What are Jow Forums's plans when it comes to destroying capitalism?

businessinsider.com/fortnite-coaches-2018-7

Are Zoomers destined to be the worst generation?

I hope you'd also enjoy having your manchild at home for rest of your life. Too many boomer parents were happy when their millenial kids were rather staying home with escapism than outside experimenting with alcohol and opposite sex like they did in their youth, and look what came of men of that generation.

You would have better luck destroying gravity. Realize this: even people in commie regimes have made an exchange of liberty for security, IOW, a capitalistic exchange. Capitalism is the baseline. Everything else is just an embellishment.

W&B

Watch news from tv when visiting parents
>Tranny acceptance in schools, everyone is special
Open Jow Forums
>Retard flailing classes and people pay money for it

I'm gonna be a fat neet and crash the system!

Attached: 1528756749668.png (920x900, 675K)

Good luck and good tidings

Most people here can't even define capitalism and have bought into marxist doctrine that capitalism follows a linear path

>select all images with chimneys

Step 1: Do nothing
Step 2: Wait
Step 3: Return to step 1.

Profligacy and Degeneracy has caused a structural problem with our society and Capitalism is the root cause for the Immigration Crisis, the death of the Nuclear Family and the destruction of western values. It will kill the old West and a new one will have to be born. So I spend my time working out, reading and preparing for the day when social instability destroys everything. As ironic as it may sound, Former Eastern bloc countries aren't as far down the degenerate path as the west and will survive.

Attached: 1496298030330.jpg (674x900, 136K)

The nature of capital will lead to even more nefarious capital holders, even if you kill all the """cronies""" just by nature of me being able to accumulate more wealth and buy up large tracts of land.

>capitalism won.
>accept it.
>move on.
Thanks Fukuyama, we'll see how that works out.

>What is the Spanish revolution

Read Kapital vol 1. The nature of how production is diluted to wages generates wage slavery, and will inherently work to enrich the boss in every case, so that they can perform useless functions to society.

Attached: DEATH!.png (437x239, 29K)

Be kids and have fun?

communism starves the body, capitalism rots the soul

>The nature of how production is diluted to wages generates wage slavery
except that's not true. there are plenty of self employed people that produce plenty of goods and services for society that are not beholden to wages

>will inherently work to enrich the boss in every case
yeah, that's the incentive for employers to employ. but that doesn't mean it doesn't also enrich the employees
>so that they can perform useless functions to society
except employers provide the most useful functions to society; they enable productivity

>even if you kill all the """cronies"""
i won't kill or make them unable to operate I will just limit their business and promote the middle man

>there are plenty of self employed people that produce plenty of goods and services for society that are not beholden to wages
There are a MINORITY of self employed people in society. All people should be self employed

>yeah, that's the incentive for employers to employ.
But it's not incentive for people to work, in fact, it's antithetical to that

>but that doesn't mean it doesn't also enrich the employees
It guarantees the enrichment of the boss, but it doesn't guarantee the enrichment of the employee. If you can't guarantee both simultaneously, there is no incentive to work

>except employers provide the most useful functions to society; they enable productivity
The people who WORK provide the most useful element of society. Work doesn't depend on a principal investor, the principal investor depends on work to happen

Attached: ghost-story.jpg (390x310, 17K)

with strong cultural and racial hegemony and clear goals for the people forgot to add

>The people who WORK provide the most useful element of society
having an enterprise and running it is WORKING though

you're arbitrarily redefining work and labor to fit it into your narrative of lower classes people fighting in some class warfare
do you think every business owner doesn't work? what about restaurant owners that work in their own kitchen? doctors with their own private practice?
you have an extremely simplified view of the labor market as either you work in a cubicle or you're a CEO of a big business. that's not the reality of our world at all

figures that you chronically unemployed losers would follow the doctrine of another chronically unemployed loser and then proclaim to have any knowledge of the outside world whatsoever. lmao

>I-I-I'll just b-boycott Amazon.
>Yeah, f-fuck that nasty jew Jeff Bezos, I'll s-show him

>having an enterprise and running it is WORKING though
As I said, it's useless work. People will work for their own security, and not because a boss guarantees it, and then uses the surplus of their labor to manufacture want, dismantle authentic culture, and accumulate even bigger enterprises. All USELESS.

Communism can never exist, it was only used as an excuse by the bolsheviks who needed to genocide indigenous gentile ethnicities with impunity. Capitalism has always existed, currency can be any item used as a trade medium. Socialism outside of blood relations (and sometimes inside too) often builds resentment and gets abused by (((those who subsidize and privatize))) every service their relatives win the contract bids for.

Attached: 20170715_135709.jpg (600x458, 151K)

low test 0/10

Attached: 1508474248689.jpg (324x324, 13K)

working to make sure the market develops and the technology and life expectancy / quality gets better along with general development in cultural aspects that go along with economic golden ages is not USELESS you commie fuck
>>I-I-I'll just b-boycott Amazon.
no I won't I will just do the opposite of what the bank loving chronies are doing by instead of strangling competition and creating monopoilies to influence the elections and the public perception a real government would put the needs of the people ( economic and cultural ) above the capital holders without making them obsolete or unable to operate but by just limiting their sphere of influence on both an economic and a cultural standing

>"the surplus of their labor"
>he unironically believes in the labor theory of value

If I eat food and by digesting it (labor) I turn it to shit, is that shit more valuable than the food?

much like Franco, Salazar, Metaxas, Pinochet on a lesser scale and mussolini for some modern examples

It's going to collapse on its own.

>do you think every business owner doesn't work? what about restaurant owners that work in their own kitchen? doctors with their own private practice?
Self-employed people do work, as I've already said, but even they are beholden to landowners, bankers, and the state. Self-employment and self-mastery is the goal for all people to achieve, which communism cannot provide

>you have an extremely simplified view of the labor market as either you work in a cubicle or you're a CEO of a big business.
>that's not the reality of our world at all
Obviously not, but useless bureaucracy and wealthy parasites extracting wealth from the lower classes has been the reality of our world for centuries.

>working to make sure the market develops and the technology and life expectancy / quality gets better along with general development in cultural aspects that go along with economic golden ages
What is to stop the boss from exploiting that economic golden age for his own profit. You're trusting a useless leech to provide you with the total value of your contribution, instead of ensuring a system is in place that guarantees it absolutely
>a real government would put the needs of the people ( economic and cultural ) above the capital holders without making them obsolete or unable to operate but by just limiting their sphere of influence on both an economic and a cultural standing.

>a real government would put the needs of the people ( economic and cultural ) above the capital holders without making them obsolete or unable to operate but by just limiting their sphere of influence on both an economic and a cultural standing
>I'll create a society that puts the people first, by putting the boss first, and making sure ethnic homogony comes first

>If I eat food and by digesting it (labor) I turn it to shit, is that shit more valuable than the food?
>What is use-value?

Read Kapital

By being shit at my job and a total parasite.

When I get sacked I’m planning on going full Ted.

They said that in 1776, 1783, 1818, 1860, 1918, 1928, 1940, 1960, 1973, 1980, etc etc etc
Stronger than ever. Maybe your just a faggot.

Attached: 5086748-0840595426-64530.jpg (500x578, 66K)

>surplus value
Full stop. Nobody believes that shit anymore, nor does anyone care about your 20th century interpretation of a 21st century economy. It's time to mature.

I have limited my consumption to the very basic need (small amounts of food, heating - when needed, and water - because water is life). I don't buy clothes, phones, I don't make plans for big investments (property), I don't take loans. I still use internet, but not for long since my 2-year contract is running out. I have amassed tons of ebooks and physical books. I am going off the grid, baby.

This is the only way. By curbing your consumption, you will deliver a decisive blow to their monetary machinery.

>your
Capitalism as it exists will cease to exist at some point. This is an non controversial opinion.

I have no idea how it will work in a post scarcity scenario.

>by putting the boss first
I won't put boss first I will just understand the biological/ cultural differences/ similarities that come into play in any society ever and make a society based on them ( with some "injustices" sure ) so we can get the least negative and the most positive in a natural system that WORKS
because let's be real, some people are better than others, and those people bring the world forward. Making them unable to operate on some social outcry platform is not a healthy idea
>What is to stop the boss from exploiting that economic golden age for his own profit
he can use it for his own profit, but his profit will be indirectly to the profit of the people since his capital won't be allowed to be monopolistic and his cultural outlooks won't easily influence public thought

Cool story bro, who told you that? Your stronk independent female professors?

this will unironically never happen

America lives under monetary socialism since FED was established.

That's what every civilization in the history of civilizations has said.

Wow. Dismantled by FACTS and LOGIC again. I'll go to bed now.

>make a society based on them ( with some "injustices" sure ) so we can get the least negative and the most positive in a natural system that WORKS
Be sure to tell the industrial workers in China that the scale of their injustice is just a minor kink in the system. Oh, but they're all subhuman anyway under your ideology.

>because let's be real, some people are better than others, and those people bring the world forward. Making them unable to operate on some social outcry platform is not a healthy idea
As if guaranteeing the survival of all people wouldn't make self-actualization universal, creating a more enlightened society. The fact that some people are ahead is because they've never had to truly struggle to survive in the world, and have a head start on self-actualization because of it.

>he can use it for his own profit, but his profit will be indirectly to the profit of the people since his capital won't be allowed to be monopolistic and his cultural outlooks won't easily influence public thought
Simply by nature of it not being monopolistic means the goal is to be humanitarian? Get real. If profit is incentivized, than higher wages are de-incentivized. Profit is the antithesis of human development.

also,
>and his cultural outlooks won't easily influence public though
Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. What is to stop a boss that profits enough to literally monopolize mass media?

and it was right every time

You're completly misunderstanding my original statement.

I'm pretty sure state exceptionalism has been refuted at least once

Attached: height-roman-empire-map1.png (990x615, 156K)

>That's what every civilization in the history of civilizations
>Capitalism as a governmental system has only existed since the 17th century
KEK okkid.jpg

Attached: 1484390423409.jpg (229x250, 8K)

>Thinking I'm refering to capitalism specifically and not making a generalization about the rise and fall of civilizations over time
Good lord.

>Thinking I'm refering to capitalism specifically
>refers to capitalism specifically

Attached: you2.jpg (512x427, 57K)

>>and his cultural outlooks won't easily influence public though
>Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. What is to stop a boss that profits enough to literally monopolize mass media?
as long as you have competition you don't have monopoly, for every cynical millionaire with bad intentions there is a donald trump and that balances itself out
you are not evil on the mere fact you are rich
and even if you are evil if you have no government to promote your monopolistic tendencies against the people ( see google ) you are not a threat to anybody, just by being liberal and a rich person
>As if guaranteeing the survival of all people wouldn't make self-actualization universal, creating a more enlightened society.
if you guarantee the same level of every aspect of life to every person in society you think you will get a loving populace that works better but in reality you will get stagnating economy, cultural devides and people with no incentive to develop anything
If we had the resources and our biochemistry was different we could talk about it
>Be sure to tell the industrial workers in China that the scale of their injustice is just a minor kink in the system. Oh, but they're all subhuman anyway under your ideology.
those factories are allowed to operate and reinforced by the chinese government which has a shitty record on economic freedom so that argument is literally not an argument

>refering to the most marvelous empire that even when it ended spawned the golden age of europe in both intellect and life quality as something bad
literally lmaoing

why do you sucks your kids dicks?

this

I wish I had funny children and enrolled them in an amusing fornite dance class.

For everyone's information, there is a difference between the following things:
>Capitalism as in the socioeconomic system that exists
>Capitalism as in the ideal (people owning shit)
The current neoliberal order is going to collapse in on its self at some point in the future. Both the monetary and fiscal policies of developed nations in the modern world are unsustainable because they require the existence of perpetual growth to function. Massive third world immigration is an attempt to satisfy this need for endless growth, but it introduces even more unsustainablity into the system. There is a breaking point, just as every past society has had a breaking point.

>as long as you have competition you don't have monopoly, for every cynical millionaire with bad intentions there is a donald trump and that balances itself out
you are not evil on the mere fact you are rich.
Bezos literally has a monopoly on logistics. He's using that monopoly to branch out into other forms in a very Hearst-ian way.

>and even if you are evil if you have no government to promote your monopolistic tendencies against the people ( see google ) you are not a threat to anybody, just by being liberal and a rich person
The nature of accumulation generates this, not the state. Finance requires constant growth in order to keep investors happy, so creating an economic empire is supported by the nature of the economic system, not the state.

>if you guarantee the same level of every aspect of life to every person in society you think you will get a loving populace that works better but in reality you will get stagnating economy, cultural devides and people with no incentive to develop anything
Again, the focus of any society should be incentivizing work, not incentivizing profit. If a person's survival is guaranteed by work, then they will, but that's something the boss cannot provide. No profit incentive = no incentive to raise wages. Some people will create great works of art, others will work with their hands and feet, but in any case, the insurance of their survival will move the locus of their thinking away from basic instinct, towards grounding in reality.

>those factories are allowed to operate and reinforced by the chinese government which has a shitty record on economic freedom so that argument is literally not an argument
Reinforced by western consumerism and the profits of American capitalists

>the most marvelous empire
Ideologue. My only point was that it collapsed, and everyone believes it was exceptional in that. No system can maintain itself indefinitely, not even the universe itself

and after all that, emerges
THE CAPITALIST REVOLUTIONARY
VIVA LA CAPITALISME
would be fun

Attached: a88.png (500x514, 61K)

Pic related sounds like a better alternative to immediately catapulting back into past mistakes.

Attached: 1536724781126.jpg (600x809, 184K)

STOP HAVING FUN KIDS

>. Finance requires constant growth in order to keep investors happy
this is what governments are for, to keep the people happy
I am not arguing for an ancap society here
>Again, the focus of any society should be incentivizing work, not incentivizing profit
disagree
>Some people will create great works of art, others will work with their hands and feet, but in any case, the insurance of their survival will move the locus of their thinking away from basic instinct, towards grounding in reality.
my original statement is the same since I think this is not realistic especially looking at history of communist states
>Reinforced by western consumerism and the profits of American capitalists
>the gooks dindu nuffin
chill out Cletus, they literally love that shit, there is not one worse powerful country when it comes to human rights and economic freedom than the "communist" chinese
>Ideologue. My only point was that it collapsed
it collapsed but a collapsed roman empire still provided more to the world than any other empire in the world at least for the time

Hitler is so fucking awesome.

hitler was not a socialist ( only by name ). that is the one thing commies are right about
He had some socialized aspects

he was a prussian socialist

>No system can maintain itself indefinitely, not even the universe itself
capitalism is not a system in the way you think it is
Even the first human civilization tribes were " capitalist " since they traded freely and claimed property for their own

What the fuck is fortnite?

Attached: 1535999071437.jpg (378x370, 100K)

We start by killing the zionist jews that control the market.

>he was a prussian socialist
eh, not really
He had some socialist aspects, which were mostly protections against nefarious capitalists to the people but he used capital and loans and shit to further his causes
He had no strong economical convictions

Attached: zoomers.webm (720x404, 2.68M)

prussian socialism is different from marxist socialism dude, look it up

i will never let my future kids play shitty games I swear to god
only mount and blade

Having strong economical convictions is a jew thing anyway

i will ty

>let them play a turkroach game

the one good thing to come out of turkey since literally ever

Spengler described socialism outside of a class conflict perspective and said "The meaning of socialism is that life is controlled not by the opposition between rich and poor, but by the rank that achievement and talent bestow. That is our freedom, freedom from the economic despotism of the individual."[8] Spengler addressed the need of Germans to accept Prussian socialism to free themselves from foreign forms of government:
yeah seems alot like what I was talking about

ZOOOMERS WERE A MISTAKE

look at that dad. He just knows. HE KNNOWS he fucked up. hes like.... MAn..... we use to just ride bikes around the block.... what is THIS SHIT !!!

>this is what governments are for, to keep the people happy
If the government's only function is to dissolve monopoly when it happens, instead of de incentivizing the constant expansion required to maintain profit growth, then the system will generate the same abnormalities I've been talking about. The capitalist's dream has always been true globalism, which is what we see today.

>disagree
Obviously

>my original statement is the same since I think this is not realistic especially looking at history of communist states

CNT-FAI

>chill out Cletus, they literally love that shit, there is not one worse powerful country when it comes to human rights and economic freedom than the "communist" chinese

They have a tyrannical state, and there's nothing my government loves more than brutal authoritarianism

>it collapsed but a collapsed roman empire still provided more to the world than any other empire in the world at least for the time

It's entropy. No matter how perfect thermodynamics is, even it is doomed to sputter out and die, which is literally the only point I was making.

>capitalism is not a system in the way you think it is
>Even the first human civilization tribes were " capitalist " since they traded freely and claimed property for their own
Mercantilism wasn't generated until the 16th century. Property was held in common by the divine right of kings, and distributed to the peasantry. The Egyptians, Indo-Iranians, and Meso-americans definitely didn't rely on free trade, and had no designs on property rights

>Mercantilism wasn't generated until the 16th century. Property was held in common by the divine right of kings, and distributed to the peasantry. The Egyptians, Indo-Iranians, and Meso-americans definitely didn't rely on free trade, and had no designs on property rights
ancient greece had a pretty basic "capitalist" system when it came to trading goods that is what I derived from
>They have a tyrannical state, and there's nothing my government loves more than brutal authoritarianism
agree and disavow
>If the government's only function is to dissolve monopoly when it happens, instead of de incentivizing the constant expansion required to maintain profit growth, then the system will generate the same abnormalities I've been talking about.
yeah I agree it will make some economic growth slower, but you take some and you lose some. All in good faith and basic logic

That pic hit me right in the feels. We've strayed too far from God.

>I've been talking about.
I don't think it will generate an economic collapse though
Every time in history something as basic as I propose has been duped was from literal warfare and not economic warfare since the free market in my opinion is naturally not very discriminating
Like for example oil companies drilling in 3rd world shitholes exploitiong and killing workers just for profit, they won't wage war on their profits just because you don't let them be subversise rats

Attached: 1535664484588.png (250x235, 60K)

ancient greece had private property laws outside of loyalty also just something to add

Ancient greece was democratic with many preface.... Women slaves etc etc.

Capitalism relies on liberty which has been eroding steadily to create the crony capitalist oligarchy we have now.

Bloodshed will come.... If we are lucky natural rights will take hold.

>Women slaves
we also had men slaves, no discrimination

>ancient greece had a pretty basic "capitalist" system when it came to trading goods that is what I derived from
Trading goods is not inherently capitalistic, it's a necessary function of society. It's when the trading of goods is expressed as capital does the country become capitalistic. You're being quite revisionist here.

>agree and disavow
Glad we could meet on something, at least.

>yeah I agree it will make some economic growth slower, but you take some and you lose some. All in good faith and basic logic
>I don't think it will generate an economic collapse though
>Every time in history something as basic as I propose has been duped was from literal warfare and not economic warfare since the free market in my opinion is naturally not very discriminating

Actually, it was from the economic bubble created by warfare, not the warfare itself. The hasty reinvesting and expectation of massive growth after the end of WWI led to the roaring twenties, and eventually to the great depression. It was the expectation of profit where there wasn't any that caused one of the worst crises my country has ever faced.

>Like for example oil companies drilling in 3rd world shitholes exploitiong and killing workers just for profit, they won't wage war on their profits just because you don't let them be subversise rats

And the state is practically contracted to endorse it. But, again, if all it takes is enough money to get the state to look the other way as you wholesale murder 1,000,000 Iraqis and destabilize an entire subcontinent, the system is broken at it's core.

But private property was only allowed to very few, who also held slaves and were wino pederasts.

>no discrimination
Filthy SJWs

>But private property was only allowed to very few, who also held slaves and were wino pederasts.
depends on the city
>ctually, it was from the economic bubble created by warfare, not the warfare itself. The hasty reinvesting and expectation of massive growth after the end of WWI led to the roaring twenties, and eventually to the great depression. It was the expectation of profit where there wasn't any that caused one of the worst crises my country has ever faced.
yes in the very modern history some good faith authoritarian regimes ( not hitler, not in very good faith ) Have been pushed out with some form of practical subversion, mostly non economic so i wouldn't blame the "free market" but more specific people/ actions
But since that state of government has been working for centuries and is also having modern outbusts at the moment I am sure it will eventually settle but not without some shitty things happening

>And the state is practically contracted to endorse it
they are not contracted, saudis are subversive bank loving faggots and they have horrible leadership
to me it's about leadership and owning up to the shitty things happening, enduring them and moving own rather than trying some fast solution which doesn't exist ( like communism for example )
At least in my opinion

>depends on the city
I'm not well schooled on property rights of the Ancients, but my point was that it was exceptional, and radically different from the systems that followed and the system we have today. Property is universal under capitalism, by a requirement for people to enter the free market

>(...)Have been pushed out with some form of practical subversion, mostly non economic
But that's my point. Purely by the economic situation created by American investment, the state ALMOST collapsed. FDR's claim-to-fame, from his own mouth, was that he prevented a mass uprising by making concessions to the working class.

>they are not contracted, saudis are subversive bank loving faggots and they have horrible leadership
They literally pay Hillary Clinton to endorse their state, and have been married to U.S. foreign policy ever since they sprang up out of the desert in the 50s

to me it's about leadership and owning up to the shitty things happening, enduring them and moving own rather than trying some fast solution which doesn't exist ( like communism for example )
It's not so much leadership, but public consciousness (assuming that democracy is a given). Crises are a given, but the point is if the system is what generates these crises in the first place (the great depression), then why not change the system? I should also add at this point that most wars have been fought for economic reasons, and the interests to dominate the resources of other states, so that too is manufactured by the system.

Nationalize banks, loans at inflation, probably back currency with something to prevent debt bubbles
Ban property speculation

Basically stuff Hitler did probably without the corporatism and more like Trumpian economic nationalism

>Nationalize banks
t. commie

Attached: vO7lRZ7.jpg.png (621x702, 56K)

>Crises are a given, but the point is if the system is what generates these crises in the first place (the great depression), then why not change the system?
because along with crisis it also brings good things, and because it is easy to implement and sustain basically
> I should also add at this point that most wars have been fought for economic reasons, and the interests to dominate the resources of other states, so that too is manufactured by the system.
yes wars were mostly fought alot for economic and cultural supremacy but I just think it is the state of man to be shitty and do shitty things and the way to stop wars is just by being self sufficient, self serving people with clear goals and fullfilled needs
And for you that can be brought by communism, but for me, we need to take some boundaries on what we want to do and what we can do
And even if I want to end all injustice and all wars and poverty ( as a christian ) I believe that the most effective way to do that is by being precise and realistic
>They literally pay Hillary Clinton to endorse their state, and have been married to U.S. foreign policy ever since they sprang up out of the desert in the 50s
i meant that they are not obliged and that they are consentually in the bed with the US

that is my fucking gym

>but public consciousness (assuming that democracy is a given).
yeah democracy and capitalism are polar opposites unironically

>kids exercising instead of playing vidya on a couch

this is not exercising, this is worse than crossfit