Mussolini is less popular in our culture, however, and few people realize that there even was a distinction from his ideology and NatSoc.


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 20:22:16 [Preview] No.35717 del
Similarly to National Socialism, National Capitalism is where the private ownership of person or property that is represented by the government is only recognized as valid for a specific group of people (meaning those who aren't White cannot truly own anything, even themselves, which essentially means that those who aren't White have no legal protections and are defacto slaves to those who are White), essentially "NAP for me and those like me, but not for anyone else".
As with National Socialism, there are also more "tame" or "reasonable" versions of this ideology, where instead of total dispensation with the personhood of those outside the group, there is merely a caste system or hierarchy that exists, such as with Hitler, where he simply created a caste or hierarchy where his people were simply given specific forms of preference to the other peoples living in his lands.
National Capitalism took an opposite evolution on the internet from National Socialism, first of all the environment of NatSoc was WigNat, to the point that even Literally Hitler would find it too unreasonably extreme for his tastes, add to that the constant bashing of all forms of "Capitalism" and "Libertarians" by the /pol/acks, which gives anyone with a taste for minimalistic laws and economic regulations the feeling of a need to prove themselves as being just as edgy and extreme as the NatSocs, and the result was the infamous NatCap "SlaveState EthnoNationalism", which, when it includes "Females" and "Non-Whites" in the category of the "slaves", produced a very kinky ideology that endorses the keeping of one's own daughters as loli sex slaves, the hilarious fact that it was a pedophile's paradise was the true reason a lot of the NatCaps became more restrained and closer to the more accurate characterization of Adolf Hitler's concept of what "EthnoNationalism" implies, that and a lot of them, like a lot of NatSocs, ended up meeting a lot of Females and Non-Whites who they genuinely liked and didn't want to see come to harm, or they just thought about things in more philosophical or compassionate terms, and decided that hurting innocent people wasn't a good idea.
This ideology is a new one, and the product of the meeting of the old "libertarian" /pol/ and the new "nazi" /pol/, the anons realizing they have common ground on a lot of their beliefs, and with a few changes to make the two compatible (prioritizing "nationalism" over "capitalism" by only applying the rights of ownership of self and property to specific groups of people they deemed to be worthy) a new ideology was synthesized from combining the two.
As this is a brand new ideology which the marxists and feds are unfamiliar with, and thus lacking in ability to respond to with shilling, they have instead tried to make it synonymous with mainstream ""civic nationalist" libertarianism, and produced quote a few memes in order to get this result, however, National Capitalists tend to know what they believe in and what makes it unique and new, and they also know that "Civic Nationalism" is an ultimately meaningless concept promoted by COINTELPRO gatekeepers and people getting paid off by Jews to shit up imageboards (or doing it for free).


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 20:22:59 [Preview] No.35718 del
That was a lot on the newest ideology in our community, so here are two dead old ideologies that have been getting revived in recent times, with significant gains in traction, at least in terms of becoming known:

National Communism ("NazBol") is the variety of National Socialism where the anarchism of communism is introduced to replace the government of socialism, it sought the gradual erosion of the state, but Hitler wisely saw the room for subversion in this, and gutted his movement of such beliefs and their adherents during his internal ideological purge on the "night of long knives", good thing too, a lot of these guys were actively working with Communist Jews and other soviet sympathizers to try and clip the claws of the rising Reich as a prominent competitive force to the USSR, many were also betraying the movement in more obvious ways as well, giving it's supporters up to the Marxist terrorists that were behind so many attacks that when the time came to stand up to the Soviets, the NatSocs decided to move the entirety of groups most likely to produce such domestic terrorists and traitors to internment camps, far away from what they would consider to be their most vital targets to attack in order to sabotage the Reich from within.


last post Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 20:23:14 [Preview] No.35719 del
>>35718
Christian Nationalism, is an old ideology that was revived recently, the idea is to build a theocracy based on the Biblical text as it's constitution, and make the Christian identity it's core group, rather than a whole race, the main bulk of them reject EthnoNationalism, and rather than an "EthnoState", they seek out to establish "Christendom", or the "Earthly Kingdom of Christ", and a ton of them idolize the 1950's style of living, even though the government they want is one that is way older than the one in 1950, and doesn't resemble it at all (more like 1450, but with modern technology and a lot of past cultural changes to account for).
However, some of them started getting influenced by various /pol/acks, and this subfaction of ChristNats made changes to things and made it a specifically WHITE Christian identity instead.
Either way, expect the result of these guys taking over to result in something like a "Christian Sharia" (do NOT ever call it that in front of them unless you want to piss them off), where God (according to Jesus Christ and not Muhammed) is considered to be the true leader of the country, and a holy book (the Bible and not the Qu'ran) is used as the basis for forming the government and making it's laws.
Often they promote their ideology by claiming that Christianity, regardless of it's factuality, was with White people for the best parts of their history, and indeed most of it, that it had a significant impact on shaping their culture and politics, and that it's decline correlates with the decline of the countries in which this had occurred. Not only do I question these claims, but I also tend to take their logic to it's conclusion, that if the Bible is useful for social engineering, and if this is the true reason why we should be at at least cultural Christians, then we could improve out society by improving the Bible, and thus the proposal has been made by me and echoed by other anons that we could rewrite the good book in order to make it more compatible with the society we want.
This was the essential core of the "Positive Christianity" of National Socialism, and it's not even the first time the book would be given a major overhauling, as we can see that this had indeed been done to it over and over again by people who wanted to make it more useful for them in promoting their political ideology, some Christian Nationalists have unironically adopted this ideology, most ChristNats hate them with a passion, because their book's current rules forbid doing such a thing (even though it was done in the past), being trolls, these "Positive Christians" tend to point out how that rules should be left in, because it would make it easier to claim that they hadn't made the changes they intend to make after they had made them, the other opposition to PosChrists is that people already know what's in it, and can read the older versions of the Bible, the answers to this issue are the same as the ones used by other countries in the past and present, and basically say that it includes a well-known mix of cultural and legal techniques to address satisfactorily, also they say that most Christians aren't anywhere near as informed on their holy book as these critics claim they are.


Anonymous 06/08/2021 (Tue) 23:57:28 [Preview] No.35722 del
(3.67 MB 1280x720 xvp5cc.mp4)


Anonymous 06/09/2021 (Wed) 03:10:59 [Preview] No.35723 del
OP can you plz post a picture of one of the walls of your room and how long it took to do all the notes and drawings and stuff


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 00:43:34 [Preview] No.35753 del
>>35709
>pic 1
hmm

In a normal situation, you are given the option to either be job and homeless and starve to death, or get a job.
This on paper doesn't sound so bad, but if you are familiar with how Capitalism's workings and certain writers such as Marx, then you will know that in a capitalist mode of production, the private property owner or capitalist will give workers a wage, this wage generally covers the worker's daily requirements to subsist and buy stuff like foods and services such as education and healthcare. HOWEVER. There is one big flaw here, the wage does NOT fully compensate for the worker's ACTUAL amount of social labor (the amount of work one does that contributes to society in one shape or form such as engineering, production, healthcare, etc.)
In an ideal world, we would have a "currency" that is measured in time to measure the amount of work done, and people would just work for the amount of time that it takes to subsist daily, but this raises the question: What about workers that can't produce the same amount of social labor as other workers due to their natural inferiority?
The solution here would be simple:
1. Provide some extensive training to compensate for their lack of skills
2. Place them in another job which they can work better in
It's simple really, you also have to consider the fact that Late-Stage Capitalism has contributed directly to the expansion of the means of production, meaning workers are able to achieve the Socially Necessary Labor Time (The average work that can be done in a set amount of time with the average skills and tools) without much problem, so this isn't a concern that holds any value in the modern world.

Just some insight.


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 00:44:24 [Preview] No.35754 del
(374.97 KB 1946x1592 wages.png)
>>35709
>pic 1
hmm

In a normal situation, you are given the option to either be job and homeless and starve to death, or get a job.
This on paper doesn't sound so bad, but if you are familiar with how Capitalism's workings and certain writers such as Marx, then you will know that in a capitalist mode of production, the private property owner or capitalist will give workers a wage, this wage generally covers the worker's daily requirements to subsist and buy stuff like foods and services such as education and healthcare. HOWEVER. There is one big flaw here, the wage does NOT fully compensate for the worker's ACTUAL amount of social labor (the amount of work one does that contributes to society in one shape or form such as engineering, production, healthcare, etc.)
In an ideal world, we would have a "currency" that is measured in time to measure the amount of work done, and people would just work for the amount of time that it takes to subsist daily, but this raises the question: What about workers that can't produce the same amount of social labor as other workers due to their natural inferiority?
The solution here would be simple:
1. Provide some extensive training to compensate for their lack of skills
2. Place them in another job which they can work better in
It's simple really, you also have to consider the fact that Late-Stage Capitalism has contributed directly to the expansion of the means of production, meaning workers are able to achieve the Socially Necessary Labor Time (The average work that can be done in a set amount of time with the average skills and tools) without much problem, so this isn't a concern that holds any value in the modern world.

Just some insight.
Also, picrel is wages vs worker's productivity in the U.S.


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 00:45:15 [Preview] No.35755 del
>>35753
ah shit, accidentally posted the same message twice. cant wait to get banned.


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 06:26:06 [Preview] No.35757 del
(141.01 KB 599x761 1444843966012.jpg)


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 06:27:30 [Preview] No.35758 del
(98.28 KB 625x552 1456357842069-1.jpg)


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 06:29:21 [Preview] No.35759 del
(24.42 KB 450x450 corporate snek.jpg)
(77.14 KB 598x598 corporate taxes.jpg)


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 13:45:26 [Preview] No.35762 del
(469.98 KB 1600x1153 Lady_SplashAttack.jpg)
>truckers made $43000 last year
>also how did you guess ive never had a real job outside of working at starbucks in highschool


Anonymous 06/12/2021 (Sat) 18:35:14 [Preview] No.35766 del
>>35762
>implying that number is wrong
>calling other people ignorant

shigady.

I'm guessing you believe the lies truck companies put out. hint: a typical trucker is not the average trucker



Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply