/social/ - Socialism

anarchism.mp4
[Hide] (2.5MB, 1920x1080, 00:20)

Can you give us a quick who's who of the main socialist parties?

>Canada is a country that exists
vid

1419030082542.jpg
[Hide] (31.4KB, 320x306)

>Canada thread
>666 get
How fitting. When global warming melts all the snow, you're going to get a lot of climate refugees up there. Get ready for your government to go full Hitler, right behind your big brother the US. That's if you don't get annexed first, but it's doubtful the US will be in the kind of shape necessary to handle that by then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr98__7Lbuw

I've seen people (online) arguing that owning any stocks makes one bourgeois. Like a one-drop version of class. I really hope they were joking.
This is especially interesting because some countries force employers to pay a substantial pension to an employee's nominated investment fund. This would effectively be the mandated universal bourgeoisification of the proletariat, given that person's bizarre framework.

>>682
It's really ultimately a question of whether you have to support yourself by selling your labor power. You might supplement that with owning stocks, but on the whole the stock market tends to take money away from commoners losing bets. If you reach a point where you own enough stock to not have to work, living off the investments, you could say that person is bourgeois.

The part about retirement funds being based on stock ownership (like an IRA) does have implications for material interests if not class status. Take those people who are living off their stock investments as retirees, collecting dividends and slowly draining their investment portfolio. I think the question of whether or not they are bourgeois is less important than the question of their relationship to class dynamics. Because their wealth responds to market trends and general profits, they have an interest in class struggle, but aligned with bourgeois interests. If they vote for anti-labor policies (which won't hurt them since they're retired), they can reap additional benefits in their portfolio when profits increase. They only own the means of production is a diffuse and abstract way (they don't sit on the board or make executive decisions or anything), but by owning enough stock that you can live off your investments, your material interests do become aligned with those of the bourgeoisie.

This is different from your  retirement being

>>685
>It's really ultimately a question of whether you have to support yourself by selling your labor power. [...] If you reach a point where you own enough stock to not have to work, living off the investments, you could say that person is bourgeois.
Exactly, the way one primarily generates income is going to guide their political/economic interests and therefore determine their economic class. If someone owns a house and rents out a room or a duplex half but makes far more of their income through wage labour, they're ultimately bound to their primary interests as a worker despite any income they make from capital. And a shop owner who takes up an occasional casual job on the side is bound by their primary interests as a petit-owner.
>I think the question of whether or not they are bourgeois is less important than the question of their relationship to class dynamics.
Sure, the basic bourgeois/proletarian model can be a little simplistic when it comes to edge cases, it paints in broad general strokes. We can add exceptions like lumpenproletariat, class traitors and non-legal/non-executive owners, but at the end of the day 'bourgeois' and 'proletariat' are broad helpful classifications, not physical attributes. Their real relationship to class dynamics matters infinitely more than the label we give them. A police officer may technically be a wag

>>685
It does.
I send mine to a union slush fund.

>>686
>Exactly, the way one primarily generates income is going to guide their political/economic interests and therefore determine their economic class.
i think this reverses the order of operations. how one generates income is a primary constituative element of one's class. one's class is in turn determinative of one's interest. 'interest' is interesting because it's ambiguous. on the one hand, we have the common use where it's a synonym of paying attention to or caring about something. "x is one of y's interests". on the other, we have it in the sense of that which is or would be beneficial to obtain or actualize. "x is in y's interest". this ambiguity is important because the notion of interest is vital to class analysis. it is related to what we understand as the subjective and objective conditions for revolution. socialism may be objectively in the interest of the proletariat, but they will not organize to that end unless and until it becomes subjectively interesting for them.

so there are two possible readings of the assertion that one's interests are determined by one's class relation to the mode of production, both of which are true: 
a) one's objective socio-economic interests reflect the structural antagonisms of their class society and their position within it, and;
b) one's subjective psychological interests reflect the norms, attitudes, and experiences one is ex

>>671
the first one i was willing to write off as likely a lone wolf. this second one has me about half way to thinking they're deadass trying to get his dumb ass.

>>677
Iif I were the head of the CIA and believed my job was protecting the USA's national interests, I'd have half a mind to order it. Listen to any interviews with the former defense staff and they talk about how clueless Trump is, either just not listening or asking dumb shit like why we don't just nuke enemies and make NATO a protection racket.
They're like the epitome of the short-sighted capitalist boss looking for short-term gains, put in charge of a country, and in a morbid way it's hilarious.

8533 - assassination fascism germany joseph_stalin meta_screencap nazi nazi_germany soviet_union war weapon world_war_ii.jpg
[Hide] (63.2KB, 1024x768)

The Good Wife.webp
[Hide] (24.5KB, 897x383)

world's weirdest hobbies.webp
[Hide] (22.9KB, 899x338)

obligatory military coup.webp
[Hide] (19.5KB, 904x303)

maybe the paranoid schizophrenics were right about the radiowaves.webp
[Hide] (13.3KB, 876x236)

>>676
>Obama's list
Oh great, another rabbit hole.

Look at all this. I thought picrel1 was extreme, but they must have thought Obama was literally an superhuman antichrist. 
There's even someone new to add to the /eses/ thread.

ClipboardImage.png
[Hide] (352.5KB, 604x259)

>>680
It's really funny how the GOP finally got their wish of a billionaire CEO president and he's easily the most incompetent doofus to ever sit in the oval office. The man drew on a map of a hurricane's projected path with a sharpie because he thought he knew better than the predictive models.

Ronald Reagan? The actor? Ha!.webp
[Hide] (16.1KB, 872x480)

>>683
When Mr. Run It Like A Business was elected, I wasn't very politically aware or a burger so while everyone around me and I were shocked, I couldn't avoid noticing how appropriate it was having The Capitalist Icon as the US president, just like when Arnold Schwarzenegger got elected in California.
And they're showing that same classic arrogant ignorance which CEOs are infamous for. They know better than the experts! They're rich!

>>611 (OP) 
>Ratt Snitches Knitches.webp
Ah, the 'I was only pretending to be a nazi' routine? *click*

A decent amount of info collected about neo-Nazis are from conservatives who joined their fronts, like active clubs, then got cold feet about the nazi race-war terrorism talk and snitch to antifascists. So it's good that antifascists are open to defectors, but opportunists like this get the proverbial pit.

kkkrusty.webp
[Hide] (21.9KB, 960x720)

>>627
>Oops, I said the loud part quiet and the quiet part into a microphone.

smug charlie.jpg
[Hide] (38.9KB, 412x309)

>>612
There's a real poetic irony in masculinity-chauvinists like fascists getting bashed. They posture as aggressive 'proud boys' and 'moggers', build up this whole image of being the strong masters and their enemy only succeeding through sly trickery and privilege... and then get their shit kicked in by some random communist they attacked.

go home juice, you're bashed.webp
[Hide] (65.8KB, 1200x914)

>>612
Blooded and soiled.

>>660
>this whole time "blood and soil" was what they were going to do, not what they were fighting for

>>545
>Cambodia
It's not as if their previous seasons didn't scare the hoes, but this could get spooky.

>>545
Very nice. I've been hoping for a deep dive into the Khmer Rouge since Proles of the Roundtable said they'd do one (and then they collapsed).

>>584
>Proles of the Roundtable
I haven't looked into them, do you recc?

>>545
One more week. How do you think they'll approach the Cambodia/Vietnam/China situation?

>>545
Aw shit this should be spicy.

>>466
Seriously. I'm actually surprised they don't just have a policy of kidnapping or assassinating them.

>>436
Not much I can say about this one, but even if one can't shift another's politics (for whatever reason), there's still benefit in finding mutual goals in unlikely allies. Obviously doesn't have to be some 'trust them with your life' stuff, but a classic liberal (lolbert) will often side with an anarchist over a nazi.
Here's a documentary report with a section of the US antifascist Redneck Revolt networking with the lolbert militia American Pit Vipers, who were shocked :0 :0 :0  to see neo-Nazis and other racist neofash filling the Unite the Right rally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8klHKVfL8Q&t=23m33s
And I personally think that's an opportunity well-taken. They've clearly shattered the mass media propaganda myth presented to the right-wing crowd through direct exposure, and that's one less militant group going to be marching against them or spreading garbage uncritically whenever they hear about le ebil antifa terrorists. Incremental gains, sure, but useful and more useful if scaled.

>>523
<vid
>y'know, most media wouldn't cover this because we're not here to shoot each other
heh, I gotta say I think they're right. That's an Australian reporting crew, not even US media.
With a quick search, I could only find one other mention of the Pit Vipers alongside Redneck Revolt, which was a joint work by (what I assume are) indie journalists: https://indyweek.com/news/hate-racists-love-assault-rifles-meet-redneck-revolt/

Snippets I found interesting:
>Carolina Mountain’s engagement with the American Pit Vipers heightened during the four weeks leading up to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. To demonstrate good faith, Carolina Mountain members showed up to support a pro-veterans rally organized by the Pit Vipers’ Tom Horne. The gesture paid off when Chance Allen, another Pit Viper, drafted a statement that disavowed the white-supremacist ideology of marquee speakers like Matthew Heimbach and Richard Spencer.

>Whether through [American Pit Vipers] or other sources, Redneck Revolt’s plans to show up in Charlottesville were well known within the patriot movement days before the event.
>Francis Marion, who is active with the militia American Freedom Keepers, broadcast a Facebook Live video on August 9, directed to Redneck Revolt, antifa, and Black Lives Matter, as well as to right-wing militia allies. Without explicitly disavowing white nationalism, Marion staked a neutral position while recognizing the legitimacy of the antiracist groups on the left.
>“We’ve been told that Redneck Revolt has reported that they are taking the same stance,” Marion said. “They’re providing First Amendment security for folks on that side that are holding the event, that are holding their event in the parks. So if antifa’s holding an event and Redneck Revolt is providing security, their position is the same as ours as far as protecting free speech without violence. And that is our intent.”
>While Redneck Revolt’s armed presence and dialogue with patriot militias likely prevented further violence, the armed antiracist group was not welcomed by official Charlottesville. The city, along with neighborhood associations and local businesses, filed suit against Redneck Revolt, along with a collection of white nationalist and patriot militia groups. The suit charges that “private military forces transformed an idyllic college town into a virtual combat zone.”
>Despite its tactical differences with Redneck Revolt, SURJ condemned the lawsuit, charging that it echoes the “both sides” argument infamously voiced by President Trump.

>>523
>but a classic liberal (lolbert) will often side with an anarchist over a nazi
>>526
>"[...] So if antifa’s holding an event and Redneck Revolt is providing security, their position is the same as ours as far as protecting free speech without violence. And that is our intent.”

It can be a gamble, although it's... well... refreshing when people slot an unexpected event logically into their ideological framework (however idealistic or broken that framework is) instead of flipping out over muh leftrights. Contrast that reaction against, say, the NRA endorsing the Mulford Act (state bill prohibiting the open carry of loaded firearms) while Reagan was the governor of California, in response to the Black Panthers pro-gun demonstrations.

>>466
Even the CIA has a lot of people who just drank the patriotic kool-aid. I think that third worldism and the like has really poisoned the well on talking about this sort of thing. Sure, westerners tend to live a lot better off than the global south or third world or however you want to put it. But it's an oversimplification to think that people's political alignment and revolutionary potential is solely determined by their economic conditions. It's vulgar economism essentially. Some dumb kid who joins the CIA because they saw Jack Reacher or whatever and thinks the CIA are the world-historical good guys is likely to end up getting a rude awakening when they actually start doing work there. And by that time they are probably in too deep to just remove themselves from that situation. Even with organizations like that, there's probably a lot of mileage to get out of propaganda similar to what Vietnam used on US soldiers, encouraging them to defect.

>>383
Still
Somebody puts in all the effort to make the DRM
Another puts in all the effort to undo the DRM

Future historians will be confounded  by this ritual.

>>385
It gets even zanier when you realize sometimes it's secretly the same person.

>>385
True, but if it drains porky's wallets than I can't help but smile at the mad little dance.

>>384
I also appreciate that the torrent sometimes gives nice surprises, like commentary tracks or DVD bonus videos.

Something I've noticed is a lot of streaming services don't even bother to be worth having. Aside from the cost, they usually are full of spyware that slows it down, don't actually render video at full resolution, and make navigating the catalog extremely painful. It's like most of them were designed to try to scare people back to using cable. Maybe they also don't feel like it's worth trying to appeal to people with standards, because it's assumed they'll just pirate anyway.

>>196
This kinda feels like a pre-Internet meme, in the way that it's a short sharp funny little template which people continually update and mutate to fit a new context.
I've already found two covers about Palestine one is actually from 2021 but could easily have been sung yesterday.

>>196
>there are bound to be a few socialists singing comedy.
We certainly have a knack for satire.

David Rovics – Vanguard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f88nMWvCZSY

Joe Glazer and Bill Friedman – The Ultimate Sectarian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxsSEwsn5-Y

You've just reminded me, I talked to the manager of the 4chan Cup /pol/eague a couple of years ago possibly the only one in there whose brain wasn't rotten on culture war race crap and I found out they were a fan of Bat'ko's songs back in the day.

>>179
This was probably the best movie of that year. Having worked in a call center and sales it really hit that much harder as well.

Love Me, I'm a Liberal [8nGJ3AjFF1Y].ogg
[Hide] (3.1MB, 1088x1088, 04:03)

>>196
The Jello Biafra and Mojo Nixon (RIP) version goes hard.

Brennan Lee Mulligan, improv comic and creator/DM of the #2 most popular D&D actual play series (Dimension 20) is pretty openly a communist, and consistently injects overt anti-capitalist and pro-socialist content into his material, both the D&D and the comedy. His boss tends to bait him into doing it too despite being more of a liberal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oXiFuPCU6k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FccWP9n7rXw

>>116
>not posting the philosopher football sketch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXOKsJViHtY

So i've been reading a book which goes into how dirty bush was. He was insanely dirty. Involved with the mafia, the book claims that Jeb Bush directly trafficked cocaine

>>349
Please crack.

1 - 1 artist_vladimir_mayakovsky bourgeoisie capitalism first_post hat meta_transparent_background milestone_post original porky smile top_hat.png
[Hide] (324.5KB, 576x566)

>>48
Young people can learn quickly that Reagan was an actor and Bush Jr. was a sequel, but it's pretty surprising to see Bush Sr. was in charge of the CIA. And I definitely didn't know about Prescott Bush. What the hell.
From https://www.democracynow.org/2022/1/26/jonathan_katz_book_gangsters_of_capitalism:
>JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jonathan, didn’t [Smedley] Butler also claim, in addition to these corporate leaders, that there were folks like Prescott Bush involved in this, the father of George Herbert Walker Bush and grandfather of George W. Bush?
>JONATHAN KATZ: So, there’s actually a kind of a game of broken telephone going on with his name being involved in this. So, Bush was actually — Prescott Bush was actually too much involved with the actual Nazi Party in Germany to be involved with the business plot.
>[...]
>And because Brown Brothers was part of a separate investigation, they end up sort of in the same folder at the National Archives, and then it ends up sort of getting mixed up in a documentary that came out about 10 years ago. So that’s actually a misunderstanding. Butler never brought up Prescott Bush’s name. But it was

On the one hand there are specific things H.W. did that you can single him out for, like the Gulf War. On the other, it was in the last analysis mainly a continuation of the new order that had already been established. As a person (vs an administration), Bush Sr. was of course a gigaspook who got up to all kind of evil shit in his career. So in that sense he's way worse than his son or Trump for instance. You can also blame him personally for both Dubya and Jeb!, since they both came from his balls and were propped up by his clout. If you want to get a little more tinfoily (but not that much tbh), you could point to H.W. as the moment where the "deep state" assumed direct control of the presidency. Probably a lot of stuff that's not public info happened when the head of the CIA got elected POTUS.

>>664
>If you want to get a little more tinfoily (but not that much tbh), you could point to H.W. as the moment where the "deep state" assumed direct control of the presidency. Probably a lot of stuff that's not public info happened when the head of the CIA got elected POTUS.
We get all the collective amnesia in the news about how Putin was a former intelligence officer, and yes it is true and relevant, but then we notice it was the same for Bush Sr..