Certified classical fascist and neo-nazi

Proud zionist, loves war and capital

Also hates stalkers

  • 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 20th, 2025

help-circle

  • Why? US foreign policy hasn’t changed since manifest destiny so threats to attack are literally nothing new, it’s still ““aiding”” a lot of western countries with stationed soldiers in case some countries outside the western bloc decides to attack, nuclear tests is a bit more iffy after the cold war, but can easily be justified by wars breaking out, trade war isn’t in the interests as well given how they have a very large economy and losing American products from all their companies would be horrible (imagine all the tech for instance)…

    There’s genuinely no reason to cut ties with US for any country, doing so would just shoot it in the foot since you lose one of the largest economies for trade.



  • When we’re talking raw resources that can potentially be turned into things needed to provide for the people, then yes there is easily enough. Today you have a lot of people living on a subsistence level, but also a ton of potential arable land, resources to be mined, production to be refocused that can provide for said people.

    However, unless we get rid of capitalism (tired trope but hopefully I can provide substance below), then even in the best case scenario of how capitalism can develop from here on will this idea of “providing for everyone” remain impossible.

    The main issue here isn’t “the rich” or them not being taxed (which others blame in the thread), but how capitalist mode of production fundamentally organizes production - goods aren’t produced to satisfy human needs (use value), but strictly for profit (exchange value) as commodities, to be bought and sold.

    If you have millions of malnourished lower-class people and a million middle and upper strata demanding more luxuries, the latter’s demand will always be prioritized while the former’s will until things get desperate that production for them finally leads to desired margins and profit rates. Why produce cheap commodities whose main buyers have very limited purchasing power (therefore a low cap on growth) when a business can produce a commodity that turns more profit and whose buyers are more wealthy, leading to more potential growth?

    That’s not to mention overproduction, the need of a reserve army of labor which are unemployed people kept on a brink of poverty to compete in the labor market to keep wages down and therefore profit up, and many other funny things. To change this fundamentally, one would have to ditch production for profit and instead replace it with production to satisfy human needs via economic planning - anything short of that is not enough and results in “capitalism coated in X”.







  • Yeah, it’s your personal responsibility to vote for the “good” candidate, with voting for the “bad” candidate being an individual’s moral and mental failure as opposed to it being caused by shifting material conditions, crises or simply just failure of liberal political side to garner enough support or them targeting only the affluent middle-class intelligentsia.

    Why don’t everyone just vote for the good guys, are they stupid?