/leftistpol/ FAQ/Primer
Welcome to /leftistpol/.
Ground Rules
No spamming, No CP (cheese pizza OK, not the other CP)
Please Be Civil
What is the purpose of this board?
It is a place to discuss leftist issues, ranging from labor, class struggle, wealth inequality, to communism and anarchism. Furthermore it's a place for general political or news discussion from a left perspective.
Is this a board for leftists only? Am I excluded as a right-winger or moderate?
No. The above description pertains to topics only. You are free to have any stance on those issues; you can be pro-free market, pro-nationalism or pro-religion. Opinions aren't censored here.
But keep in mind that the plan is that most threads will be pertaining to left issues rather than the usual /pol/ fare. The right-wing already has /pol/ and most of 8chan and 4chan to begin with. And for all the talk from /pol/acks that their board has free speech, we know that is bullshit. They censor leftist threads and comments on there. Your opinion from a non-left stance is valuable and welcome when it comes to those specific topics.
What are the most important board rules?
Please do not open threads, or try to derail threads, with a blatant /pol/-premise (for example Blacks and crime; Jews and the media; gay degeneracy), even if they are factual. A good self-check before posting is: "Would I open this thread on /pol/? Would it be applauded there?" If yes, it is probably better suited there rather than here in the first place.
Are you a SJW?
No. /leftistpol/ is firmly anti-SJW and anti-identity politics. Anti-SJW threads are ok. After all the SJWs have infiltrated our leftist movement. So this is obviously an issue of concern for us. But it's not cool when Anti-SJW threads dominate the board. The primary purpose of this imageboard is to promote fiscally left-wing issues. Pro-SJW discussion is also allowed if you really insist. If you really think that it's important for the left to address. But if this discussion overwhelms the board, there will be a purge.
If you are pro-free speech why do you censor? Are you trying to shut down politically incorrect discussion?
Ensuring board quality/focus ≠ censoring opposing opinions.
You are free to express your opinion on any matter that is discussed here, but when creating threads please try to stay within on-topic bounds of this board. We would like /leftistpol/'s content to remain separate from that of the other /pol/ and IDpol/SJW boards, i.e. while they focus more on race/gender/LGBT issues, we focus more on class issues.
Trying to avoid a flood of /pol/-like or SJW threads is not in any shape or form different from trying to moderate away threads about females on /cuteboys/ or threads about the virtues of gun bans from /k/.
What sets you apart from /leftypol/?
It's an secondary alternative to /leftypol/ with a more pro-reformist focus pertaining to fiscally left-wing issues and hopefully better quality assurance. /leftypol/'s philosophy is that violent revolution is the way to improve the lives of the working-class. Our position does not call for the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie. We are reformists who want to enact change by working within the system and educating the working-class about class issues. The modern working-class doesn't care for Karl Marx, Engels and other 19th century and early 20th century literature. We need a leftism that speaks to the 21st century modern working-class. Without exhibiting the outright hostility towards white heterosexual cis males that we see in the so-called modern "left" these days. Both the old-left and the modern "left" are out-of-touch with the modern working-class. Though posters who don't believe in reform are welcome to post and share their views. On virtue of being (right now) slower moving and /leftypol/ having become rather fast, we hope it also enables long-term in-depth discussion without fear of threads 404ing within a few days.
To the owner of /leftypol/ itself I extend my friendship as a fellow leftist. We just have our philosophical differences.
Memberships
This board is a proud member of the United Boards for posting at /leftistpol/
The UBF is a loose confederation of boards centred around the concept of posting at /leftistpol/ from moderation.
See the full list of members here: >>>/ubf/
3 parent embryos OK'd
Ethicists approve ‘3 parent’ embryos to stop diseases, but congressional ban remains
An elite panel of scientists and bioethicists offered guarded approval Wednesday of a novel form of genetic engineering that could prevent congenital diseases but would result in babies with genetic material from three parents.
The committee, which was convened last year at the request of the Food and Drug Administration, concluded that it is ethically permissible to “go forward, but with caution” with mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRT), said the chairman, Jeffrey Kahn, a bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University.
But the advisory panel’s conclusions have slammed into a congressional ban: The omnibus fiscal 2016 budget bill passed by Congress late last year contained language prohibiting the government from using any funds to handle applications for experiments that genetically alter human embryos.
Thus the green light from the scientists and ethicists won't translate anytime soon into clinical applications that could potentially help families that want healthy babies, said Shoukhrat Mitalipov, a pioneer of the new technique at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Ore.
“It seems like the FDA is disabled in this case by Congress," Mitalipov said. “At this point we’re still not clear how to proceed."
The FDA released a statement Wednesday saying it will carefully review the report from the advisory committee, but added that the congressional ban prohibits the agency from reviewing applications "in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification. As such, human subject research utilizing genetic modification of embryos for the prevention of transmission of mitochondrial disease cannot be performed in the United States in FY 2016."
MRT should be used rarely, with extreme care and with abundant government oversight, and it initially should be applied only to male embryos, the advisory panel said.
The report comes at a time of dazzling advances in genetic engineering and a commensurate struggle to understand the ethics of “playing God,” a phrase uttered twice Wednesday by committee member R. Alta Charo, a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin.
Two months ago, scientists from around the globe gathered in the same building to hash out guidelines for the use of another revolutionary technique, known as CRISPR, which can be used to efficiently edit nuclear DNA genes. Earlier this week,
British officials approved publicly funded research that will use CRISPR to study the development of early-stage human embryos, but the embryos will not be implanted in women.
The FDA last year asked the Institute of Medicine, now part of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, to review the ethical implications of MRT because it would result in what has been loosely referred to as “three-parent babies.” British officials have already approved investigatory experiments involving the technique.
[One year ago, the UK voted yes on 'three-parent' babies]
Nuclear DNA is by far the more significant form of genetic material for determining most human characteristics. As the committee put it, “While mtDNA plays a central role in genetic ancestry, traits that are carried in nDNA are those that in the public understanding constitute the core of genetic relatedness in terms of physical and behavioral characteristics as well as most forms of disease.”
As a result, modifying mtDNA “is meaningfully different.”
But panel members said that they took the philosophical issues seriously, noting that someone with genetic material from two different maternal bloodlines would potentially have to wrestle with questions about identity, kinship and ancestry.
They also countenanced the possibility that people would want to use this new technique to create babies that are enhanced in some way intellectually or physically. They said that is not a major concern at the moment because the feasibility of such enhancements remains speculative.
RACE DOES NOT EXIST
" But ancestry based on genes does "
Anarchy
Why aren't you anarchists yet, /leftistpol/?
Basic Income Pilot to roll out in Ontario (Canadian Province) in 2016
archive: http://archive.is/eAQ83
I have long been a proponent of basic income. This is not socialism. It's a social democratic reformist proposal. But it's a step in the right (or shall I say left?) direction. Accelerationism leads to nothing else but fascism. Not socialism.
Due to the nature of capitalism, labour productivity in our society continues to improve in the long-run (sure you will see short-term setbacks in labour productivity from time to time. But the general trend has been upward). We are seeing more and more automation. More outsourcing to firms that more efficiently utilize labour or to firms abroad based in countries that provide a large supply of cheap labour. As a result, the demand for labour decreases.
But the labour supply is still high. Because there were so many baby boomers and then those baby boomers had kids (us). With an excess of labour supply to labour demand, there is going to be a lot of unemployment and underemployment (ie. part-timers who want to work full-time but can't get full-time hours because there isn't enough demand for their labour).
You'd think that with there being a large surplus in labour supply and an ever decreasing demand for labour that employers would naturally gravitate to reducing full-time work week hours. But capitalism doesn't exactly work like that. Employers want to gain as much productivity as they can out of every employee they have on their payroll. Recruiting additional staff and increasing the size of your payroll costs money.
Corporations want to slim down as much as they can. They would rather have 75 employees on their payroll working 40 hours/week plus undisclosed overtime than have 100 employees on their payroll working 30 hours/week. The amount of hours they end up paying for will remain the same (3000 payroll man-hours per week). But they will have to invest more money into recruitment, payroll, accounts payable, HR, administration, etc. You would have far more bloat. And the whole goal of private enterprise is to trim the fat. Find efficiencies.
So at the end of the day, when companies do what they have to do to find efficiencies, you end up with a lot of people who are unemployed or underemployed. And what do you do with these people? Let them rot. I think that a government job program would help to some extent. A lot of unnecessary cuts have been made to government services over the years. But that won't be enough to compensate everyone who has been deemed excess to the requirements under capitalism. Ultimately you're going to need a basic income if you don't want people on the streets, starving, etc.
And ultimately if you pay out a basic income to every adult and a smaller amount to every child/adolescent, inflation will hurt only people who skew at the high-end of the wealth spectrum.
If your income is $10k per year before basic income but you receive a basic income supplement of $14k and now have $24k per year, are you better off with $24k per year even if there's some inflation or are you better off with just $10k? This is why the argument that basic income is bad for the poor because it will cause inflation is full of shit. No the extra inflation will harm the wealthy, not the poor.
Voting Reform
Every American knows their electoral system is completely fucking broken and forces people to regularly choose between the less of two evils instead of the people they would actually like to see running things.
What is the best method to go about finally fixing this shitheap?
is BO a newfag?
>Our mission is a reformist/incrementalist approach to agitate for the working-class (non-reformers are welcome to post). Without alienating the white heterosexual cis male as is typically the case with modern leftism (which makes up a huge chunk of the working-class in the west. It's politically suicidal). We think identity politics is divisive. We want to be inclusive to people of all races, genders and sexual orientations. That doesn't mean that we're in favor of giving preferential treatment to one group over the other. That seems to be the modern leftist view of "equality". If the left didn't actively try to alienate white heterosexual males, the conservatives/Republicans would never win. The whole conservative/Republican strategy is to feed off working-class white heterosexual male resentment and it's working. I'm Pro-Bernie Sanders/Jeremy Corbyn/Kshama Sawant/Elizabeth May. Though I wish these candidates weren't so Pro-IDpol/SJW (Bernie Sanders is only Pro-IDpol/SJW because he feels that he needs to be to be politically relevant. But we know his true power level.)
So BO never lurked /leftypol/ too much? because /leftypol/ is illiberal as fuck most of the time.
Still I'll post and browse here because BO promised that this place will be action based and not theory based.
Welcome Refugees
Are liberals and socdems today absolutely fucking INSANE?
Proof that /leftypol/ is a Social Justice Warrior board
http://8ch.net/leftypol/res/465660.html#q465725
http://8ch.net/leftypol/res/465660.html#q465744
Whenever you play the reality card and point out the facts to SJW liberals, they can't help but play the race/"nationalist" card. That's the only card they have left in their deck. And I consider myself a liberal. A libertine in fact. And I abhor nationalism. National borders are just imaginary lines. But I don't want to be shot up or blown up by a bunch of Islamist nutjobs. And I'm not down with the political correctness bullshit that is destroying the modern left.
/leftypol/ also goes on to justify suicide bombing as military tactic. Ow the edge.
My stance is this: If you are Muslim and you are not a terrorist, don't support terrorists, willing to cooperate with authorities to identify terrorists ("snitch") and don't support Sharia Law and accept our liberal democratic way of life, you're welcome to live among us.
If you're a terrorist, terrorist sympathizer, terrorist enabler or support Sharia Law, we don't want you here. And unfortunately a large percentage of Muslims in the west fall within this camp.
It is a moral dilemma sure. I don't want to deny the good Muslims a chance of life here in the west. But there are lots of fucking crazy Muslims in the Middle-East, North Africa and the Indian Subcontinent (ie. Pakistan, Bangladesh, some parts of India) who are terrorists and terrorist sympathizers and want to establish Sharia Law and a Caliphate in the west. But when you have a bag of M&Ms and 35% of those M&Ms will kill you, what do you do? STOP EATING M&Ms.
I think it's perfectly justified for France and Sweden to put a severe limitation or moratorium on Muslim immigration right now. Even if we manage to somehow weed out all the nutjobs and accept only moderates, keep in mind that many of these Muslim youths committing these terrorist atrocities came from moderate families. They were radicalized by ISIS via social media. ISIS reaches out to disenfranchised Muslim kids in the west via Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Myspace, you name it.
So what happens when you have mass Muslim immigration + poverty in Muslim ghettos caused by neo-liberal capitalism + extremist imams spreading propaganda in Mosques + ISIS/ISIL propagandists recruiting disenfranchised western Muslim youth on social media? A powder keg waiting to fucking explode.
If ISIS/ISIL is going to attack us, it makes absolutely zero fucking sense to import more Muslims. During World War II, we had a moratorium on Italian, Germany and Japanese immigration. Even though there were plenty of Italians, Germans and Japanese people who abhorred Mussolini fascism, the Nazis and the far-right Japanese Empire respectively.
Planned Revolutions
What if the same old governments that pushed Europe into a prolonged war in WWII knew the best way to reverse rights and freedoms quickly was to import millions of slimerabs and mohamenigs and the rabble to fight among the streets with other poorshits?
Europe swings far right? Great! "we already have candidates campaigning who could be installed as nationalist champions while their primary goals will be corporate as usual."
bolshevik jewry
Communism (and leftism in general) is jewish. It cannot divorce itself of anti white jewry.
Tourism
I'm curious how socialists interpret tourism.
Far-right Front National gets shut out in second-round French Regional elections
First-round re-cap
-Far-right Front National was leading in 6 of the 12 mainland regions in France.
-The centre-right coalition Union of the Right was leading in 4 of 12 mainland regions in France.
-The centre-left coalition Union of the Left was leading in 2 of 12 mainland regions in France.
Second-round highlights
Centre-right coalition (Union of the Right)
- WON in 7 of the 12 mainland regions in France.
- GAIN of 3 regions from far-right Front National
- HOLD of 4 regions from the first-round
Centre-left Coalition (Union of the Left)
- WON in 5 of the 12 mainland regions in France.
- GAIN of 3 regions from Far-Right Front National
- HOLD of 2 regions from first-round
- The Far-Right Front National wasn't able to maintain a lead in any of the 6 mainland Regions they led in in the first-round.
Analyzing the Defeat of the Far-Right
- In the 2 regions where the Far-Right was the strongest (Nord-Pas-de-Calais - Picardie, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur), the third-placed Union of the Left decided to bow out for the second-round and backed the Union of the Right to defeat the Far-Right. Which they successfully did. The Front National increased their overall share of the vote in the second-round. But the Union of the Right was able to beat them in the head-to-head second-round run-off.
- In Alsace - Champagne-Ardenne - Lorraine, the Union of the Right was beating the third-placed Union of the Left by a 1.6:1 margin in the first-round. But in the second-round, voters for the parties that were eliminated in the first-round decided to back the Union of the Right instead of the Union of the Left because they thought they had a better chance to beat the Far-Right. So the Union of the Right's margin over the Union of the Left increased to 3.1:1 in the second-round! The Union of the Left remained in Third. Front National slipped down to second. The Union of the Right moved up to victory.
- In Languedoc-Roussillon - Midi-Pyrénées, the Union of the Left was beating the third-place Union of the Right by a 1.3:1 margin in the first-round. But in the second-round, their margin increased to 2.1:1 due to voters of the eliminated parties backing the Union of the Left. Front National slipped to second in the second-round and Union of the Right remained in third and Union of the Left claimed first.
- In Bourgogne - Franche-Comté, the Union of the Right was beating the Union of the Left by a slim 1.04:1 margin in the first-round. Both the Union of the Left and Union of the Right decided to risk splitting the vote against the Far-Right and stayed in the second-round. The Union of the Left ended up beating out the Union of the Right by a 1.05:1 margin in the second-round despite placing third in the first-round. The voters of the eliminated parties were split but ultimately rallied a bit more behind the Union of the Left. Front National slipped to third this time in the second-round but the first-place Union of the Left had only a
1.07:1 margin over the third-placed Front National. Very tight, risky race.
- In Centre-Val de Loire, the Union of the Right had only a 1.08:1 margin lead over the third-place Union of the Left in the first-round. But ultimately the Union of the Left beat them by an anemic 1.02:1 margin in the second-round. The voters of the eliminated parties were very split, ultimately leaning ever so slightly with the Union of the Left. Front National dropped to third in the second-round. The first-place Union of the Left had a 1.18:1 margin lead over the third-place Front National in the second-round. Another close three-way race.
Conclusions
- The Union of the Left cares more about their identity politics special interest groups (Muslims, racial minorities, feminism, LGBT issues) a lot more than fiscal issues so it doesn't surprise me that they would sacrifice themselves in the second-round in the far-right's two strongest regions to make sure the socially conservative, anti-Muslim immigration Front National didn't win. Modern social democrats adopt third-way neo-liberal ideology and are traitors to the working-class. The Front National these days is more socially democratic on fiscal issues than the social democrats in France.
- The Union of the Left however didn't want to sacrifice themselves in the other three regions where they were third and Front National was first. Because they either thought they had a good chance of winning those regions for themselves (they did go on to win 2 of those regions). Or because they thought the far-right wouldn't win (Alsace - Champagne-Ardenne - Lorraine had 36.07% voting for Front National in the first-round. But the Union of the Right was beating the Union of the Left by a 1.6:1 margin. So they figured voters would vote strategically for the Union of the Right anyway to beat the far-right. And the Union of the Left figured they might as well stay in the race so that they'd get some seats.
- In those regions where the far-right had 40+% of the vote in the first-round, the Union of the Left figured the risk was too great of a far-right victory. So they bowed out of the second-round to give the second-place centre-right a better chance of dispatching the far-right.
- The Union of the Right on the other hand had no interest in sacrificing themselves in any of the regions to make sure the far-right didn't win. BASED Sarkozy. Social democrat Hollande on the other hand is a cuck.
- Ultimately it's just too difficult for the far-right to win head-to-head run-offs. They just don't have enough mainstream appeal. And in three-way dance run-offs, it still remains a challenge for them to win. They only had more than one-third of the vote in the first-round in three regions. And with the left and right conspiring to screw over the far-right, it's hard for the far-right to win a three-way run-off if they can't get one-third in the first round. Only their #3 region (Alsace - Champagne-Ardenne - Lorraine) had a three-way dance among FN's top 3 regions. And they lost there because there wasn't much voting splitting between the centre-left and centre-right (the centre-left is significantly weaker than the centre-right in that region). The far-right might have been able to win a three-way run-off in their top 2 regions. But the Union of the Left sacrificed themselves to force the far-right into a head-to-head run-off with the more mainstream centre-right.
- That all said, it's very important that the centre-left and centre-right adopt a more sane policy with regards to Muslim immigration, Islam and integration of Muslim 1st and 2nd generation migrants into their country. Their suicidal politically correct stance regarding Islam is fueling the far-right's fire. Don't be surprised if the far-right catches the centre-left and centre-right napping next time and makes them pay at the polls with some victories. I love me some beurette (North African) qts but let's think rationally about how fucking insane it is to import a whole bunch of people with values that are incompatible with western liberal democracy. With people who believe that wives should be submissive to their husband, that women should be forced to cover up and dress modestly because they think a woman is a slut who is asking for it if she doesn't, an ideology that preaches Sharia Law which includes honor killings for adultery and for abandoning Islam. Just because you are Muslim yourself and you don't believe in these things, doesn't mean that there aren't a significant number of Muslims who do. The majority of French people, Americans and Canadians rejected the current politically correct status quo stance on Muslim immigration in national polls. Yet centre-left and centre-right politicians refuse to care about what the people want.
- We need more common sense Syrian refugee and overall Muslim immigration policy. Lower numbers, tighter background checks.
And yes I think we should give priority to secular/nominal Muslims (this includes Kurds), Christian Arabs, women, children and old men and less priority to military-age men. I would prefer to import Muslim women who do not even wear a hijab. And would prefer Muslim women who wear a hijab to those who wear the niqab/burqa. I don't think women who wear a niqab/burqa should be allowed here. They have very socially conservative views. Which they will pass on to their sons and daughters. Who may one day join ISIS and wage Jihad against us.
A
CUCK
Far-right Front National making big gains in French regional elections
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_regional_elections,_2015
http://elections.interieur.gouv.fr/regionales-2015/
The centre-left Union of the Left "list coalition" headed by the "Socialist" Party got hit hard by the polls while the far-right Front National more than doubled their votes in the regional elections. The centre-right Union of the Right list headed by the Republican Party saw very modest gains.
It looks like both the centre-left and the centre-right are paying the price for blatantly ignoring the wishes of the French people. It's worth noting that the majority of registered French voters abstained from voting. Which suggests that the French people feel very alienated by the "choices" that their democracy has on offer. Or worse, they just don't fucking care about French regional politics. The voter turnout was just under 50% and that figure drops down to just under 48% if you count valid votes only. 1.2% of the electorate left their ballot blank (probably a protest vote) and another 0.79% cast an invalid/spoiled ballot (some of these could be protest votes). That's fucking embarrassing.
They just completed the first round of voting Dec 6th. The second round of voting will be on the 13th in regions where no single party won a majority vote. In each region, 75% of the seats are distributed via proportional representation with a 5% minimum vote threshold for each party or list coalition. That means that in order to be represented in regional council, your party/list coalition must have had at least 5% of the vote in the first round.
The remaining 25% of seats in regional council are distributed to the party/list coalition that wins a plurality (first-past-the-post) in that region in the second round. If any one party/list coalition won a majority vote in the first round, they win the remaining 25% of seats and then there is no second round.
In the second round, parties who finished with less than 5% of the vote are completely eliminated. And if you finish between 5-10% in the first round you have to join a list coalition in order to be eligible to compete in the second round. If you have 10%+ of the vote in the first round you are allowed to advance to the second round automatically.
I'm going to do an in-depth break down of the second round for the French regional elections region-by-region in the next post. Since they don't break it down for you on Wikipedia or on the elections website.
I posted an image of Front National leader Marine Le Pen's niece Marion Maréchal-Le Pen for uh "fanservice". Since she is quite the hottie. She is an elected MP in the National Assembly of France.
Finland to conduct basic income experiment 2017-2019
There's all sorts of talk in the media that Finland is actually going to implement a 800 euro/month basic income policy and I actually thought this was the case. I supported this policy in social media and condemned the administration in my province for not following suit and for paying a comparatively paltry sum to workfare and disability benefit recipients. But then when I went digging further, I found out that this was not exactly true. They are going to be conducting pilot basic income experiments from 2017-2019 in Finland. And it won't apply to the whole country. Only select communities.
We have seen basic income pilots before. In Dauphin,Manitoba from 1974-1979 in Canada, in select regions in India, Namibia, etc. And they are just that pilots. They never resulted in permanent adoption of basic income as policy. I'm tired of "pilots". We've done pilots before and the results of these pilots were quite positive. Let's actually implement basic income policy that applies to an entire nation or province/state. And let's fight to get basic income implemented all across the world.
There's no reason why anyone in a developed country should be homeless, experiencing food insecurity or lacking access to needed health care, clothing, transportation, telecommunications, etc. In a world where you have millionaires and billionaires who acquire exorbitant amounts of wealth off the backs of labour. They are rent-seekers and usurers. And idle rich trust fund kids who were lucky enough to be born into a family where daddy is rich and has connections.
The idea of a basic income is that everyone would receive a basic amount every month that would be just enough to cover basic needs - both ongoing regular expenditures (ie. food, rent, etc.) and allowing people the ability to save some money to cover less frequent basic expenditures (ie. durable or semi-durable goods like clothing, household appliances, and services that you pay for less often than once a month). And then you would raise taxes in order to control for inflation. Like obviously we don't want the 1% to be a net recipient of a basic income. We want them to be a net contributor if anything and therefore see them pay more taxes. The purpose of making basic income universal is to prevent a welfare trap/cliff effect where people on welfare are discouraged from working.
I encourage my comrades to support politicians who advocate for basic income policy. Elizabeth May, Green Party of Canada leader and federal MP in British Columbia advocates for a $20k per year (Canadian dollars) "guaranteed livable income" (GLI). Which is really their way of saying basic income.
US Democrat Party presidential candidate and US Senator for Vermont Bernie Sanders likes the idea of a basic income. But doesn't advocate it as policy because he doesn't think it would be very popular in the classcucked United States. Where the notion that able-bodied adults between 18-64 (and they have a very loose definition of what constitutes able-bodied) should be forced to work full-time (40+ hours/week) in order to support themselves and their families is the dominant view. Because Americans buy into the Calvinist Work Ethic. Meanwhile they don't really say anything about the idle rich kids who are independently wealthy and were just simply lucky enough to be born into wealth…
why are queers the target of so much h8
I want to know why so many think its wrong to be homosexual or identify as a gender other than your physical gender. If you do your research you'll understand that its natural and not uncommon for people to like the same sex and that gender identity is the same thing as name identity. Why the hell is "gay" an insult? My best theory is that people are uncomfortable with their sexuality so they insult other people in the opposite sexuality than they identify as to make them feel uncomfortable. It destroys young men and women's lives when they are bashed and hated on even by parents because they are "queer". And just being human, we should want to help them and support them. I want everyone here to take their time and try to educate themselves on what gender identity is and learn more about sexuality.
>inb4 i smell tumblr
Let's DDoS these misogynist incel sites: lookism.net & sluthate.com
Elliot Rodger was from PUAhate and PUAhate shut down and became sluthate.com. Lookism.net branched off sluthate. These are guys are just as bad, if not worse than /pol/ and /r9k/. They spread misogyny and racism.
out of control racism at mu
racism is so rampant at MU that the university president resigned. now the MU police department is trying to crack down hard on campus racism.
itt we call the MUPD and warn them about: > the roving gangs of <CENSORED> in sharp business attire who are putting <CENSORED> in every pool they can find > a white kid dressed as hitler opening fire on blacks at the student union > rednecks in a blue pickup dragging multiple, hog-tied <CENSORED> down the road behind their truck > three <CENSORED> beating the shit out of an asian girl in the library for flaunting her math privilege
remember to vocaroo
MOD Note: Don't be a racist fuck OP. Back to >>>/pol/
Portugal's Socialists Form New Government
Portugal's Socialists Form New Governmentorm a left-wing governing alliance with the eurosceptic radical Left in a bid to become the country's new government.
Following an election stalemate in which the opposition Socialists came in second place to the incumbent conservatives, leader Antonio Costa has said he is ready to strike up an alliance to become the country's new prime minister.
The eurosceptic Left Bloc and Communist Party both received 10.2pc and 8.3pc of the national vote share respectively. However, Mr Costa has affirmed that he will only head up an alliance that would pursue policies that will keep the country in the euro, four years after it received an €78bn international bail-out.
"Although the negotiations are obviously still underway, at this moment, everything indicates that the Socialist Party is in better condition to be able to lead a more stable government solution,” said Mr Costa, a former mayor of Lisbon.
October's general election saw the ruling coalition of prime minister Pedro Passos Coelho lose its majority, despite coming in first place with 37pc of the vote. Mr Coelho's government had zealously implemented spending cuts and tax hikes as part of the country's bail-out deal.
Mr Costa had vowed not to provide parliamentary support for a conservative-led minority government, throwing Portugal's economic progress into doubt.
The political vacuum has seen already seen Portugal become the first eurozone country to fail to submit its draft budget plan to the European Commission.
Portugal's former creditors, including the International Monetary Fund, have urged any new government to stick to the path of austerity and structural reforms in order to return the economy back to health.
https://archive.is/MrFsqPortugal's Socialists to Form New Government
Any of you lot read The Strategy of Conflict by Schelling? What did you think? I've been really into game theory recently and this has been quite an interesting read.
/b/ Here
Are these the same people who I talked to a week ago about how /b/ was literal shit since January. It had a few of the wins of 8chan back in it. From September-January ofc.
Bernie Sanders is Ayn Rand’s worst nightmare: He’s changing how we view socialism — and exposing fre
The point is, “socialism” does not necessarily mean centrally planned economies, as most on the right believe. The original definition of socialism was something like this: the collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. In this sense, worker-owned businesses (i.e. worker co-ops) are very “socialistic,” and Sanders has appropriately put forth a plan to increase worker ownership. The word socialism can also mean “Social Democracy” — this is what best describes Bernie Sanders’s philosophy — which involves a market economy with socialistic programs. The most common example of this sort of economic system can be found in the Scandinavian countries, which have hardly “failed.” Indeed, Scandinavian countries have all been previously ranked among the highest in the world when it comes to “ease of doing business,” “global innovation,” and “prosperity.”
The second-most common claim on the right came from the sagging Rand Paul last month, when he said that “Bernie Sanders is offering you free stuff…but guess what, there is no free lunch.” This kind of assumption is not new, and can be traced back to Ronald Reagan and those infamous “welfare queens,” a sad dog-whistle that haunts us to this day. Of course, it’s not about “free stuff,” but fairness. Indeed, when some facts are introduced, this assumption is revealed as a myth that has long been used by the right wing to divide the middle class (particularly along racial lines). Rand Paul seems to be entirely ignorant (willfully, I’m sure) that it is not lazy unemployed people that strain Americas welfare system, but working class people who are not being paid livable wages by corporations. Indeed, this was exactly what was found in a recent study at the University of Berkley California. The Wall Street Journal reports:
“The study found that 56% of federal and state dollars spent between 2009 and 2011 on welfare programs — including Medicaid, food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit — flowed to working families and individuals with jobs. In some industries, about half the workforce relies on welfare.”
Hello, I'm the owner of the United Boards for posting at /leftistpol/ ( >>>/ubf/ ).
If you are seeing this message, this board in the past was accepted into the confederation either by invitation or by request.
This is a reminder that current members must have a link to the UBF somewhere on their board to show their membership
Boards without one will be removed October 15th
(Below are some examples, you don't have to copy+paste, just have something similar)
In board announcement:
<a(SPACE)href="https://8ch.net/ubf/">Proud member of the UBF</a>
or
In sticky:
This board is a proud member of the United Boards for posting at /leftistpol/
The UBF is a loose confederation of boards centred around the concept of posting at /leftistpol/ from moderation.
See the full list of members here: >>>/ubf/
Thanks
If you would like to opt out of the UBF, please ignore this message.
Can we have a cop/judicial hate thread?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USkEzLuzmZ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDVmldTurqk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS5mwymTIJU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto
revolution when bros?
UBF Membership
Hello, I'm the new owner of the United Boards for posting at /leftistpol/ ( >>>/ubf/ ).
I'm posting this message because in the past this board was accepted into the confederation either by invitation or by request
It is now required that all members have a link to the UBF somewhere on their board to show their membership
Boards without one of the following will be removed October 1st
(You don't have to copy+paste, just have something similar)
In board announcement:
<a(SPACE)href="https://8ch.net/ubf/">Proud member of the UBF</a>
or
In sticky:
This board is a proud member of the United Boards for posting at /leftistpol/
The UBF is a loose confederation of boards centred around the concept of posting at /leftistpol/ from moderation.
See the full list of members here: >>>/ubf/
Thanks
If you would like to opt out of the UBF, please ignore this message
India Strategic Uranium Reserve
Department of Atomic Energy is carrying out nuclear energy programme in India.
The Indian Nuclear Power Programme has the following three stages.
The Indian Nuclear Power Programme has the following three stages.
1.First Stage: It is already commercial now, comprised setting up of PHWRs (pressurized heavy water reactors) and associated fuel cycle facilities. PHWRs use natural uranium as fuel and heavy water as moderator and coolant. The देसीgn, construction, and the operation of these reactors are undertaken by public sector undertaking the NPCIL (Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited). The company operates 16 reactors (2 Boiling Water Reactors and 14 PHWRs) with a total capacity of 3900 MWe.
2.Second Stage: It was envisaged to set FBRs (Fast Breeder Reactors) along with Reprocessing plants and plutonium-based fuel fabrication plants. Plutonium is produced by irradiation of Uranium-238. The Fast Breeder Programme is in the technology demonstration stage. Under this stage, the IGCAR (Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research) has completed देसीgn of a 500 MWe PFBR (prototype fast breeder reactor) being implemented by BHAVINI (Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam).
3.Third Stage: The Indian Nuclear Power Programme is based on the thorium-uranium-233 cycle.Uranium-233 is obtained by irradiation of thorium. Presently this stage is in technology development phase. The ongoing development of 300 MWe AHWR (advanced heavy water reactor) at BARC (Bhabha Atomic Research Centre) concerns thorium utilization and its demonstration.
Over the past one year, India has been pursuing its case to buy uranium from different countries including Australia and Canada. It is also procuring uranium from Russia. India renewed a contract with the Central एशियाn country to procure 5000 MT of uranium.
After a record production this year, India is working on creating a 'strategic uranium reserve' to ensure its atomic power reactors do not face shortage of the crucial nuclear fuel.
"The reserve pool could be anywhere between 5000 MT to 15,000 MT which can last for 5-10 years," said a senior government official.
India's first indigenously देसीgned 500-MW fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam would start nuclear power generation by September.
This project will be completed at any cost now," Mr Fadnavis told PTI.
The Jaitapur project, where the French company Areva is setting up six nuclear reactors with a total power generation capacity of about 10,000 MW, has been stuck for long due to differences over the cost of electricity.
Canada will supply 3,000 MT of uranium over the next five years at a cost of USD 254 million.
"For a developed country to be a partner country of a state is not a small decision… I will return home tomorrow but I can never forget Canada's love," he said.
Prime Minister Harper described Mr Modi's visit as "historic" and said his country wanted to work with India in enhancing trade, investments and working in the security area.
India will sign a contract with Kazakhstan to procure 5,000 metric tonnes of uranium Kazakhstan is one of the major uranium suppliers to India. It has 15 per cent of the world's uranium resources and became the leading uranium-producing country in 2009.
Apart from Kazakhstan, India also has an agreement with Uzbekistan, another Central एशियाn country, to procure uranium.
India's reactors had been running under capacity for all these years due to lack of fuel.
India and Australia had last year signed a landmark civil nuclear deal, clearing the way for Canberra to sell uranium to the energy-starved country for power generation.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Kazakhstan signed an agreement on Thursday to locate the first internationally-controlled bank of low-enriched uranium in the ex-Soviet nation to ensure fuel supplies for power stations and prevent nuclear proliferation.
Set to become fully operational in 2017, is intended to provide IAEA member states with confidence in a steady and predictable supply of fuel even if other routes are disrupted.
The storage facility will be located not far from Semipalatinsk where the Soviet Union tested nuclear weapons. By the time of its 1989 closure following growing popular protests, Semipalatinsk had held 30 surface, 88 atmospheric and 340 underground tests.
The mineral-rich Central एशियाn nation of 17.5 million is the world's largest uranium producer and holds more than 15 percent of global uranium reserves, second only to Australia. It has no nuclear power stations of its own.
Venom used to Heal
Toxin into Brain to Heal it from Cancer
A study has found over a hundred proteins identified as possible anti-cancer agents in Centruroides tecomanus scorpion venom from Colima, south-west state of Mexico. The preliminary investigation was carried out by specialists of the faculty of chemistry at the University of Colima (UCOL), who have identified peptides that destroy cancer cells in vitro.
A study has found over a hundred proteins identified as possible anti-cancer agents in Centruroides tecomanus scorpion venom from Colima, south-west state of Mexico.
The preliminary investigation was carried out by specialists of the faculty of chemistry at the University of Colima (UCOL), who have identified peptides that destroy cancer cells in vitro.
Laura Leticia Valdez Velazquez, head of research, said that when the toxin, derived from scorpion venom, invades channels in the cells with this disease, it produces cellular damage and kills the cells.
"We have identified a highly selective group of peptides, which indicates that they could specifically bind to cancer cells and cause their death," she indicates.
Centruroides tecomanus species is one of the most poisonous scorpions in the country. The UCOL already has the genetic sequences of the protein components of the venom.
The scientific team took advantage of the great number of scorpions found in Colima. They began with the collection and extraction of poison, inoculating and immunizing rabbits.They studied the venom with the support of Lourival Possani, from the Institute of Biotechnology of the National Autonomous University od Mexico (UNAM).
The researcher explains that UCOL undertook the task of characterizing each component from the arachnid toxins, among the most poisonous on the continent. Currently, it has identified a group of 10 peptides in order to evaluate whether they have greater toxic effect against lymphoma cells.
"The venom toxins act on ion channels of the cancer cell damaging them. Our interest is for the cell to be selectively removed. We have found that these peptides have affinity with these cells, and could specifically bind to them and induce cancer death."
In parallel, the research team of the UCOL conducted a study on the effect of scorpion venom in models of Parkinson's disease.
People with Parkinson's are affected because neurons are damaged and dopamine production is inhibited. The team has tested the scorpion venom toxins in animal models, noting that these toxins are attached to receptors on dopaminergic neurons and increase the release of dopamine, with future promising effects for sufferers of this disease.
It’s been pointed out that while the paint helps during surgery, it’s the surgery part that needs to be replaced completely if possible. Surgery is always going to inflict damage even if it does remove the tumor completely and save someone’s life. However, if you’ve got a substance that makes its own way to the brain tumor through the blood stream, maybe it can be adapted in the future to also take some tumor-killing drugs along with it and remove surgery from the equation.
The advantage of exploring specific toxins is how selective they are when attaching to their targets within the body – minimizing the potential for unwanted side effects.
"Toxins have evolved for millions of years to target a specific receptor," says Manjunatha. Also important is their potency, as just a small amount can have fatal effects.
Environment and Regeneration
What is today one of the largest tracts of rainforest in the world was, until little more than 500 years ago, a landscape dominated by human activity, according to a review of the evidence by Charles Clement of Brazil’s National Institute of Amazonian Research in Manaus, and his colleagues.
After Europeans showed up, the inhabitants were decimated by disease and superior weaponry, and retreated into the bush, while the jungle reclaimed their fields and plazas. But, thanks to a combination of deforestation and remote sensing, what’s left of their civilisation is now re-emerging.
They reveal an anthropogenically modified Amazonia before the European conquest. “Few if any pristine landscapes remained in 1492,” says Clement. “Many present Amazon forests, while seemingly natural, are domesticated.”
Amazon domesticity
The evidence for this radical rethink has been stacking up for some time. Archaeologists have uncovered dense urban centres that would have been home to up to 10,000 inhabitants along riverbanks, with fields and cultivated orchards of Brazil nuts, palm and fruit trees stretching for tens of kilometres. Remote sensing has revealed extensive earthworks, including cities, causeways, canals, graveyards and huge areas of ridged fields that kept crops like manioc, maize and squash clear of floods and frosts.
Meanwhile, agriculturalists have discovered that many forest soils have been mulched and composted with waste. These fertile “dark earths”, or terra preta, may cover 150,000 square kilometres, much of it now reclaimed by rainforests. Before the arrival of Europeans, the region’s population may have reached 50 million.
The remains date back 3000 years or more, say the authors, who include geographer William Denevan of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and anthropologist Michael Heckenberger of the University of Florida at Gainesville – both pioneers of the idea that the Amazon has long been modified by humans.
Not everyone agrees. Dolores Piperno of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama recently argued that “recent investigations of soils in parts of the western Amazon… found little vegetation disturbance“.
Clement and his co-authors agree that “the idea of a domesticated Amazonia… contrasts strongly with reports of empty forests, which continue to captivate scientific and popular media”.
But the idea of a domesticated Amazon complements research in other rainforest regions, including the Congo basin and South-East Asia, that also suggest that much of what seems pristine is actually regrowth after dense human occupation. Erle Ellis of the University of Maryland, Baltimore, says such evidence suggests that we should be dating the start of the Anthropocene – the era of human domination of the planet – to thousands of years ago rather than in the middle of 20th century.
alliance with /1/
>▶Seeking Alliance Anonymous 08/19/15 (Wed) 20:13:37 No.7373[Reply]>>8130 [Watch Thread]
>>>/leftistpol/ here
Come down and say hello.
Would like to make official alliance with /1/ and we sticky each others links.
as a voice for /1/ i vote: no to alliance but welcome to free passage
im not sure bout the rest. i would hope /1/ open-minded
Dugin
Your board should have a thread on this sexy motherfucker.
I disagree with him on many points, but his ideas are golden, he knows lots of history and philosophy and is generally my husbando.
>bailouts for banks but not sovereign nations
that's all.
Learning Economics
Hi /leftistpol/I want to learn some economics, could you recommend me books or other resources?
Fun
Let's inaugurate the first FUN ALLOWED thread: Lefty editionStarting with a classic
SJW/Identity politics hate General
I recently stumbled upon Mykeru, a channel run by someone extremely eloquent, the likes which is pretty rare on Youtube. He's an atheist, but he also frequently scrutinizes modern third-wave feminism. The embedded video is the best anti-SJW critique I have ever seen on YT. IIRC he also touches upon class in this (that, or it was another video).
Traditional Left-Right Paradgim
I created a political paradgim using the traditional left-right paradgim. I want other people's opinions on it. Tell me if I left anyone out, or got something wrong.
Dignitarianism
The label essentially means>giving dignity back to the Western left, progressive and avant-garde movements that have been defaced by post-modernism/post-structuralism
One may regard it as label for a reactionary force (as in reaction, not the conservative school), or an entirely new stream of progressive thought - it's open to interpretation right now.
If you study history it becomes evident that people rally around labels and symbols. You may have a thought, a concept that is shared by a diverse set of individuals, but without an unifier people are just limply and flaccidly aware of some common ideals rather than fiery partisans mutually affirming their affiliation.
Anyway I wanted to throw this at the wall and see what sticks.
Vile reactionary here.
Just pointing out that your current lefty board fragmentation corresponds exactly to the Right's critique that progressivism always eats its own yesterday's vanguard.
I look forward the next bout of purges :^)
Détournement
Let's try this!1. Grab a random comic off the interwebs
2. Edit it to say radical leftist stuff
3. Post it here!
Would you describe yourself more as a Bolshevist or as a Menshevist?
>Bolshevism: strong leadership, individuals as avant-garde, hard core of the party makes the policies, professional revolutionaries
>Menshevism: more spread out leadership, mass party membership, party policies by everyone, large representation of the populace
After reading/listening up how Occupy failed I am firmly in the Bolshevist camp. Menshevist-organized groups are simply too prone to being hijacked by foreign vocal interest groups (in the case of Occupy, SJWs) and by shills (g.g. agent provocateurs).
Occupy also lacked a vision and voice, their message as muddled and unclear to the public.
Sure a Bolshevist group is more exclusionary, it is less an "ark" for disaffected ordinary citizens. But I think this makes it much more effective.
Ryan Dawson Thread
What is /leftistpol/'s opinion on Native American Indian Activist Ry Dawson's youtube channel?He did a very good 10/10 video exposing the Zionist and Imperialist agenda in Syria here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4vD6JpJAFI
He also created a much longer 1 hour long video explaining the entire history of imperialist US foreign policy here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3TJXTtE4g
I don't think that Ry Dawson himself is a Marxist or a leftist but I think that leftists such as yourself can find useful arguments against imperialism in these videos that might help your cause.
Please let me know what you think about these videos!
PLEASE ENABLE YOUTUBE VIDEOS
Can the board owner go in to the php admin web page for this board and check the box [x] that enables people who post here to embed youtube videos in their post? This feature is currently not enabled.Also checking the [box] that enables duplicate posting of images is also recommended as sometimes somebody will post a pro-leftwing or pro-marxist infographic in a thread and then somebody else will start another thread where you want to use the same infographic a second time and you can't do so because the default setting doesn't allow the same image to be posted twice in two different threads.