[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / anita / b2 / dempart / fascist / kind / shota / tob / vichan ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

A collective of people engaged in pretty much what the name suggests
Winner of the 83rd Attention-Hungry Games
/strek/ - Remove Hasperat

May 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: 2ffa4bcb92ac8c6⋯.png (74.62 KB, 400x450, 8:9, allorg.png)

 No.2939150

"anarchist think tank and media center" claims Cockshott is a reactionary

https://c4ss.org/content/52231

 No.2939156

Fuck idpol


 No.2939165

Article got already dealt with in the Cockshott general.


 No.2939175

Typical anarchist lmao


 No.2939176

>‘victories’ of socialist states in forcing sex workers to give up their craft

Wait, anarkids want to KEEP sex work after revolution? What the fuck.


 No.2939183

>morally correct position

>the position in support of open/no borders flows smoothly from considering things from the perspective of the individual

Stopped reading here lol. Oh anarkiddies


 No.2939189

>>2939176

sex “work” to begin with


 No.2939194

Because he is when it comes to the social sphere.

>big bad scary sex work

Lol the sky is falling.


 No.2939208

File: 2d1307f04217daf⋯.png (378.02 KB, 467x562, 467:562, 2d1307f04217daf974edf4fc36….png)

anarchists?…


 No.2939209

He has some shitty boomer takes on social issues but besides that no. Once again radlibs being dumb


 No.2939213

>>2939194

It's not that it's bad and scary but it's literally turning yourself into a commodity, there should be no need for anyone to do that in socialism.

If you really want to fuck a bunch of people or film your junk you can do that in your free time as a hobby.


 No.2939214

>>2939176

You want to force women at gunpoint to stop doing sex work and throw them in prisons for camwhoring? That sounds more like a "What the fuck" position.

We want to remove the capitalist incentives and injustices that force women to do sex work against their will. If they do it completely of their own volition, where's the fucking problem lmao


 No.2939218

>>2939213

>It's not that it's bad and scary but it's literally turning yourself into a commodity

You could apply this to anybody whose job is a performing some kind of service using their body, like an actor, athlete, bouncer, etc.

>>2939214

>You want to force women at gunpoint to stop doing sex work and throw them in prisons for camwhoring? That sounds more like a "What the fuck" position.

It sounds a lot like neoclassical economists getting mad when human behavior doesn't match the economic theory.

>We want to remove the capitalist incentives and injustices that force women to do sex work against their will.

This. People who do sex work out of desperation are picking a preference. Trying to stop them just makes their lives harder. If you get rid of the conditions that push them to do that out of desperation, the only people who do sex work will be willing, and then the only justification to stop them is either social conservatism or "camwhores are petty bourgeois." The anti-sex-worker stance is untenable. Yes, quasi-involuntary sex work is bad (you still have a choice to not have that income, but you're strongly incentivized to get the income), but if someone wants to be a professional at making people cum, who gives a shit? It's like being a professional barber. It's not a need per se, but it's better to take care of it, and there's skill involved so an expert could do it better than an amateur.

>If they do it completely of their own volition, where's the fucking problem lmao

There is the argument of camwhores being petty bourgeois, but they usually also do backend production for videos/streaming, which is way more work than it looks like. The problem here IMO is looking at it as renting your sexuality rather than as producing videography that happens to be erotic.


 No.2939248

>>2939218

>>2939214

The argument against prostitution is to avoid commodifying human bodies and intimacy. There is however nothing wrong with a informal gift economy where sexual favours are bartered for gifts. It's not about social conservatism it's about the economic mechanisms meant for efficiently managing productive forces, and this shouldn't invade the personal realm of people, at least not if we want to have a non alienated society.

prostitution in a market economy makes the banks the pimp

prostitution in a planed economy makes the planning system the pimp.

Socialist economies are planed economies, could you imagine having a ministry for brothels, having political debates of how much labour power should be diverted for this, how the "output" is distributed. Consider that one labour hour is one labour hour… So no heigh-end prostitute incomes.

There always is this the suspicion where superficial social causes are used to shoehorn market economics in to socialism.


 No.2939251

File: 7a656c3214eef20⋯.jpg (36.56 KB, 640x639, 640:639, stalin with no hair.jpg)

>>2939214

The abolition of intellectual property requires the abolition of camwhoring as well. Sorry madam but you're coming with the gulag with me


 No.2939256

>>2939214

>LOL what's the problem with generalized commodity production, bro? Respackting womang means we gotta let them commodity sex, bro. What's next, are you going to say that housing, healthcare, air and water shouldn't be commodities either? But what if you had a BLACK landlord, an INDIGENOUS doctor association creating private medical practices and a TRANSWOMAN laying claim to clean water sources to try to get people to pay them for water? Get fucking woke, bro, you fucking bigot!


 No.2939262

>>2939251

I'm opposed to intellectual property too. I don't see how that necessitates punishing people for being naked in front of cams.

>>2939256

>y-youre just an idpol radlib

I'm not saying sex should be a commodity, you retard. I'm saying you shouldn't force people at gunpoint to not exchange sex.

Decommodifying housing, healthcare and water isn't done by forcing people not to engage in exchange, it's done by abolishing private property and thus giving everyone access to these resources based on need.


 No.2939263

>>2939150

>A left market anarchist think tank

>Left

>Market anarchist

Isn't this an oxymoron? Like a big one.


 No.2939265

>>2939263

C4SS are just bleeding-heart ancaps


 No.2939268

>>2939263

not really.

there are markets, but no private property.

people only own what they use, so collectively operated ventures (like factories) are under collective ownership of the workers.

It keeps market exchange mechanisms, but prevents accumulation of capital and ensures workplace democracy.


 No.2939271

>>2939262

>I'm opposed to intellectual property too. I don't see how that necessitates punishing people for being naked in front of cams.

Yeah, in a real world scenario it's very unlikely that you would actually put Belle Delphine against the wall because she couldn't help but be a camwhore or whatever. But you would have to be openly hostile to people prohibiting the reproduction of goods in unlimited supply via artificially limiting this supply and charging rent for their usage, which is what camwhores generally do to make a living. In this sense Chaturbate-esque streams that make dosh via voluntary donations are a gray area, tho.


 No.2939272

>>2939268

heheheheheheheh read Poverty of Philosophy nigga


 No.2939273

>>2939262

>I'm not saying sex should be a commodity, you retard. I'm saying you shouldn't force people at gunpoint to not exchange sex.

That’s what a commodity is, a good or service produced for the purpose for exchanging it. If you sell sex (or “exchange” for it), you are engaged in commodity production through the commodification of sex.

>Decommodifying housing, healthcare and water isn't done by forcing people not to engage in exchange

No, that is precisely how you do it.


 No.2939280

>>2939262

> I'm saying you shouldn't force people at gunpoint to not exchange sex.

I have only seen this argument come from the most disabled of tankies. At no point did I notice anyone bring up this "liquidating brothels by force" scenario that you seem to be clinging to. Why do we need to constantly make the discussion on the relationship between the Communist movement and prostitutes a argument between the two poles of "beng a sex slave is progressive lmao!" and "prostitutes are lumpen proletariat that should be gulaged lmao!".


 No.2939281

>>2939209

This, you can fully adopt the program get set out in towards a new socialism without any of the dumb boomer social attitudes


 No.2939284

>>2939271

sure, stuff like private no-sharing snapchats would obviously be out the window, or have to be based on trust instead of IP law.

Donation-based camwhoring would be an option.

Again, I'm not saying that there is a right to cmawhore, and if Belle Delphine goes out of business due to socialist property law, so be it. I simply don't think you should stop people from camwhoring with force.

>>2939273

I know what a commodity is you autismo. Read the fucking post again.

>the thriving black market might be a sign the people's needs aren't met? nonsense!

>everyone to le gulag XD

you're LARPing as supreme leader while my USSR born and raised commie parents were listening to under the counter Pink Floyd records in 70s Russia


 No.2939286

>>2939280

Sure, I'm in favor of nuanced discussion and open to criticisms of sex work (I'm critical myself).

Hard to call it a strawman though when the comment directly above yours is one of those most disabled of tankies.


 No.2939290

>>2939248

>There always is this the suspicion where superficial social causes are used to shoehorn market economics in to socialism.

I didn't say anything about a market, although markets are not inherently capitalist. You could have sex be planned as a service. The state socialist objection to this is based on the notion that economic planning is done centrally. To an anarchist, there's nothing objectionable about a sex worker choosing to do sex work for those who "need" it and being credited for the labor (if law of value hasn't been abolished). If the planning for such a service is not centralized, the "commodification" question is moot. If anything this leads to a critique of central planning or state planning as opposed to decentralized planning. It's not hard to envision a situation where planning happens in different ways for different things. Just because industrial manufacturing and the like is managed by a state doesn't mean you couldn't have brothels structured like co-operatives that award labor vouchers by the state but the sessions are planned by the workers.

>The argument against prostitution is to avoid commodifying human bodies and intimacy.

If that's the argument then it's too late for capitalism, and in socialism where would the commodity be? The point is to abolish commodity production, isn't it? Services (including sex work) are already arguably not the same as commodities, since instead of properly entering a market the "product" is consumed as it is being produced. Rather than a good that is produced with the presumption that a certain quantity can be sold, services are produced to order, i.e. for direct use. The difference in a socialist economy would simply be that they are compensated in labor vouchers or something similar (if compensation is a factor). The fact that there are massive numbers of people posting nude self-photography or pornography online for free, I would argue that this industry is already in the process of communization.

>It's not about social conservatism it's about the economic mechanisms meant for efficiently managing productive forces, and this shouldn't invade the personal realm of people, at least not if we want to have a non alienated society.

Where is the line between "the personal realm of people" and everything else? If I do something as a hobby, it's personal, but if I get paid for it then it's my job. What makes sex different other than a particular intangible value placed on sex?

>prostitution in a market economy makes the banks the pimp

I would replace banks with market forces but ok.

>prostitution in a planed economy makes the planning system the pimp.

And what if the prostitutes are themselves doing the planning? This is again a problem with state socialism, the notion that planning must be alienated from the workers. This is why it's important to have people like Wolff talking about the internal structure of the production process and how planning can take place at that level.


 No.2939292

File: fc53f14eaa57d3c⋯.pdf (218.49 KB, Marx - Critique of the Got….pdf)

>>2939290

>>2939248

>Socialist economies are planed economies, could you imagine having a ministry for brothels,

Yes. I don't see the objection here beyond "ew gross." It would make sense for there to be some body that keeps track of sexual needs same as any other (often more ethereal) needs. If there isn't enough sex work relative to demand you could encourage people to get into having sex for a career. Behind these kinds of worries always seem to be this idea that people (women) don't like the idea of having sex, or having sex to get something. It's a common thing in (unhealthy) relationships, and if that kind of behavior was instead channeled into work it would remove the "exchange" aspect of sex from romantic relationships where it really doesn't belong. In socialism you'd presumably have a robust social safety net, so there'd be little pressure to engage in sex work you weren't comfortable with.

>having political debates of how much labour power should be diverted for this, how the "output" is distributed.

It's only a problem if you give the actual power to decide to the ministry and not the workers. It's funny how these concerns about autonomy only seem to apply with something like sex work and not any other labor.

>Consider that one labour hour is one labour hour…

Marx recognizes the problem with this. See Critique of the Gotha Programme:

<But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.

<But these defects are inevitable in the first phase of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society. Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby.

<In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and

society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

This is not a problem specific to prostitution. It's a general issue with labor. When you use arguments that apply to any form of labor it is just bolstering the case that sex work isn't meaningfully different from other work.

>So no heigh-end prostitute incomes.

"High-end" prostitutes tend to provide "escort" services, which are a completely different job than hooking up in a brothel. The bigger issue here would likely be that there are no longer very wealthy people who can afford to be sugar daddies.


 No.2939307

>>2939284

You said that you somehow wanted "decommodification" without abolition of exchange, which is a contradiction.

>le supreme leader gulag xD

Cockshott's whole thing is computers organizing the production and distribution of goods and services, which would, in fact, be better than markets in every conceivable way.

Also you're "USSR born and raised commie parents" had shit taste.


 No.2939318

>>2939307

Abolition of exchange doesn't necessarily mean forcing people to not engage in exchange. In fact, that's the least efficient and effective way to stop people from trading goods.

The far better method is to provide these goods to them in a better way than through market exchange, so commodity exchange stops being a necessity. Cybernetic planning, like Cockshott suggests, is one method to accomplish that.

Abolition of exchange doesn't automatically mean "forcing people not to trade".


 No.2939321

sex work is based though

how else are young people gonna get money to get expensive goods?


 No.2939373

What do you guys think of Charles Fourier's idea about prostitution under socialism? From what I understand the idea is that benevolant bands of prostitutes would service those who can't make it in the current sexual market and resocialize them. Maybe that's the solution.


 No.2939383

>>2939290

Markets will procedurally generate capitalism, socialism has to seek to abolish money market schemes.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQrEEdy_uwM

Anarchism has a theoretical flaw, namely it lacks the mathematical foundation for a decentralised system, as it currently stands all conceptions of decentralised systems will necessarily centralise, while there might be a solution to this, it is currently unknown. Anarchism would economically be a sophisticated barter system.

The objection to prostitution is that is commodifying the bodies of people, it is not a sex service, it's not about the act stimulating certain body-parts, it's far more brutal way of dehumanizing people that in a metaphorical sense is like a butcher that converts animals into different categories of meat products.

The next objection is the alienation of human intimacy in by economizing it, we do want to have a central planer that organizes the productive forces of societies in the most efficient way possible, because that still is a existential question. However we do not want to optimize and improve efficiency for intimate human relation, that would cause the alienation from the self. You speak the language of emancipation yet argue in the same direction as conservatives who seek to sell/buy women, with the notable difference that you only want to do it on a temporary basis rather than a permanent basis.

>there are massive numbers of people posting nude self-photography or pornography online for free, I would argue that this industry is already in the process of communization.

Nearly everything on the internet is platform capitalism, this is not communisation, this is primitive accumulation where data about people is like a resource that is being mined.

>I would replace banks with market forces but ok.

lol the insensible pimp!?

>And what if the prostitutes are themselves doing the planning? This is again a problem with state socialism,

States are the result of the technological inability to produce mobility of sufficient quality and scale for people to stop organizing in territorial units.

>the notion that planning must be alienated from the workers. This is why it's important to have people like Wolff talking about the internal structure of the production process and how planning can take place at that level.

The central planner performs the function of decentralizing wealth, Authority is used to enforce democratic decisions. Also Wolff argues for police enforced prohibition prostitution, al be it the kind that criminalizes the demand.

Like I said before there is nothing wrong with bartering sexual favours for material gains in a informal gift economy.

>>2939292

You are contradicting yourself on the point of wanting to both "encourage" the supply of prostitutes while at the same time wanting to have no pressure to engage in prostitution.

>See Critique of the Gotha Programme

No there is definitely not going to be any deviation from using labour time as a hard measurement, a hour of time is an hour of time, the differences in income will have to be facilitated by taxation and redistribution, preferably with a democratic mandate. Socialist economies cannot have mystification of relations of the type of having different time values.

>prostitution isn't meaningfully different from other work.

For once it'n not productive and as far as other objection go look the 2 paragraph above.


 No.2939388

>>2939251

That is pure utopianism. There should be no need or reliance on benevolence in general, it's like trying to solve poverty through private charity.


 No.2939399

File: c69b48dbd955d39⋯.jpg (44.91 KB, 850x400, 17:8, LeninHeWhoDoesNotWorlShall….jpg)

>>2939214

Sex “work” produces no value, thus it is not real work.


 No.2939411

>>2939399

>satisfaction of people's physiological and psychological needs is not value

woah, I guess therapists and psychiatrists don't do any real work as well then.

I guess you must live in a Soviet propaganda film then, where everyone is a stoic factory worker who does his work with machine-like discipline and endurance and has no sex drive.


 No.2939413

>>2939399

1) it absolutely does if it's not… "freelance"

2) no work will produce value in socialism. that's the whole point


 No.2939414

>>2939411

I always wondered what sex culture looked like in USSR


 No.2939416

>>2939150

>Paul Cockshott, the author of Towards a New Socialism, is essentially a NazBol.

What a way to start an article.


 No.2939418

>>2939399

>>2939413

>Milton, for example, who did Paradise Lost, was an unproductive worker. In contrast to this, the writer who delivers hackwork for his publisher is a productive worker. Milton produced Paradise Lost in the way that a silkworm produces silk, as the expression of his own nature. Later on he sold the product for £5 and to that extent became a dealer in a commodity. But the Leipzig literary proletarian who produces books, e.g. compendia on political economy, at the instructions of his publisher is roughly speaking a productive worker, in so far as his production is subsumed under capital and only takes place for the purpose of the latter’s valorisation. A singer who sings like a bird is an unproductive worker. If she sells her singing for money, she is to that extent a wage labourer or a commodity dealer. But the same singer, when engaged by an entrepreneur who has her sing in order to make money, is a productive worker, for she directly produces capital. A schoolmaster who educates others is not a productive worker. But a schoolmaster who is engaged as a wage labourer in an institution along with others, in order through his labour to valorise the money of the entrepreneur of the knowledge-mongering institution, is a productive worker.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1864/economic/ch02b.htm


 No.2939419

>However we do not want to optimize and improve efficiency for intimate human relation

I do. You are blinded by your position of privilege where it does not even enter your mind that some do not even have intimate relations because they are so unequally distributed.

>>2939388 for >>2939373


 No.2939428

>>2939419

Well in Fourier's vision it was sexual charity, but a state run firm dedicated to the service might work


 No.2939434

>>2939214

>Equating camwhoring with sex slavery that is the VAST majority of sex "work" globally.

Lol @ you disingenuous liberal cunt.


 No.2939495

>>2939434

Sex slavery is not voluntary sex work by definition. You wouldn't have to force women not to do it if they had the option.

I was expressly talking about voluntary, consentual sex work, and that forcefully punishing it is the wrong way.


 No.2939499

Tankism is right wing to us so its accurate.


 No.2939509

>>2939214

>socialist society

>profit

Pick 1


 No.2939538

>>2939499

Nazism is left wing to centrist so it's accurate.


 No.2939541

File: c26c444f082251f⋯.png (52.68 KB, 365x423, 365:423, 19af53ef00e88037fde1294b1a….png)

>>2939416

COCKSHOTT IS NAZBOL


 No.2939547

>open link

>"Paul Cockshott, the author of Towards a New Socialism, is essentially a NazBol. Everyone seems to ignore this, and I have no idea why. He is quite open about his hatred of gay men, sex workers, immigrants, and trans women — and his policy proposals are filled with horrific implications and unworkable ideas."

>close link


 No.2939551

>>2939214

>You want to force women at gunpoint to stop doing sex work and throw them in prisons for camwhoring?

yes


 No.2939552

I don't get where this idea came from where to be a socialist you have to stop being critical of social phenomenon. Like it's one thing to discriminate, but it's something else entirely to just criticize. I thought marxism was about criticizing everything?


 No.2939574

>>2939538

great analysis there dipshit


 No.2939577

Anarchist have think tanks?


 No.2939584

w*Sternoids were a mistake


 No.2939590

>>2939318

>lol the only way to stop capitalists from polluting the air to a point where it is no longer safe to breath and then selling people clean air canisters is for the state to pollute the air and cybernetically distribute the air canisters, otherwise you’ll just get an air black market.

Sex is normally free, you donut.


 No.2939618

>>2939590

Where's my free sex?


 No.2939628

>>2939618

just run "yum install sex"

If you get an insufficient permissions message, ask your sysadmin.


 No.2939630

>>2939590

>not paying for sex

t. retart


 No.2939636

>>2939411

>>2939413

>people need sex

Fuck off, sex workers not being sent into steel mills weakens the socialist state.


 No.2939645

>>2939628

run "sudo pacman -S sex" then map "exec sex" to $mod+shift+S so you can have sex whenever you want

i use arch btw


 No.2939646

>>2939577

this was the most confusing part to me as well


 No.2939657

>>2939628

>>2939645

Actually git clone or rsync it and make make install so you have the source code to configure any sex you want in the main.c file. Or "emerge sex" with savedconfig and kink use flag.

I've heard giving rim job while fucking vagina or kissing while boobjob is pretty kinky.


 No.2939674

File: 639eee9ecee7979⋯.webm (7.53 MB, 656x304, 41:19, Libertarias 1996.webm)

>>2939176

C4SS aren't anarcho-communists. They also want the market to remain.


 No.2939682

File: 5b3da3b43cb1416⋯.jpg (45.75 KB, 320x327, 320:327, 575-5755124_post-capitalis….jpg)


 No.2939695

File: 4082d978acc85ac⋯.jpg (39.97 KB, 645x729, 215:243, Brainlit2.jpg)


 No.2939701

File: 0f4338bb6e6c9ea⋯.png (44.94 KB, 879x454, 879:454, cockshott nk.png)

File: ff9c005a21d67d1⋯.png (193.35 KB, 1080x814, 540:407, cockshott assad quote.png)

File: ab36d4d8f2a0970⋯.png (117.41 KB, 577x404, 577:404, cochshott cw.png)

File: e12e404a74868ab⋯.png (769.86 KB, 1080x1005, 72:67, cockshott mao.png)

File: ca86e25053e8ad6⋯.png (395.8 KB, 1080x1045, 216:209, cockshott on muh gorillion….png)

>>2939194

They would label him as an evil reactionary tankie regardless of that.


 No.2939735

>>2939618

>>2939630

Legit, though, it’s like charging money for air. It’s something that is normally free if you want to do it.


 No.2939758

>>2939701

>>>>>>>>>Cockshott


 No.2939928

>>2939176

>craft

Lmao


 No.2939962

>>2939928

tfw you will never be crafting a sex in the femderation of femspiring self-fempowered femtrepreneurs

🥺🔫


 No.2940099

Can anyone name one thing that Cockshott has done wrong?


 No.2940169

>>2940099

he should shut up about gender because its irrelecvant


 No.2940174

C4SS is a pariah.

No Left Anarchist really takes them seriously.

They are at best there to convert An"Caps" and at worst they function to water down syndicalism into mutualism.

Hecc C4SS


 No.2940178

File: 53f70dc777d1d0b⋯.webm (7.64 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, anarcho liberalism.webm)


 No.2940189

Anarchists are retarded, more news at 11.

Also anyone calling cockshott a reactionary just because he is a terf is retarded in general. Just ignore his relatively unvoiced stances on trannies, damn.


 No.2940191

>>2940189

>he is a terf

He's not even a TERF, he;s just anti-idpol and he's objectively right about it. All that liberal shit is just taking away from the main issue - class struggle.


 No.2940193

>>2940191

No he is (or was, idk) quite litterally a member of a terf group and went out of his way to promote anti-trans propaganda and shit.

Being actively anti-trans is just as much idpol as making everything about being trans.


 No.2940221

>>2939218

<what's wrong with child labour? Do you deny human nature??


 No.2940242

>>2940193

He's said that it's retarded to have biological males sitting in a women's committee for abortion. That's not IdPol nor is it "going out of his way".


 No.2940253

File: 5d22d835d8142fa⋯.png (386.56 KB, 413x618, 413:618, Markets-Not-Capitalism-cov….png)

>>2940174

The fact that this is on their website tells you all you need to know about them.

https://store.c4ss.org/index.php/product/markets-not-capitalism/

>Individualist anarchists believe in mutual exchange, not economic privilege. They believe in freed markets, not capitalism. They defend a distinctive response to the challenges of ending global capitalism and achieving social justice: eliminate the political privileges that prop up capitalists.

>Massive concentrations of wealth, rigid economic hierarchies, and unsustainable modes of production are not the results of the market form, but of markets deformed and rigged by a network of state-secured controls and privileges to the business class. Markets Not Capitalism explores the gap between radically freed markets and the capitalist-controlled markets that prevail today. It explains how liberating market exchange from state capitalist privilege can abolish structural poverty, help working people take control over the conditions of their labor, and redistribute wealth and social power.

>Featuring discussions of socialism, capitalism, markets, ownership, labor struggle, grassroots privatization, intellectual property, health care, racism, sexism, and environmental issues, this unique collection brings together classic essays by leading figures in the anarchist tradition, including Proudhon and Voltairine de Cleyre, and such contemporary innovators as Kevin Carson and Roderick Long. It introduces an eye-opening approach to radical social thought, rooted equally in libertarian socialism and market anarchism.


 No.2940756

>>2940253

>leading figures in the anarchist tradition, including Proudhon and Voltairine de Cleyre

[Laughs in Kropotkin]

>and such contemporary innovators as Kevin Carson and Roderick Long

[Gags in Maletesta]


 No.2940786

>>2939263

No.

>>2939265

Fuck off.


 No.2940790

>>2939150

>a libertarian market socialist think tank claims a plan economist marxist is a reactionnary

Imagine my shock.


 No.2940792

>>2939416

I'm sure the author must lurks here or /leftpol/ or /anarcho/.


 No.2940805

>>2940792

I think that's unlikely. But he's certainly on twitter and also spams his article on reddit.


 No.2940817

>>2939150

I decided to check out some of the articles on gender they're bitching about and the first one I looked at is nigh incomprehensible . Which is bizzare, since usually Cockshott is so straight forward

https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2017/08/26/the-desire-for-a-convergence-of-heterosexuality/


 No.2940819

>>2940817

>Robotically constructed

Nevermind, that explains it


 No.2940885

>>2939150

>wahh, this guys has opions on social issues that most people agreed with in 2005

Oh no, the horror


 No.2940921

File: df16948e73afe2e⋯.gif (3.33 MB, 270x205, 54:41, 1522125252574.gif)

>>2940846


 No.2940990

I'm pretty sure c4ss is just the left-wing branch of Koch bros funded libertarian think tanks


 No.2941473

>>2940990

Agorism is pretty much Von Mises with Red on it


 No.2941498

Cockshott is a social reactionary and the article is right.

>>2939194

Though fuck prostitution. Socialism will make sex work obsolete.


 No.2941532

>>2939150

Dumbfuck new converts from /pol/ seem to have this idea in their head that the Paul Cockshott support was unironic.

He's a dumbass sperg who says dumbass sperg shit. That's why people "ignored" his homophobia. He was a meme.

This article seems to miss that, as do the people in this thread.

Basically his entire workbase is just an Econ and CS major reinventing existing theory and calling it new CS-major sounding shit.

This article offers no actual critiques of his position and instead just says shit like "lol paul is stupid". It's not wrong, but it's not really useful.

Let's take a look at this line from Paul: "the interests of gays tend to be aligned with that of the propertied classes"

Meanwhile a shitload of homeless youths are gay; after controlling for a number of factors associated with poverty, rates for Gay & Bi adults are higher than for heterosexual adults (williams institute), being the victim of a crime tied to poverty is much higher if you're LGBT in poverty and not cis-het in poverty, etc.

This reminds me of when /g/ unironically started thinking Stallman was a god, then when /g/ unironically started thinking Terry wasn't a dumbfuck retard.


 No.2941550

>>2941532

hi c4ss


 No.2941553

>>2941498

how will i get sex under socialism


 No.2941554

>>2941532

>I never read cockshott and have no idea what I'm talking about

ok


 No.2941741

>>2941532

>Dumbfuck new converts from /pol/ seem to have this idea in their head that the Paul Cockshott support was unironic.

No, Cockshott is the new Marx and every writing of his contains value.

>>2941553

By dating people.


 No.2941749

>>2941741

Why would they do that under socialism if they don't do it under capitalism?


 No.2941769

>>2941749

This is precisely where the argument goes into incel stuff.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / anita / b2 / dempart / fascist / kind / shota / tob / vichan ]