/int/ – No shittings during wörktime
„There is no place like home“

File (max. 4)
Return to
(optional)
  • Allowed file extensions (max. size 25 MB or specified)
    Images:  BMP, GIF, JPG, PNG, PSD   Videos:  FLV, MP4, WEBM  
    Archives:  7Z, RAR, ZIP   Audio:  FLAC, MP3, OGG, OPUS  
    Documents:  DJVU (50 MB), EPUB, MOBI, PDF (50 MB)  
  • Please read the Rules before posting.
  • Make sure you are familiar with the Guide to Anonymous Posting.

No. 9229
72 kB, 714 × 960
What's with SJW agenda lately? Why it's pushed so hard? Do megacorps want to get filled woth unqualified cheap workers in the name of diversity?
Several days ago they considered "master/slave" terms in Python offensive.
Now they accepted CoC in Linux kernel.
I don't think this is healthy behaviour.
>>
No. 9236
There is a whole generation of people who have no jobs, family or believe in God, they are currently in college or attended one.
They have Marxist values and virtue signal for social points, they do not socialise like before they do their socalising online with facebook or twatter.
They do not have a pension or a work ethic but they have a tattoo and an instagram.
Welcome to the demoralisation of the West.
>>
No. 9237 Kontra
nice kohl you have there

>>9236
>work ethic

So I should just agree on shit wages and shit jobs since I obviously have a problem with affirming capitalism and its politics?

You post is the real deal kohl here whereas OP just gives the low effort starter. This place is seen as a place without short meme buzz gratification dumbdown, no?
>>
No. 9238
>>9236
>>9236
> demoralisation of the West.
well it happens everywhere altough slowly.

>>9237
if you have shit wages maybe the problem is about you not the system, stop falling for victim complex.
>>
No. 9239
>>9237
If you don't like capatalism try serfdom.
>>
No. 9240
>>9237
Wait, shit wages now depend on calling faggots faggots?
For me such infoevents seem to be a noise to cover something a lot bigger. Slavery in, let's say, Dagestan hasn't ended because they stopped using somewhere words "master" and "slave". How long ago you have been called a slave on your work, though? That's it.
>>
No. 9241
>>9240
There is slavery in Dagestan?

Btw I think they also use master/slave language in engineering and mechanics when describing hydraulic systems
>>
No. 9242
>>9241
In North Caucacus republics. Periodically they report about people who got free after they were said gone missing.
You hear this nowadays less, hope that is so.
>>
No. 9245 Kontra
>>9239
>I'm bitter and resigned, where is my beers already?

>>9240
My post has not really anything to do with yours but only with HK sharing the mainstream depressive mentality of no future and better past, if not at all complete exhaustion and the fact he got crippled by the society he had to live in so far that he resigns to enduring the status quo.
He was memeposting on a kohl level and even tho I can understand some sentiments, his bitterness caused by swallowing the TINA-pill is the real illness that grapples down the west.
I always thought of him of being over 30 and I know many people in their early 20s have the same attitude. Their imagination is non existent, it has been removed over the last two decades.
Millenials fight for minor incidents mostly which is also very one sided and not far reaching

>>9238
stop falling for "the individual is responsible for everything" meme introduced by a neoliberalism that shuts down any solidarity and community thinking, basically what you guys cry over as the moral decline of western society, yet you want to continue at all costs if a "commi" comes around the corner. laughable.
also laughable to deny that people are forced in different ways, be it economically or socially, which you cannot just escape by will power. Just glossy shitchat, yes everybody can be the next Zuckerberg by will power, this definitely has nothing to with lucky circumstances, place of birth and childhood upbringing. People who say that are the ones who take things for granted as well which basically are not their social-economic background and their place of birth, and that's were they resemble with the people they critic: millenial vegan genderfluids showing of their tattoos on instagram.

and yes, the virtue signaling is strong. But becoming a bitter commentator on it won't help shit either. I refuse both, moral driven consumerism and bitter conservatism, probably both helping themselves over the status quo by making go the pain away with a little help of substances, really a great way to help the faltering west oh no, so sad, when is Elon inventing my personal time machine or at least one that gives you the virtual experience of it
>>
No. 9247 Kontra
>>9240
I agree and yet I think your starter has something that reminds me of kohl.
>>
No. 9250 Kontra
91 kB, 1080 × 720
>>9239
Capitalism is already becoming serfdom. Mentioning serfdom is a pretty great way to criticize Capitalism.

>>9236
You act like this is somehow restricted to leftism. The entirety of the alt right is a very good example of what people with no principles, virtues, or ethics looks like. Kektards are from the exact same pool of people only they're usually way less socialized with fewer friends than their counterparts and their lives genuinely revolve around shitposting.

>>9247
This. Learn how to post like a normal person ffs. Stop posting like such a complete retard. I only didn't ignore this thread because ernsts were having a discussion it seemed.
>>
No. 9253
>What's with SJW agenda lately?

It's just a clique of bored kids on the internet with no real agenda. Businesses have rarely exercised proportionality to letter campaigns as this interview with Rod Serling in 1959 illustrates and these days it's just a different faction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQlqjONEsKQ

None of this is especially new and to be honest with you I don't think anyone should be too concerned in the grand scheme of things. Dumb ideas will fail horribly and both sides of this debate will grow up into the new ethical-consumer middle class.

>Do megacorps want to get filled woth unqualified cheap workers in the name of diversity?

They'll pay whatever lip-service is needed to stop angry letters but you'd be a fool to think they will ever sacrifice the bottom line for it. Watch how quickly things change when nobody cares.

>>9236
>They do not have a pension or a work ethic but they have a tattoo and an instagram.

How horrifying. Why can't they be more like the noble counter-culture generations before like hippies, punks and imageboard users?
>>
No. 9256 Kontra
>>9253
>>Do megacorps want to get filled woth unqualified cheap workers in the name of diversity?
>They'll pay whatever lip-service is needed to stop angry letters but you'd be a fool to think they will ever sacrifice the bottom line for it.
Key word: cheap

Who do you think wants these workers to begin with? Do you think the megacorps give a fuck about any consideration other than money? Do you think they want to deal with high pay, benefits, and paying pensions for native born workers? Fuck no and that's a big part of why outsourcing happened. People like to talk about immigrants but mysteriously clam up about outsourcing because "muh markets" well guess what this isn't some sort of Marxist or SJW or whatever the fuck retarded conspiracy, this is just how Capitalism actually works. The idea that you can "protect muh people hurr 14 words" with Capitalism in place is fucking absurd.
>>
No. 9257
>>9229
So they want to fuck me in the Arch.

Sad.
>>
No. 9259
>>9256
We're specifically discussing diversity here, Tovarich.

Diversity hiring is primarily a 'face' issue where organisations must look as if they're addressing problems like inequality. Emphasis on look because even it's most vocal followers raise issue with starting position but try to correct that at the finishing line. Needless to say I’m sceptical both because it’s a plaster to cover social mobility crises and because the important people, the executives and project leads somehow remain “male and pale”.
>>
No. 9260
They behave like cancer, like every cancer it's only purpose is thriving by growth which is again (for a social cancer) only possible by infiltrating new domains regularly.
>>
No. 9266 Kontra
>>9260
Thy just another dumb fashion like hippies.
And this thiread have danger to become actual cancer if it not already
>>
No. 9273 Kontra
>>9257
Du hast den schönsten Arch der Welt.
>>
No. 9276 Kontra
>>9259
And that is also what sells now. Like you pointed out, the actual shot callers remain unaffected and it still serves to mask other things like true inequality and social mobility. Corpos don't care about social issues they care about making money. If there's a huge market demand for "organic" produce, or for gluten free bread, or for "cruelty free" soap, or for "green" packaging, then companies are going to do it just to sell more shit. A million nutcases screaming on their PR page is what they usually want to avoid. This is likewise the thing with say queer issues. It's not because the CEOs give a flying fuck about it, nor even because gays and particularly trannies make a truly significant market demographic, but because their friends do. This means enough people give a shit that they may consciously switch from one brand to another just because they're butthurt about something. The one interesting case along these lines is Nike because you have angry trumptards burning their sneakers now but let's be honest here, Nike's huge demographic is black people and they probably had more to lose by pandering to the kinds of people who buy Carhart and boots instead of Nike sneakers anyway. This is purely market forces responding to social cues. Like clearly McDonald's doesn't give two fucking shits how many animals suffered and died or whether you're getting fat but they'll still offer the fuggin salad just due to market forces. I even knew someone who's a strict vegetarian who started eating at Burger King just because they offered veggie burgers. Refused to even eat gelcap medication because it had gelatin which is from rendered cartilage, but still ate the damn veggie burger almost guaranteed to be soaking in animal fat from the griddle and still ended up giving money to a slaughterer of the world. This is why companies do the shit they do.
>>
No. 9281 Kontra
>>9273
Now a melody is rumbling in my head, I cannot nail it down but I will not youtube that song and find out what was popular trash during my mid/latish teens
>>
No. 9283 Kontra
The unhealthy tendencies we're facing will have (or already are having) a massive backlash. Youths will get tired of it or already tired of it, will crush most of this shit and become reactionaries. The next revolt will be lead by young men without fathers, love and a perspective in life. It's safe to say that 20th century fascism will be considered a joke compared to what is awaiting us.
>>
No. 9286
>>9245
> "the individual is responsible for everything" meme introduced by a neoliberalism
the very base of your argument is completely false not to mention you use the word neoliberalism as buzzword.
>>
No. 9290
REEEEEEEEEEE!
leftypol
Talk about forum sliding
>>
No. 9309 Kontra
>>9286
so whats false in that? you said the problem is the individual and I say it's not responsible for everything, therefore it is not the problem in all cases. You did not even comment on my argument with the socio-economic background and people taking it for granted while spouting big words about how they worked so hard as if it included the work of their parents and grandparents.
neoliberalism fosters indivduation and cracks down on social security. Perhaps Turkey never had it.
The west lost its sense for community thanks to making people rival on private levels, which is what neoliberalism does.
>>
No. 9314
>>9309
>>9309
>problem is individual
the thing is you said this kind of view is invented by neoliberals which is objectively %100 false.

And in Turkey gov only back you up if you're some kind of criplle, people complain about poorness here but as long as you have a family they'll back you up better than western welfare. I dislike many aspects in this country but this one is solidly better in my opinion. Dependency on the state makes worse and it empowers the state enough to disturb our everyday life. The 'free' hospitals and shit like that only empowered the dictator not the everyday citizens, but of course you can blame the government not the social welfare systems, I'm just saying.

>the west lost it sense as community
well, because you rely on your state now not your family or any community.

>you did not even comment about my socio economic background
well because what's the point? as you said according to me it's your personal problem. I don't care about your ranting about luckier born people either.
>>
No. 9322 Kontra
>>9314
>the thing is you said this kind of view is invented by neoliberals which is objectively %100 false.

Never said that, it just shoves every responsibility on the individual, it did not invent the concept of it.

>well, because you rely on your state now not your family or any community.

I doubt welfare is the cause for people giving a fuck over each other, the state hate is a common dominator.

I think your very attitude is what fosters such decline
>don't care bro unless it affects me the I will rant as well and look out for the causation

Family will still help you out, I cannot complain that my family is cold-hearted, it is quite the opposite. This is not what people have in mind when they talk about decline.

But people will give fuck about others that are foreign to them, just like you do. It's all about YOU and perhaps your family but that is not community but family. Because everything that goes beyond family is the other with his/her personal problems. Pretty much a neoliberal impetus you have internalized.
>>
No. 9325
>>9322
>Never said that
you said
>"the individual is responsible for everything" meme introduced by a neoliberalism

>don't care bro unless it affects me the I will rant as well and look out for the causation
if I care I'll also care about your everyday decisions, you want others be responsible from you yet you or let's say generally people share same view with you are bitching when you meddle with their affairs.

I'm not saying fuck you, I say fuck you if you want me to responsible from you yet I'll not able to affect your life otherwise. I'm a person, not a cow to milked and will get thrown away when not needed. Actions have consequenses if you want others to be responsible you'll give them rights about your life which will ruin social liberal utopia. No rights, no responsibility, end of the story.

>Pretty much a neoliberal impetus you have internalized.
I'm not liberal in any way. Work on your guessing skills.
>>
No. 9349 Kontra
>>9325
introducing something is not the same as founding a concept, like as in origin, tho I want to know from what its historic predecessor is

>you want others be responsible from you yet you or let's say generally people share same view with you are bitching when you meddle with their affairs.

??

>Actions have consequences if you want others to be responsible you'll give them rights about your life which will ruin social liberal utopia

Indeed they have, and that is where my responsibility ends when some things happen. If somebody crashes into your car, because he was speeding and lost control over his car raming into you on the other side of the road and you are paralyzed until death, it not your fucking fault but the drivers. You then can decide to kill him or be a recluse sitting in his wheelchair all day watching the people outside walk by. Yet it's not your felt you ended up in that situation, it was not in your responsibility, every personal choice afterwards might be.

So are you some anarcho who thinks getting into your niche is the answer and then every thing else does not matter because everybody is free to follow?
It seems you oppose the state and hierarchy. Or are you some ancap guy?

>I'm not liberal in any way.

uhm, you advocate individual freedom here
>>
No. 9352
>>9349
|introducing something is not the same as founding a concept
yet you are still wrong as neoliberals are not the ones introduced it. assuming you actually meant to say introducing of course.

>et it's not your felt you ended up in that situation, it was not in your responsibility, every personal choice afterwards might be
you completely miss the point I'm not even talking about things like that yet alone opposing it.

>you advocate individual freedom here
if you support welfare, you are a communist tier logic here.

>ancap
dear dog no
>>
No. 9353
>>9322
>it just shoves every responsibility on the individual

I'm ripping that out of context.
What's about that? I'd LOVE to have the choice to save up to 50% of my earnings by not paying social insurances.
Certainly, I'd pay a big chunk, but I would just pay for what I(!) think is necessary and it would not be conceiled tax.

But, well, if you don't pay it at all, you are fucked, murrica style.
>>
No. 9357 Kontra
>>9352
I just typed a long text but got a time out. So I will just ask, what point it was you wanted to initially make about responsibility in connection to the behavior of complex systems like your socio-economic and globally connected socities, in which according to you, one cannot be the victim of circumstances, which was my claim in the beginning of it all and you said I should not fall for that.

also let me quote Thatcher
>And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours

The funny thing is the first two sentences can be derived from your previous posts as well and yet you claim to not have an neoliberal impetus.
what is its historic predecessor then? But anyway you can still define neoliberalism like I did and it has been agreed on by many and that is where you might see that this thinking actually affected you, maybe only passively, neoliberalism is not some offensive nazi or soviet propaganda.
The neighbor thing is rather cynical when you see people compete with their neighbors in status related things like they are on some market to sell themselves as the best to whomever or whatever

>>9353
And why do know what is necessary? Really not so dispassionate or on common ground.
>>
No. 9362
>>9239
That's not a great argument. Imagine that bank gives your family means of production instead of money as loan and than you pay them interest for several generations. Then bank can resell your loan to another bank. Serfdom is just a capitalism in agrarian society and i described how serfdom appeared after the decline of slavery.
>>9256
>cheap
>Do you think they want to deal with high pay, benefits, and paying pensions for native born workers?
Currently big corps are just more interested in a developing countries, since consumerism in usa and europe is quite exhausted. So they pay a lot, but to less skilled workers abroad.
>>
No. 9370
>>9357
>>9357
> in which according to you, one cannot be the victim of circumstances
I have to assume you either joking or you are some kind of illeterate.

I didn't said not even implied societies didnt exist. I said or atleast subtly said societies exist BUT if you want your burden carried over by others expect their intervention to your life. You empower them and they have no intention to stay weak or lets say they will be intervening. You can't just ask people for help and fuck off they are not your family, when society has the attitude of care&share they'll care you more than enough to impose their views. If you still don't get this I don't know how to tell you.

>what is its historic predecessor then?
if you mean simply being a non intervening person normal liberalism, you can even trace it back to tribalistic times because dying or suffering sometimes or quite often seen as neccesary for various reasons. So in a sense it exist for thousands of years. Of course I'm talking about 'letting it go' not full blown liberalism.

> can still define neoliberalism like I did
you can't just change words meaning like that.

> it has been agreed on by many
no offense but I've seen much more retarded things agreed upon. Let's just say the amount of people agreed with you is irrelevant.

And I don't know why are quoting thatcer. Thatcer says there is no society stop depending on the state. I say you can be dependent on the state or your family, who ever you'll dependent on, they will eventually control your life. They get some responsibility now they think they have rights about decisions in your life regardless if this is true or not which in my opinion it can be true in some extend.
>>
No. 9373
Get woke - go broke
>>
No. 9374
>>9373
I think on some level that's what the hippies were actually going for "turn on tune in drop out". Likewise I feel the same about certain aspects of say Sovereign Citizens movement. I'd like to find a way to just burn my social security card and travel the country among a network of people who've wholeheartedly rejected this society, although I am sure everyone from the IRS to whomever would try kicking down doors just for us having the audacity of wanting to live off the land and not bother anyone nor be bothered by anyone. I'm pretty sure at this point that you'd basically have to go either to the middle of Montana, middle of Alaska, or somewhere in California to do that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCs5RBNKWMI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vVCSUafFVI
>>
No. 9388
>>9370
Then we talk about different things all the time.

it's not about my personal burden here, it is about people with responsibility, be it Thatcher or Erdogan or in another sense: an abstractum like capitalism that has control over your life, your are dependent from it even tho you didn't even choice to give rights to "it", that is my problem. you are depedent from wage labor if you are not someone who has some share holds or whatever and let money work for you.

what you basically seek is a society, where nobody has control of anybody else, so some kind of anarchy with kinship and all?

views will be imposed on you even in a society that is not care&share, like we have today...too bad the state is not an antagonist to capital.

>you can't just change words meaning like that.

I did not change the meaning, neoliberalism implies increased burden and pressure on the individual on different levels, you have to present yourself on markets, precarious working contracts make you struggle to make ends meet in a society that is not about care or share anymore but about canis canem. all that you want, we already have it but the control is not gone, neoliberalism is also increased bureaucracy, thing of all the feedback shit which means pressure you have in enterprises, all the middle management positions

>no offense but I've seen much more retarded things agreed upon. Let's just say the amount of people agreed with you is irrelevant.

Have you even read anything about that it or do you just like to call it free market society? It is argued for in the end on not just agreed.
>>
No. 9663
>>9241

>There is slavery in Dagestan?

They definitely have forms of servitude and bonded labour where poor and badly educated workers become victims of extreme exploitation. There is a documentary on youtube about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X199Of0qoSM
>>
No. 9695
36 kB, 500 × 375
>>9229
>pic
wait, isn't boyfriend/girlfriend gender-neutral?

gender != sex

it took me a long time to realize, that "gender" is some "self"-feeling about the state of your own mind, not your actual sex. we do not have anything like that concept in our language. always thought it is a synonym for "sex".

and "girl" or "boy" is a word referring to the sex of a human. nothing to do with gender. therefor the terms are gender-neutral.

or am i missing something?

i feel like i cannot untangle the logic behind this gender-bender-thinking. is there any logic? or just feelz?

sry for bumping in
>>
No. 9726
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lmvX00TLY

Going to college was a big mistake if I was young again I'd run away from those hipster shits