/mlpol/ - My Little Politics


If you want to see the latest posts from all boards in a convenient way please check out /overboard/
For Pony, Pony, Pony and Pony check out >>>/poner also Mares

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
0
Select File / Oekaki
File(s)
Password (For file and/or post deletion.)

NAPone.png
what’s the point of extremism
Anonymous
8729485
?
No.389748
389751 389752 389838 389840 390193 395679 395756 397374 397418 403836
how can we even be anarchocapitalists under any sort of government. how is it possible to even try when it’s impossible in the state. why does anyone have hope for this ideology. i really thought i got it when i was like 15 but there’s no point, even libertarians are getting fucked. there’s not enough of us to fuck up the govenment so why try

also why do we all draw her with dollars and not bits, she’s a horse people

also also please post her more here, makeshift ancap pone thread
157 replies and 40 files omitted.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.395726
>>395701
>An institution as old as humanity that you portrait as oppressive but many dispute that because slaves were take of and were given a purpose in life, to serve their masters through their work.
I disagree with the premise that serving someone else through work is a fulfilling purpose in life, especially when it's involuntary.
>Well, here is the case of private property as slaves where indeed property and as well women. You see, it is all about if the time line has been contaminated with the "equality" trope.
Are you arguing for AnCap, or against it?
You denounced libertarianism in the other post, but you also seem to be pro-slavery. What is your point?
Anonymous
91395b2
?
No.395727
395729
ecS7FtB_d.png
>>395725
>So was literally kidnapping them from their families to take them as brides.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.395729
395751
Rape_of_Prosepina_September_2015-3a.jpg
>>395727
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping
See the embedded sources.

Answer the other questions, faggot.
Anonymous
a40bf3b
?
No.395751
395755 395760
>>395729
>article lists historical allegations against the Vikings, the truth of which is difficult to verify at a remove of a thousand years or more
>"oh, also Gypsies did it hundreds of years ago! And maybe a remote tribe in Uzbekistan!"
>plus stories, equally poorly attested, of cannibal tribesmen of the Americas, and the H'mong
>and Etruscans during the Bronze Age
>ooh! ooh! someone accused the Mormons of it!
>"however, accurate information is difficult to obtain from these closed communities"

I stopped reading there. It was a really nice red herring, though. I'm still trying to figure out what any of this has to do with arranged marriages, in which no one is kidnapped by Jivaro cannibals in the dark of the night.
Anonymous
affbff5
?
No.395755
395921
>>395751
The guy asked for citations, so I provided them.
Anonymous
4795ae4
?
No.395756
>>389748
Extreme problems require extreme solutions. That said whatever your position is you shouldn't alienate potential allies with your positions.
sage
sage
009b977
?
No.395760
395921 395922
>>395751
>defends kikes, gypsies, and offshoot judeo-shitstains
>forgets to mention cathocucks, (((puritans))), scientologists
Show your real flag.
Anonymous
c981d85
?
No.395921
395922
>>395755
Just put the fries in the bag, bro.
>>395760
Who's defending? I read the article and copied and pasted a few snippets from it, which don't support his claims. And his claims are irrelevant, anyway, because they were an attempt to change the subject. Arranged marriage != bride kidnapping. Bride kidnapping != arranged marriage. They are two different things. They don't have anything to do with one another. This is called the "red herring" approach to debate. It's something midwit Plebbit trash do, and calling them on it whenever they crawl out of their hugbox to try to pull that bullshit in a place like this is a moral obligation. It's also fun.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.395922
>>395921
>Just put the fries in the bag, bro.
What is that supposed to mean?
>Arranged marriage != bride kidnapping. Bride kidnapping != arranged marriage.
Nobody said that.
The point is that both go back a long time in history, countering the point that just because something has been done history makes it inherently good. Appeal to tradition is in itself a logical fallacy.
>This is called the "red herring" approach to debate.
If you think it's a red herring, you clearly didn't understand the argument. It was an example to contradict your logic.
>It's something midwit Plebbit trash do, and calling them on it whenever they crawl out of their hugbox to try to pull that bullshit in a place like this is a moral obligation.
And now you're just resorting to ad hominem.
>>395760
You are not using sage correctly.
Anonymous
d607894
?
No.395924
395964
>>395686
Hierarchy needs be established and maintained by violence.
Anonymous
496807b
?
No.395964
397421
>>395924
Did your dad need to beat the shit out of you for you to respect him?
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397374
397378
>>389748
anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms, capitalism requires the enforcement of private property to keep the means of production out of the hands of the workers who will be subjugated by wage slavery, and for the benefit of the capitalist class who passively extracts the surplus value of labor from work they didn't do. capitalism is not just "the market", there are markets in socialism, and were markets even before money itself. profit is theft from the worker, capitalism is slavery. you can't "anarcho" capitalism any more than you can "anarcho" monarchy, they're fundamentally about unjust hierarchies.
Anonymous
0939491
?
No.397378
397425 397439
>>397374
>there are markets in socialism
Yep, only difference is that all the shelves are empty.
Anonymous
d67b248
?
No.397418
>>389748
Ancaps get put against the wall last
Anonymous
7c3f001
?
No.397421
>>395964
No, but unfortunately it is what some people need. See niggers and ninjaz
Anonymous
7c3f001
?
No.397425
>>397378
That's why distributism is best. The problem with capitalism is that there aren't enough capitalists.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397439
397441 397444 397507
>>397378
cool cia propaganda bro. obviously the workers owning the means of production instead of some ignorant capitalist who didn't do any of the work is just utopian fantasy starvation simulator don't think about it bro, trust me bro
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.397441
397451
>>397439
Nice false dichotomy, commie.

I, personally, prefer the fascist approach, where private industry flourishes, but the industrial sector is kept in check through trade unions led by nationalist party leaders, with union workers who are educated to be nationally and racially conscious. That way kikes aren't allowed to amass economic power, and the private sector works in the interests of the nation.
Parallel but separate parts all facing the same way, stronger together.
Anonymous
6cb5a0d
?
No.397444
397447
1741445368489376.gif
>>397439
Unironically yeah. You fucking seen those commie countries? It was so bad that the only prospering commie country (China) made it by scrapping all the commie parts and only kept the control parts.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.397447
>>397444
China is arguably closest to a fascist country, but in a bad way imo.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397451
397456
>>397441
fascist "unions" don't protect the worker at all, they protect the capitalist class from the worker by acting as a faux entity that prevents collective bargaining. there's zero difference between fascist economics and capitalism, because fascism is capitalism without the pretense of a bourgeois democracy that doesn't actually answer to the will of the people anyway. that's why the answer is a dictatorship of the proletariat, the people, not the capitalist class that just buys up every institution and politician. fascism isn't opposition to capitalism, it's the final form of capitalism, colonialism turned inward, full ownership of all people as property of the state run by the capitalist class.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.397456
397459
>>397451
>fascist "unions" don't protect the worker at all, they protect the capitalist class from the worker by acting as a faux entity that prevents collective bargaining
A union of any kind is a tool for collective bargaining. What makes fascism work is that the collective action of the workers is reinforced by the powers of the state, so we can just shoot any kikes who mistreat their workers.
You argue that fascist unions aren't effective for collective bargaining, but there's no evidence to suggest that they were any less effective than those in socialist countries. Socialist countries in history had unions led by party members too, and were often just sockpuppets for the state.
>there's zero difference between fascist economics and capitalism, because fascism is capitalism
No, it really isn't. The point of fascism is to present a third option between socialism and capitalism. Fascism preserves the principles of competition and private enterprise, but also reigns in and restricts the powers of the bourgeois class for the benefit of the nation. Fascism creates unilateral solidarity so that freedom can be preserved without the state overstepping its bounds. The key aspect to fascism is corporatism, and fascism attains that through the incorporation of class-conscious, nationalist workers unions who are there for the purpose of making sure private businesses use their businesses for everyone's benefit, instead of letting them consolidate power and wealth at the nation's detriment.
You might have noticed that a lot of the fascist politicians in the 20th century were formerly members of socialist parties. They abandoned socialism for fascism because socialism doesn't work.
>without the pretense of a bourgeois democracy
Fascism and democracy are not mutually exclusive. The point of fascism is to have unilateral solidarity across state, industry, and culture, and for that popular support is necessary. You just think it's anti-democratic because you buy into the Hollywood's depiction of fascism.
> full ownership of all people as property of the state run by the capitalist class
Literally the opposite.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397459
397465
>>397456
>"it's not capitalism because my overlords who own me like cattle can shoot jews advocating for workers rights for all so i don't have to be a slave"
the rest of your post is rambling nonsense, fascism isn't third to anything - it's just the the final monopoly of capitalism over all institutions of state.
Anonymous
add7728
?
No.397465
397467 397540
>>397459
I don't really care what you call it. Fascism, socialism and capitalism aren't even mutually exclusive. You can have a fascist country with capitalist and socialist policies. I, for example, think that there should be at least a few social programs for healthcare, like they had in the Third Reich, although I may be biased in that because I have some chronic health problems.
>final monopoly
You have completely missed the point. Fascism is supposed to prevent monopolies. Maybe if you listened to actual fascists describe the definition of fascism, instead of whatever cartoonist supervillainy your commie propaganda tells you it is, you would understand why it was so popular in the first half of the 20th century, and how it might soon see a resurgence in the 21st century, as people like the idea of organized labor without the failures of socialism.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397467
397500 397519 397521
>>397465
you have chronic health problems and you advocate for eugenicist politics, are you mentally disabled too?
Anonymous
7c3f001
?
No.397500
>>397467
Maybe he is a transhumanist
Anonymous
0939491
?
No.397507
397518
>>397439
Name one real-world example of workers owning "the means of production" that hasn't ended in a complete clusterfuck where nothing of value is being produced and nobody owns anything. I'll wait.
Anonymous
7c3f001
?
No.397518
397523
>>397507
Mondragon corporation. Of course that is a distributist example not marxist.
Anonymous
affbff5
?
No.397519
>>397467
>you advocate for eugenicist politics
I never mentioned anything about eugenics. Eugenics was more a product of the American positivist movement.
Fascism has nothing to do with eugenics. Fascism is primarily economic policy.
It's mostly leftists carrying the torch of the eugenics movement, with their antinatalism.
Also, my chronic health conditions are mostly due to a severe chemical lung injury when I was young, not genetic.
Anonymous
3e03a37
?
No.397521
397526
>>397467
>you advocate for eugenicist politics
Eugenics is tribal and even racial prophylaxis. Its practice deserve praise and encouragement.
Anonymous
b674048
?
No.397523
397590
1579740273633.gif
>>397518
That is a very unique method. I'm impressed by that company. Instead of wealth cap, there's a wage cap, such that an exec's pay is a strict ratio to the lower workers. That is actually a very agreeable idea, much better than the fucker in the dedicated distributist thread putting wealth caps on the table.
Anonymous
affbff5
?
No.397526
397528
>>397521
No. Eugenics is a product of the 1920s progressive movement when they thought that they could breed human beings like dogs with the "science-led" state to enforce their whims. It's not tribal at all.
Anonymous
3e03a37
?
No.397528
397544
>>397526
>Eugenics is a product of the 1920s progressive movement
I disagree, I read about records from ancient times, Rome and Greece in this case, where defective and bastards in some family lineages were put to death.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397540
397544
>>397465
>prevent monopoly
it is monopoly, you just can't parse the propaganda marketing of fascism from the reality of fascism. it's like a monkey's paw, solving a headache by eating a grenade, technically the headache is gone.
Anonymous
affbff5
?
No.397544
397545 397546
>>397528
The eugenics movement was a lot more than culling deformed infants.
>>397540
>propaganda marketing of fascism from the reality of fascism
Okay then, fag, then I guess you can say that I believe in the "marketing" of fascism, whatever you want to call it. I will continue to call myself a fascist and I will continue advocate for organized labor as a vehicle of nationalism to incorporate the private sector towards national goals.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397545
397549
>>397544
Yeah so was every other fascist week before they read The State and Revolution by Lenin.
Anonymous
3e03a37
?
No.397546
397549
>>397544
>The eugenics movement was a lot more than culling deformed infants.
Sure, its goals are noteworthy. The improvement of species having the ubersmensch as the ideal. Nothing wrong with it.
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397549
397551 397552
>>397546
Nah, the eugenics movement was a failure overall. It just resulted in inbred rich kikes posturing that they're generically superior because they have the most money.
Nazis were in part inspired by the eugenics movement though, and they had a lot of interesting ideas on the matter.
>>397545
I am already familiar with that material. I reject communism entirely. Fascism is the way because it creates the conditions for unilateral social causes and proper balance of power between the state and private sector, while also preserving the principles of competition and private enterprise.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397551
397555
>>397549
It's telling that you don't say you read it, you just say you're familiar with it. Then continue spouting off a bunch of nonsense that shows you don't understand fascism, much less socialism.
Anonymous
3e03a37
?
No.397552
>>397549
>posturing that they're generically superior
This always baffled me. If the idea is so bizarre and ridiculous, then why oppose it with such a hatred?
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397555
397556
>>397551
>It's telling that you don't say you read it
I only read part of them, mostly The State, which I got about halfway through. I believe I don't need to read every single socialist book in history to decide I don't like communism.
>Then continue spouting off a bunch of nonsense that shows you don't understand fascism
No, I do understand fascism. I understand the policies that I am a proponent of. I am a firm advocate of organized labor as a vehicle of nationalist incorporation, and I am grounded in these beliefs. I really don't care for whatever labels you give me, but I call myself a fascist, and I know what policies I support.
Besides, just because I support the general structure of fascism doesn't mean I support every failed policy of the 20th century.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397556
397558 397560 397744
>>397555
Are you trolling, they're not different books you idiot, that's the title of one book. Fascists are actually illiterate, holy shit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_State_and_Revolution
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397558
>>397556
Idk, m8. It was like 15 years ago, when I was still in highschool. I never claimed to be an expert on socialist literature. I just recall reading a book with a familiar title.
Maybe I'll give it a read. How about you also read some fascist literature and we can talk about it some other time on this site.
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397560
397583
>>397556
Anyways, since you claim that the definition of fascism is different from what I described, what do you call the policies that I advocated for? With organized labor acting as a vehicle for nationalist incorporation? From my perspective, that's a fascist policy.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397583
397585 397588
>>397560
I think you're trying to describe a fascist soda, when what you like is soda, not fascism.
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397585
397591
>>397583
Call it what you want then. I don't consider myself to be a hardcore fascist. I mostly envision fascism as more of a means to an end. I want nationalism, and I want to use organized labor to bring about nationalism, and to reign in usurious corporate entities who try to subvert and undermine the sovereignty of my people.
Functionally, I vote libertarian, just because I consider the current regime to be the enemy of my people, so I don't want to give the state any power at all, much less give it my money.
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397588
397591
>>397583
People have been calling me a "fascist" and a "Nazi" for as long as I can remember. Even you called me a fascist. Am I not supposed to believe all of the people who tell me that the policies I advocate for are fascism?
Anonymous
7c3f001
?
No.397590
397592 397597
>>397523
I am the fucker putting wealth caps on the table. I don't want any more bill gates or Jeff bezos types running around. Humanity should not have to suffer anything like them ever again.
Anonymous
d66bd65
?
No.397591
397593 397596 397744
>>397585
>>397588
You'll have a lot more to think about after you finish this, and I suspect you'll be a lot more prepared to define yourself on this matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrfLQsyUYig
Anonymous
d52f3b7
?
No.397592
>>397590
It wouldn't be so bad if their companies were led by fascist party union members so that they could hang them if they tried to do any of their deranged, misanthropic billionaire bullshit.