Spread the word
ktt2.com/americana-32522224

its just ktt dude block him

oh i thought saturday made the thread lol

Nah tell him keep my name out his mouth if he’s not gonna engage

lmfao the transphobe in the other thread killed me with the "you link everything to capitalism like it's the name of the sociopolitical system we live under or something"

Glad the sanctions are off Venezuela but it's funny to see some leftists go "🤗🥳 omg new Chevron oil drilling facility in Venezuela!"

Maoist schoolboy be like "I hate phySSics homeworKKK"

My mom said Mandela might have f***ed up by not having a "final solution" to the white south african problem

The the Maoist International Movement was the best at this s***

Nothing disgusts me more than conservatives from the global south justifying any form of oppression in their own country as "their culture"

Like when Haile Selassie defended slavery as "Ethiopian culture" that typa s*** disgusts me fr

the democratic party unironically needs a great purge

The USA is the culmination of a society driven by socially Darwinian, hyper-competitive individualism; it produces an unprecedented degree of social atomization and a lack of social commonality, and by extension less empathy.

I'm not one to appeal to 'empathy' as the issue, however, as I believe that its absence is merely a byproduct of everything else and not the primary, or foremost, driving force, BUT, when this absence of empathy is read as a symptom of something bigger, such a lack indicates a disconnect from each & every one human to another that extends beyond the basic alienation of personhood and instead relates to an alienation from society which is paradoxically conditioned within society itself. In other words, people don't feel as 'a part' of the very same society which produces them, and as a consequence everyone scorns everyone else without any second consideration.

The final outcome of all this is an all-permeating attitude which effectively dehumanizes each real person found behind the function of their labor, and so, each individual is recognized only in a decontextualized sense, one which only concerns their labor power, like meat-machines relating solely to the ultimate purpose of provisionary utility.

The most disturbing, eschatological implication of this, then, is that even sectors such as 'therapy' etc. don't actually give a s*** about you or anyone else when it comes to your deepest ends, rather, the interest is rendered under a purely economizing framework, devoid of fundamental co-humanity; 'getting better' = productive functionality, psychiatrically administered meds = zombifying the physical body as if it were one's whole being so that the subject can produce, so that it can work, without any concern for the socially mediated context in which said labor occurs. It is extraction. Theoretically, there's nothing wrong with this 'fixation' on labor, but the problem is that the operations herein are socially devoid and that they estrange each person from each other person to a degree that exceeds and accentuates the basic alienation we already enter into the world with.

Thus, America has no coherent sense of community, in its vacuous stead, it feigns the appearance of meaningful relations only through various disintegrating niches, polarities of consumer-microcosmic-reified identity–any 'real' community is indeed very real, and this is where the 'society of the spectacle' type thinking gets everything wrong in assuming otherwise. The reality of such bonds, though, is that they exist only as a part of a diaspora, they do not relate to any broader totalizing collective, they mediate further individuation vis a vis their standing as yet another polarity amidst the sea, and the deepest bonds people get to experience, for example, marriage/love/sex etc. are still economized, cut off from an ethos which respects the society at large responsible for the production and participation of any two individuals who come together under it. So, there's an irony here, whereby even couples are still individualistic in their perception, in that they are self-abstracted from the broader belonging to which they are a comprised unit of, because any such broader belonging has yet to be coherently united or expressed as a totality. American nationalism, for instance, isn't even nationalism, it's an appeal to a specific and exclusionary subset of something which, in its historical formation, was always already a continual diaspora, so even here, you have more of an appeal to secession and the building of enclaves than a properly collectivizing recognition or resonance of each and every fellow man under one banner.

So, in its contemporaneity, America, while still very much conducive to history at large, is a stranger to the realization of its own historicity, with most of its individuals recognizing that they do nonetheless contribute towards a real movement, but without the necessary understanding that any such movement is indebted to a deeper collective context: that of the people. The failure of recognition here impresses one with the misconception that there are only floating 'I' humans, no 'We'. This is how you end up with fatalist misreadings of the state of affairs like Fukayama's end of history. The prospect which still implies a potentially exploitable rift of hope here, however, is that most Americans don't resonate with Fukayama's message! His is still reserved only for those most divorced from societal participation at large, trust-fund kiddies and the like. The problem is, again, a confusion of recognition: It is not that Americans possess an inability to see history in all things, to see their own movement as generative of history too, but rather, that they do not collectivize the property of this phenomenon, they think of its occurrence and dynamism only in selfish and individually-heroic terms.

The last consequence of all of this 'disharmony' as it might be called, or disunity, is the social disarray of atomization. There has never been a single society in all of human history as atomized as current America, so of course you have mental illness and d*** addiction running rampant: it's the decay of an economy which does not self-relate to the totality of those responsible for its sustenance and functionality, and thus whittles both itself and its constituents towards destitution. 'Fuck you, got mine', is the attitude of each crab in the bucket, each left alone even when together. Any help which may be received, is, again, therefore only ever an intervention set to reorient someone towards the same problematic perpetuity which originally sickened them, never intending upon systemic correction. The diaspora at hand, then, is not a strengthened 'diversity' but a pluralistic cacophony extending from hyper-individualistic identity-mongering, all to distract from the claim to a nation which knows the context of its own labor, and in so doing, prioritizes the people and the workers towards their own ends from within their own ends, materially satisfying them and thereby setting forth the precondition for the dissolution of atomization, bringing people together under a sense of commonality as per their engagement as workers proper. When history is known as made by the many, led by whomever represents & embodies them, only then does it assert itself without internal estrangement, possessing some self-articulative capacity. Again, the problem is not that America doesn't have history, for it does; instead the problem is that America sees its current history as very real, yet the nature of its reality assumes a plethora of technically separate atoms suspended in an economized chaos (exploited economization, that is, the utilitarian social darwinist model derived from the alienation of labor, that which is operative without the collective spirit and the understanding of the driving force within human activity behind itself: the real economy of a totalized humanity).

its crazy how much of modern societal issues in the west (particularly the US) can be traced back to debt spiraling

wasn’t MIM the one that started the third worldist bs

More or less yeah lol

nothing will not convince me those harvard boys who started that s*** were feds

You write this or what’s this from?

if people knew how private debt truely worked for the rich we could finally get those guillotines ready

Any good resources on this? @krishna_bound

most of what ive seen on it were infos here and there from interviews of bankers/politicians/economists etc

basically the hottest get richer quick scheme on the block rn is

-own a rich company.
-borrow 100M from a bank that you will pay back in one payement 10 years later.
-buy a struggling company and inject the 100M in it to artificially double its value.
-double your money, get the 200M.
-time to pay back your loan -> borrow 100M from a different bank to pay back the first loan.
-repeat until you die.

It's good to have a few ex politicians on your board that will give you intel and know everything about monetary policies too.

Central banks love it because it looks like you're creating growth but since no money is actually spent in the real economy it doesn't lead to inflation, even more so when you pay back the loan and the money is destroyed

free money and less taxes too!

Fictitious Capital: How Finance Is Appropriating Our Future by Cédric Durand (s/o @Scratchin_Bandit for mentioning this one in this thread it coalesces a ton of stuff ive read elsewhere finally into one really concise book)

Governing by Debt by Maurizio Lazzarato

Debt: The First 5,000 Years by David Graeber (not marxist but still interesting from an anthropological standpoint)

The New Economics of Debt and Financial Fragility by Moritz Schularick (also not marxist but still interesting a***ysis)

The Economics of Sovereign Debt and Default by Mark Aguiar & Manuel Amador (textbook economic a***ysis)

I wrote this

the thing that slips between the cracks here which is the important part of this a***ysis is that every time someone - or some government or some company - does this cycle, there is a small % of interest that slips between the cracks which is never paid, since the amount paid back by the secondary source covers the principle and maybe a portion of the interest. that amount of small interest that slips through the cracks is essentially never paid, and builds and builds in the same way sediment does during erosion
the thing that makes this so dangerous is EVERY single rich person, EVERY oligarch, EVERY corporation, and EVERY government is constantly doing this on a month to month, year to year, etc. basis - that causes this sediment to pile up
now on a macroeconomic level, this "slippage" actually becomes the governing focus of all financial entities - because that debt slippage actually outpaces the wealth of the institutions allowing such borrowing to commence, and it's increasingly never paid back but incurred further and further through other institutions w/o the first ever being satisfied. When people ask "why do companies care about infinite growth instead of just being successful?" - this is why; they literally have to because they have to bet on infinite growth outpacing the debt which is accrued institutionally in the background
now, the obvious answer here is like, that debt will never be payable because it's not possible to - it's likely the actual amount of total debt which exists due to this is greater than the amount of liquid capital in circulation. so because of this, entities are borrowing money essentially from the future; but that money doesn't exist yet, and may not exist, so it spurs the same need for infinite growth because they have to continually push the economic forward to match the growing rate of debt which is insatiable otherwise