I LOVE CAPITALISM I LOVE CAPITALISM

You are just a brain dead contrarian

I'm very smart though

Reminder the USSR had a mandatory full employment policy, meaning a large chunk of the population was stuck doing pointless busywork.

Why has every socialist state failed? Is it just US interference?

Labour produced that, not capitalism.

I don't determine what I believe based on how popular or unpopular it is, NPC.

Retard.

Attached: cringe.png (1100x648, 1.32M)

What are you talking about? Socialism has always been implemented successfully. There has never been a time in history where this was not the case.

>Is there anything more cucked than supporting capitalism when you are not one of the oligarchs?
You fundamentally misunderstand the conservative mindset. Supporting capitalism is, for them, not about their own material conditions (although for many, that is a factor). Capitalism is a hierarchy. The Market is a process through which the Worthy get to prove themselves and rise to the top, while the Unworthy sink to the bottom.
Supporting capitalism, then, is supporting a natural hierarchy in the world. Conservatives find a certain sense of honor is playing their role in the Market and filling their positions in the hierarchy. "Working hard" is playing the game well, and if you find yourself not at the absolute bottom, that just means you're more Worthy than those below you. Being more Worthy grants you certain power over those below. What's more, it is morally self-validating: Being closer to the top means you are, ipso facto, a morally better person, and so you know what the right thing to do with the power that it grants.
It's this packaged justification of their own privilege (however minuscule!) that powers conservatism. They don't need to be at the top for that, all they need is to not be at the bottom.

This is why conservatives see any attempt at collective action as a sort of cheating, an attempt to distort an otherwise natural order. "Ganging up" in what is supposed to be a competition between individuals. Unionization gives suspectedly bad workers an unfair advantage. It's not right. It puts power in the hands of the Unworthy. And that leads to chaos.
The same goes for things like taxation. You might mistake the right-libertarianian instinct to be pure selfishness, and avarice certainly plays its part, but that's not the entire story. Conservatives dislike Big Government because it redistributes wealth (=power) from the Worthy to the Unworthy, as determined by the Market. Even if they personally benefit from this redistribution, they still find it wrong. Those at the top DESERVE their wealth, and if they are struggling, that just means they need to work harder and pull at those bootstraps.

>jeopardy thesis

This, Joe. Those god damn niggers like Joy-Jay-z or whatever are fucking models like Bye Joncé and shit for shitty "work"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""222 while i work inmy farm for days and days god damn it!

*ahem*
North Korea, Venezuela, Soviet Union
What are your "successful" examples?

North Korea, Venezuela and the Soviet Union.

Have sex.

Why would you want to live in any of those countries?

Forcing NEETs to work until they kill themselves is unironically a good thing.
Because they don't realise nationalism is a vital part of the mix (socialism, not communism which is unworkable utopian trash).

Because they're socialist and therefore have/had a far superior quality of life to capitalist states. I think that North Korea is probably the ideal society and the best nation in the world currently. I'd like to live there but it's hard to gain citizenship for reasons which I completely understand.

>The Market is a process through which the Worthy get to prove themselves and rise to the top

Attached: d85be290-88b1-4b12-ae45-3cf701c8df5a.png (1310x1410, 725K)

>Because they don't realise nationalism is a vital part of the mix (socialism, not communism which is unworkable utopian trash).
Communism is simply the higher stage of socialism, they are not distinct. Also there are and have been both nationalist and socialist states.

Physical labor of any kind is the mark of peasantry. Did kings and royalty work? They made reactive decisions. They didn't exert their energy for material production or transformation. The NEET, insofar as he is paid to exist, is more king-like than a manager at McDonald's and is closer to a CEO than a janitor. Of course the NEET is beholden to his society which at any time take away his funding, meaning he is less king-like than an actual King.

North Korea is comfy as heck. I wish I could live there

Read more carefuly before you get buttflustered. The dude was describing a "conservative mindset", he wasn´t stating his own opinion.

discord.gg/bRcvdmH
We liev in a post industrial society.

It's good thing you brought this up, actually, because it allows me to bring up another important element of the conservative mindset.

Whenever conservatives face a situation where the Market produces plainly wrong results, they have two courses of action: First, to deny it. Second, to blame external distortions. These "external distortions" are key. They are the source of conservatism's infatuation with conspiracy theories. When the Market seems to fail too often, or if it puts people who are plainly immoral and Unworthy in positions of power, or when it seems to keep them down no matter how hard they work or how moral they consider themselves to be, the search for external distortions becomes obsessive. The government is usually the go-to explanation for most conservatives, but for some it's not enough. The see the Market failing so hard, producing results so far removed from what they expect, that they can't blame it on government alone. It's here that the Market is separated from the simple small-m capitalist market. The nefarious forces that distort the Market (or the Struggle, or the Natural Order, or Life... unfortunately conservatives don't have a proper term for this natural hierarchy they believe in) seem to distort even capitalism itself. The absurd and bombastic claims about the reach and power of Jews, NWO, freemasons, etc. are the logical extrapolations of the scale to which the Market is distorted.

Why did conspiracy theories proliferate in the wake of the culture wars of the 1990's onward? Because that's when the general culture begun leaving social conservatives so far behind that a benign narrative of an evil government vs. the great American Middle couldn't cut it anymore. When you see even major tech companies - the highest winners of the Market, those at the very top - spout plainly immoral rhetoric and look and behave like the Unworthy, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. (It's the Jews)

So conservatives are brain dead bootlickers

Did you not know that?

Yeah, that's why you don't have friends.

>internet was developed by a government institution
Sure buddy

Lumpenconservatism is to Jews as accelerationism is to Capital.

Attached: 1563832336870.jpg (1024x683, 157K)

Spot on analysis

That's incredibly insightful

That's a truckload of bullshit.

t. conservative

>*Let's CEO fuck his wife while he works overtime*
So much JAVkinos with this theme.

And plenty of doujinshi too. exhentai.org/g/1310114/686ac5de2e/

>boring
female detected

Yes, unironically believing socialism, or worse communism, is better.

Oh, but you believe it keeps failing every time it's tried because of muh CIA interference, don't you.

these downsides are the result of America's post socialist regulations and social programs

Stupid American.

>Conservative = Libertarian
Delete this right fucking now
>Social conservative = Libertarian
AAAAAAAAAH

Attached: madlad.png (112x112, 14K)

Capitalism would have been replaced decades ago if not for dumb communists being a literal retarded foil for it. Now people are too stuck in not capitalism = communism = dumb ass shit to move on.

The underlying pathos here is the same for all right-wing ideologies. This is by definition: hierarchy-vs-egalitarianism is the most consistent definition of right-vs-left.
Conservatism, right-libertarianism, fascism: The framing may be different, but it's all based in a veneration of hierarchy.

A right-libertarian is a right-winger whose Market is literally just capitalist markets. A fascist is a right-winger whose Market is a Darwinist struggle between ethnic groups. A Jihadist is a right-winger whose Market is a holy struggle between religions. Ultra-nationalism is a type of hierarchy too, where you expect to find your own nation at the top, and anything different must the result of some sort of interference.

If you are a right-libertarian yourself you may find this a bit disturbing because your ideology often pretends to have a complete deference to the Market. Right-libertarians pretend to have no preconceived notions of what the Market should look like (unlike, say, white supremacists). And yet, I'm sure if I were to point out bad Market outcomes (e.g. monopolies), your first response would be that this is Not Real Capitalism, because... the government... distorts.......
I hope you see where I'm going with this.

what's the alternative to capitalism?
please explain the social system with some minimal detail. explain how goods are produced and distributed.

Ok boomer

That's not how kings or lords ruled. The ruler who acts purely in terms of reaction will not be a ruler for long. Sedentary lifestyles are a sign of decadence and femininity

No, socialism has been a constant success throughout history.

If they really believed it should be an honourable contest between individuals, then no one should be allowed to inherit.

Ummmm sweetie
mises.org/library/government-did-invent-internet-market-made-it-glorious

>Labour produced that, not capitalism.
You can't understand anything except literally meaning, you little aspie, don't you?
>making hypothesis over a topic that experts such as psychologists, psychiatrists and neurologist are still studying
You don't know a fucking clue about scientific method, don't you?

/sci/ is infested by /pol/tards and their pseudoscience
I don't like Yea Forums anymore
Guess I'm turning my back over Yea Forums after many years
Stay healthy anons, it's been quite a good trip

Inheritance is the act of the Worthy choosing what to do with their deserved wealth (in this case: pass it on to their kids).

Basically all rudimentary tech worth it’s damn was invented and developed in the public sector. Also, capitalism slows down tech as it only produces just enough to rake in cash, and developing the tech further beyond is disincentivized because they will grant competitors cost-free business ideas

None of this stuff is all that serious.
youtu.be/xC2OdPr5qwA

Tfw America is going to turn into a third world country. Which country should I move to before everything falls apart?

>All the borgies are conspiring in a room to slowly drag out tech so they maximize profits
Nice conspiracy

Attached: 1566206904963.jpg (647x740, 54K)

>spending most of your formative years inside on your computer is good for your social development!
You're a senseless retard

> (You)
>>Labour produced that, not capitalism.
>You can't understand anything except literally meaning, you little aspie, don't you?
You're missing the point. I wasn't just being pedantic, I meant that labour is ultimately what produces anything so saying "(mode of production) produced (product)" is stupid.

You should use the correct terms for what you describe. 'Market' doesn't mean competition, there's a word for that - It's competition. I agree that hierarchy is extremely important to any reactionary force, but your posts are full of half-truths, generalizations, and very strange diagnosises in general.

>misunderstand X do it fits your preformed criticism
Do you even know what the average Chinese work week is?

>mises.org

hmmmm could this source possibly have some bias......

>muh economic system is better than yours
they are all trash

Attached: linkola 3.jpg (800x574, 72K)

>Stop posting sources that have a bias towards the truth
The only bias that mises.org has is the truth.

Attached: 1566500170251.png (644x800, 30K)

I don't know man. My job is pretty comfy. Low pressure IT job with decent pay. Boss is lazy and indifferent like God intended. Good people all around. Can read and write during work.

Attached: 1563329347326.png (819x827, 16K)

But then the children are on top without proving their worth. If the original post was really what capitalists believed, there would only be one generation of real deserving capitalists.

lol you need to study epistemology you uneducated brainlet
I am specializing in neurology so I guess I know how the scientific method works
>is ultimately what produces anything
Dude, you're literally focusing on the literal meaning
I am not missing your point

>lack of socialization helps your social skills!
utterly braindead

But. That’s what they’re actually doing, retard. There is literally no incentive for them to put out cutting-edge tech, they store it for when they need to compete.

Lmao, libertarians getting mad at net neutrality

Yea Forums wouldn't exist if it weren't for net neutrality, everything that's great about the internet is because of it.
We had that discussion a while ago Ajit, everyone hates you

I live in fear of not meeting anyone

Attached: IMG_20190809_235439_543.jpg (1333x1333, 413K)

>austrian economics
>the truth

i seriously hope you guys don't think this

>You wouldn’t have the computer you’re typing on
That's more of a point against capitalism. If socialism brought famines and brainlets such as OP wouldn't be able to post because they would have to till the soil, we'd all be better off.
Even him, he would learn some appreciation of honest work.

sounds legit

If they are unworthy, they will sink to the bottom.

It's not about what We think. Australiano economics predicted the downsides of the keynesian and socialist economic models succesfully, down to predicting economic crises caused by said models with a margin of error of months. The other two theories can't do the same with Austrian economics.
If You believe that economy is a science It's clear which theory describes reality better.

>weekly mass shootings
>$7.25 minimum wage
>for profit healthcare
>less spending on infrastructure, schools, social programs
>higher spending on military
>huge taxcuts for the rich, amazon paid $0 in taxes for 2 years, increasing wealth inequality

it already is

ok you're trolling

otherwise you're retarded but mostly uneducated:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Attached: 1556730775057.png (1111x1133, 749K)

Is there even an ideological case against unions?

The claim that capitalism is a creator of and rewards actual innovation is absurd.

It was the Soviets who put the first man into space.

>I KNOW! I'LL JUST POST A MEME! THIS WILL TEACH HIM!
Till the soil.

Attached: IMG_1877.jpg (624x434, 108K)

...when pratiche by monks and other religious people who didn't have to compete with privately own corporations.

holy fuck how delusional can you get
>predicting economic crises caused by said models with a margin of error of months
You do realize that if this were actually true, 99% of hedge fund managers and financial institutions would be Austrian? That Central Banks would all use Austrian economics (whatever that even means) when determining monetary policy?
Oh, wait. They don't. They all use some sort of elaborate VAR models, and recession forecasting is always based on simple indicators like yield curves and saving rates.

The only thing Austrian economics actually ever contributed to the world is:
A. Dogmatic adherence to Say's Law (demonstrably false)
B. Credit expansion theory of recessions (reverse causality sleight-of-hand)
C. Time preference (easily refuted by the existence of bank runs)
D. That's it. The rest is pseudo-philosophical mambojumbo like praxiology, and some political mantras for the decrepit ghouls of the Cato Institute to excrete.

"Austrian economics" are less than nothing. They are pre-Great Depression neoclassical economics packaged in fanciful ideological terminology. Not even Friedman considered himself an Austrian. The only people who think "Austrian economics" are in any way useful are gold-obsessed crackpots and the small-time ideological grunts you see on Yea Forums.

You're the one who keeps squirming in the face of basic logic. Kids who spent their formative years in their room on their laptop and didnt socialize with other kids as much will have stunted social growth as a result. This is simple, verifiable fact.

>Oh, wait. They don't. They all use some sort of elaborate VAR models, and recession forecasting is always based on simple indicators like yield curves and saving rates.
And they still get It wrong while the Austrians get It right.
Ideology is a terrible drug.

How do "austrian economists" predict recessions?