International Politics

>>5890
TED KACZYNSKI

>>5889
comparing AnCapitalism to communism is so stupid. Statism is more utopic than AnCapitalism will ever be, only one of them asks for perfect humble beings who rule with a heart of gold. AnCapitalism doesn't requires perfect humans nor bad humans, it only requires humans. Crime and violence will always exist, you just need an ideology that maximizes progress while minimizing coercion. That ideology is AnCapitalism.

>>5882
>good society is when rampant corruption and I kill people who I disagree with
Good society is when everyone has their fixed place and function, under a common religion or at least culture resulting in a vaild sense of purpose. Such as medieval Europe or ancient Greece and Rome, before they were destroyed by degenerate individualism. They were not afraid of coercion or NAPs in organizing their lives.

>>5887
>the more liberal, the more we advance
Liberals are in power almost everywhere on the west. It causes it's degradation, in Europe and in the New World, what is more noticable.
>Don't mix liberalism with progressism, two different things
It's the same thing, differences are miserable for an actual rightist.
>The best nations in the world are the ones closest to AnCap ideals
Hallucinated it award. I wonder, how exactly do you measure how good nation is?
>Europe was capitalist, it exchanged it for Social-Democracies, and it is now filling up with arabs and stagnating economically, soon China will overtake them
Europe was imperial but then leftists(liberals, commies, socialists, nazis etc) seized more power and now we're here.
>Sad decay of a statist population who forgot what it means to be an individual
A clear example what happens if you let leftist too much of control.

>>5892
>AnCapitalism doesn't requires perfect humans nor bad humans, it only requires humans.
Impossible. Being yourself as a faith is not considered as an ideology that could maintain the balance of the state. Everyone has different feelings and behavior as good and bad. And to accept as a single feeling, then it still won't be considered as anarchy, much less capitalism

>>5892
>only one of them asks for perfect humble beings who rule with a heart of gold
That is something that we, ziggers, call "PEREFORS". Ruszaryan, do you know how to translate it in English?

>>5893
>Such as medieval Europe or ancient Greece and Rome, before they were destroyed by degenerate individualism
Stop this, you don't have to simp over the hive to be conservative.

>>5895
There is no state idiot, that is the point
>>5894
every liberal nation is failing? The US is doing amazingly well, just like it has been doing for the last 200 years as the most liberal nation in the world (liberal = libertarian)

>>5898
>The US is doing amazingly well
Not like US isn't a superpower but... Guys, should we tell him?

>>5899
you bastards don't understand that any of your goals are unachievable through the state. The state is nothing more than the perfect tool for corrupt elites to aggress the common folk and keep themselves in power. The less state, the better; this way, some leftist from California won't be able to completely influence your life with a vote. It is simple.

>>5900
>there is no state idiot
>The United States is doing amazingly well
...

>>5901
I never claimed the US was AnCap dumbfuck

>>5902
>>5865

>>5903
>the closest
>but none of them get close, really
why are ziggers so illiterate?

>>5900
Lenin, log in.

>>5904
Then why did you mention America if he has states?
>but its just a country name o algo

>>5906
>America is he/him now
Geg

>>5907
wait, are there 3 russians again?

>>5906
??????????????????????????????????????? oh my god this zigger is so retarded its insane KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK no way bro said this

>>5908
No, its just me

>>5909
You said this:>>5898

>>5911
>>5898
>found a bug award

>>5906
for the sake of truth, he said that US are a closest thing to ancap, but still isn't close enough o algo

>>5912

state
/stāt/
a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.
"Germany, Italy, and other European states"

im not talking about whether a country has states or provinces you retarded zigger

Which states are the blackest in Brazil?

or federative units o algo

>>5915

>>5917
>I live in the rich part of Brazil
Definitely Salvador

>>5918
probably

/Brabant/ election results.

>>6248

>>6248
No way there’s 50 people who use the Zarty

>>6250
evendoe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule

>>6251
Yeah there definitely are lurkers, however I think that on the Zarty the ratio between lurkers and posters is more balanced than 99 to 1, posting and replying is a large component of what makes the Zarty fun.

>>6249
All of them are leftists btw

>>6249
fixed it for you

>>6263
All of them are leftists again btw

>>6263
>capitalism is leftist

>>6267
It is

>>6270
the left-right divideis socialism-captialism, capitalism IS the right wing slavdog... you're thinking of liberalism vs totalitarianism

>>6272
>the left-right divideis socialism-captialism
Who will tell him?

>>6273
I'm right you mongoloid

>>6263
All of them are modern and therefore cannot stop the devastation of liberalism.

itt: people once again fail to place every ideology on a one-dimensional axis

>>6282
tsmt, the term 'right wing' in common sense day language and not some soyence peer reviewed "definition" encompasses so many different ideologies that can conflict with each other, that the term loses any value other than being a very very simple label.

>>6283
This classification is much better than simple left-right distinction (even though it includes it), but what should be done imho is to prepare a sufficiently comprehensive questionnaire, give it to many people of different ideologies and then try PCA on the answers set.

>>6273
I will take the burden of educating my fellow unwashed brown masses
>>6272
capitalism and socialism are both liberal revolutionary concepts, aka leftoid nonsense
What (You)'re thinking of is reddit political compass memes

>>6284
I think even usual square political coordinates represent reality better than this something. Lenin is more left than Trotsky(???), Czarism is about 100% absolutism(evendoe czars had to balance between their ideas and nobility), Hitler is close to absolutism(???????), you can't be republicanist and a darwinist at the same time(????????????????) etc.
>>6285
Holy TRVKE that saved Europe and Christianity.

>>6278
>Anarcho-Capitalism is moderate
obsessed rotten mindbroken by bbc frenchie brain
>>6283
right wing is capitalism, left wing is socialism, tell me an ideology and I'll place it in this axis and explain why. AnCaps are far-right, Fascists are center-left, Communists are far-left

>>6286
>Lenin is more left than Trotsky
whatever, they're both dead
>czars had to balance between their ideas and nobility
the struggle for power and possibility of a coup is always there, we are talking about ideological postulates, not how well they were implemented in practice
>Hitler is close to absolutism
fuhrerprinzip
>you can't be republicanist and a darwinist at the same time
you can't, the concept of human rights doesn't allow that in fullness

>>6284
this looks really retarded, it still has the exact same problems as the original PC has. It clumps up totally contradictory ideologies in the left-right divide, you might as well not have that divide at all. At least it gets rid of fake ideologies such as Anarcho-Communism or Authoritarian-Capitalism

>>6285
revolutionary-conservative has got nothing to do with left-right you braindead mongrel

>>6289
classification of ideologies based on tradeoffs between three values makes much more sense than "everything I don't like is left wing"

>>6290
Says you, the graduate from reddit.
It's quite literally exactly what it means. Kill yourself.

>>6291
okay? Not my point. Remove the left-right divide completely, it is meaningless in that framework. Any definition of the left-right divide that clumps together literal Anarchists and Absolutists is retarded. The Capitalism-Socialism one is the best, but it also doesn't really fit that triangle. Honestly, now that I look deeper into it, I think it's ok. The labels and position of figures/nations is REALLY retarded though; look at China, for example

>>6293
>Remove the left-right divide completely
You can ignore it and that's what you should do, it is meaningless and always boils down to "this is bad according to my moral framework"

>>6293
>The labels and position of figures/nations is REALLY retarded though; look at China, for example
I agree with this one, it's communist only in name

>>6292
you're such a stupid mongrel, wow. meanings change and evolve over time, the socialist-capitalist one is consistent, always. The one you propose is useless is any modern political sense; tradition is linked only to a small niche of retarded conservatives without any real economic or political-structure values, while equality can mean anything you want depending on what you believe to constitute true equality. The historical roots are irrelevant for our discussion you stupid mongrel

>>6294
If you are really keen on having those labels, they should look like this:

>>6295
China is pretty much Fascist, which is why they're not a complete shithole; Fascism is bad, but it is still 10x better than Communism

>>6296
>words don't mean what they were originally coined to mean, they mean whatever shitty reddit memes tell me they mean
What are you, 14 and down syndrome?

>>6296
You admit that the meaning of left and right are fluid throughout time and context.
You insist upon left and right being determined by economic framework, however the contemporary meanings of left and right are not solely defined by economic systems, furthermore ideology is not reducible to a single aspect.
It does not matter what definition academics come up with for a term, what matters is how people use the term in real life. In real life left and right aren't only about economic systems, but about an ideology as a whole.
That being said, I believe left-right is too simplistic to fully encapsulate ideology, although it can be useful to determine enemy-friend distinction in some cases.
If you want to have clear communication you should use the terms socialist-capitalist instead, however you use left-right because that has more moral weight to people compared to socialist-capitalist.

>>6301
TSMTNVKE

>>6300
kys mongrel
>>6301
fair. I agree honestly, but I still believe pushing the left-right distinction as socialism-capitalism is worth it. The left-right dichotomy will not die anytime soon, and it is currently used in the mainstream as right = everything bad for the neoliberal status quo, and left = everything useful-idiot-like for the neoliberal status quo. The right-wing fascism and nazism narrative has established itself on people's head definitively, so they now use it to attack capitalism as analogous to nazism or some other retarded collectivist shit like that (some even go as far to claim that Stalin was capitalist), so pushing something as consistent and easy as the socialism-capitalism division into the left-right divide is worth it in the end

>>6301
> furthermore ideology is not reducible to a single aspect.
although this is pretty irrelevant and doesn't go against anything I've said.
> In real life left and right aren't only about economic systems, but about an ideology as a whole.
which is why we should change it, and the left-right dichotomy does not stem exclusively from top-down or bottom-up action, its current form is only useful for retarded neoliberals and progressists

>>6288
>whatever, they're both dead
And? Who cares if they're dead, was more right and adaptive than people thing. Evendoe he was a homosexual.
>we are talking about ideological postulates
Then czarism isn't even an ideology, that's just the word commie use to say "monarchy is le bad"
>fuhrerprinzip
>we will place people at coordinates not because of their deeds, but because of what they say.
>you can't, the concept of human rights doesn't allow that in fullness
Republicanism isn't about human rights though. It's about election, no matter who or how elects.

>>6296
>meanings change and evolve over time, the socialist-capitalist one is consistent, always
Jesus Christ, socialist-capitalist one is consistent even though it was made up by bunch of leftists in 19th century and never was correct. Let's make it more clear: everything that goes against traditional foundation is revolutionary and leftist. "Capitalism" itself, in the definition of a market economy, isn't left but if you trying to push your liberal degenaracy labeled as "TRVE capitalism" it will still remain a liberal degeneracy.

>>6309
I meant consistent as in it works-consistent, not consistent throughout time as a concept.
> Let's make it more clear: everything that goes against traditional foundation is revolutionary and leftist
subjective. How far back would you trace that foundation? Let's say you set it at the birth of the left-right divide; this would mean 99.999% of the population nowadays is leftist
>but if you trying to push your liberal degenaracy labeled as "TRVE capitalism"
??? A market economy requires freedom, freedom allows degeneracy as long as it doesn't infringe on other's rights

>>6310
>I meant consistent as in it works-consistent, not consistent throughout time as a concept.
Still never worked in fact, one dimension is not enough to describe an ideology.
>subjective. How far back would you trace that foundation?
It doesn't goes back, it goes right. We still have the same traditions, only details change.
>Let's say you set it at the birth of the left-right divide; this would mean 99.999% of the population nowadays is leftist
No, I don't need to set it at the birth of the left-right devide. As I have said, we still have the same traditions. Anyone, who declines it and tries to find something new is leftist. Those, who accept it and build their nation in accordance with tradition are rightists.

>>6311
>dimension is not enough to describe an ideology.
no one's describing an ideology zigger
>it goes right.
zigger die
>tradition
whose tradition you dictate? Again, it is subjective. That left-right divide is the ziggerest shit ever, its awful

>>6312
>no one's describing an ideology
What the fuck then you mean by left\right? That's a political system.
>whose tradition you dictate?
Every ethnic group has its traditions, oh my God, how brainwashed lefties can be
>Again, it is subjective.
>No, in this left\right devide I will be a leftist and I want to call myself right so u wrong. Mmmmmmm macaco soup, yum yum.

>>6310
>this would mean 99.999% of the population nowadays is leftist
No you dimwit. People live under governments, of which you could say 99% are leftist (most countries are some sort of facade democracy), and as people can only politically operate within the purview of the government they're under, they can only engage in leftist governance (voting, running for elections etc.) But that doesn't mean right wing positions can't be had within this purview. Anything championing tradition, even within leftist governing bodies, is right wing.

>>6314
both can be true at the same time you retarded fuck

>>6315
>ou algo

nah cause have this shit on the website was confusing and it took an hour to know what all of them met

(i took National socialist for Denmark?? :3333).