/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

Mode: Thread

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(583.61 KB 1500x1000 IMG_1990.jpg)
Jeremy Corbyn appreciation society Anonymous 03/19/2020 (Thu) 18:38:14 No. 378472 [Reply] [Last]
"Generations to come will look back on this moment and they will judge us—they will judge us on the actions we take now. Our response must be bold and it must be decisive. The market cannot deliver what is needed; only collective public action, led by Government, can protect our people and our society. That collective action must not allow the burden to fall most on those who lack the resources to cope, as happened after the financial crash. People across the country do understand the need for temporary restrictions on our way of life to protect us all, and we will work with the Government, but the Prime Minister must understand that that will require balancing action to protect the most insecure and vulnerable, in the interests of public health as well as of social justice. The health of us all depends on the health of the most vulnerable, so I ask the Prime Minister: will he step up now—not tomorrow—and give support to those vulnerable people who live on the margins of our society, who are vulnerable themselves and make us all vulnerable, and give them the support and the assurance that they are desperately searching for today?" - Jeremy Corbyn, in his last question as Leader of the Opposition, 18th March 2020 Big up the big man himself, and remember how he changed British politics. Not only did he shift public opinion leftwards, but his leadership gave hope to a whole generation, even in the most depressingly shittily-run nation on Earth. He is one of the very few public figures that I don't viscerally hate, because he showed that he could distance himself from the views of the blairite thugs. In a chamber full of champagne guzzlers, a real fucking human being stood forward. Jeremy gave his all. Jeremy gave a shit.
(186.96 KB 2048x830 IMG_8187.JPG)
fuck succdems
Have a bump, OP. I'm not a brit but I respected what Corbyn was trying to achieve. He was not a perfect leader and he made many mistakes but we can never except perfection from anyone, and we should be the most demanding towards ourselves first and then others. Corbyn failed. It looks like Sanders will fail. But a failure is not always a mistake - sometimes it's just the best one can do given the circumstances. If socialism and reformism have both failed at times, we should remember that reactionary and capitalist societies have also failed. Many people were convinced after the Great Depression that capitalism was simply going to disappear - the future would be nationalized industry, guaranteed employment, and a permanent war-economy. The future that Corbyn, Sanders, and their supporters are fighting for is a decent one and probably the only future in which this planet doesn't turn into a terrifying dystopia. The movement these men leave behind will long outlive them.
(156.16 KB 1200x900 stalin society.png)
Can anyone edit that "Stalin Society" picture to "Corbyn Society" if you really have nothing to do?

(40.43 KB 700x700 smnkkkpaws.jpg)
Am I a post-leftist? Anonymous 03/16/2020 (Mon) 05:45:23 No. 363599 [Reply] [Last]
/dead/ is locked so I guess I'm posting this here. Don't hate me. I believe that soviet style communism (under Lenin and Stalin) is the best method of human organization which we can point to in history. I believe that Bordiga's theory of party organization is marginally superior, but that if we achieve communism, the revolutionary party will most likely be MLM. I believe that a proletarian revolution is the last hope for humanity. However, I don't believe that this is likely to happen. I have read and taken seriously many of the writings of Ted Kaczynski. I believe him to be the most important living philosopher at least out of those I have read. Some Chinese theorists may be more relevant if communism is to succeed. I think that if we cannot achieve communism--which is likely--it would be better to dump the whole stinking system of industrial society and try to recapture some variety of primitive communism. It would obviously not be a true return, as it's impossible to undue the damage we have caused, but some vulgar approximation would be better than late-capitalism. I have personally lived in the wilderness for up to 3 months at a time in various locations around the US. Bushcraft is hard, primitive fire-making is hard, hunting is hard, fishing is hard, plant and mushroom identification is hard. However, once you get used to it I cannot even begin to explain the relief it brings. Times when I am inawoods are the only times in my life I have not felt alienated and miserable. I have also read and taken seriously several post-structuralist writers and think that there are problems with historical materialism, and with the idea of scientific socialism. I wouldn't describe myself as a post-structuralist--rather some variety of pessimistic German idealist--but Foucault is very relevant to how I understand politics. All of the post-leftists I know in real life are just edgelord anarkiddies, but I can't help but think they are right that the left has failed and is doomed to fail. Am I a post-leftist or just a burned out communist?
14 posts and 8 images omitted.
(27.96 KB 480x600 snnn.jpg)
>>363878 Yeah you're right. Why give up when communism has the potential to be so beautiful? Thanks anon. I've been doing some graphic design and web dev work for a local organization that's starting (focused on anti-war and demilitarization stuff). There's a lot of really good activists involved so I'm hopeful that we can accomplish something. The corona bullshit kinda derailed everything though. We where gonna hold a forum next month but I think that is probably a no go. Since I'm doing a lot of the social media / web dev stuff I can still be working on it from home. I've been putting off getting in touch with one of the other organizers to resolve some hosting related issues, but I feel a little more motivated today than yesterday. There may not be hope, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth fighting. Cool to hear about your farming project, sounds fun! You should take pics or even start a lil blog or something to document your progress. Not if you don't want to, I just genuinely love watching plants grow and I've been a little too out of sorts to take good care of mine lately. >>364247 >Washing clothes by hand When I've lived inawoods I've only carried about 2-4 complete outfits plus extra socks and underwear/long underwear. I then would just wash my socks and long underwear daily, and the rest of my clothes like once a week. You can stay pretty clean that way and it isn't a ton of labor. >Bathing outside I prefer it. The temperature isn't the nicest part, but you get used to it and it's absolutely worth it for the views. (the natural views, I'm not talking about fellow bathers although that can be nice too assuming there's a preexisting relationship) If you're scared about insects perving on you then idk what to say. >Giving birth This the argument that gives me the most pause. Giving birth however you see it is pretty painful, but in primitive society it is very dangerous. Even as an anti-natalist I have huge qualms about saying that women brought that on themselves since not all pregnancy is the result of consensual sex, and even when it is the power dynamics at play can inequitable to put it lightly. You seem to be kinda misunderstanding my point though. Primitive society is not my "ideal society" or something. I can imagine dozens of ways we COULD organize society that would be vastly superior. The question is which of these are actually achievable. Out of what has actually been shown to be achievable, I think communism is probably the best, and primitive communism is a runner up. I'm just having doubts about whether we can achieve communism in time. >>363870 >It's going to happen regardless of your belief This is such a naive position. I'm critical of historical materialism, but this isn't even historical materialism. You are literally espousing some vulgar form of economic determinism. This has NO precident within serious forms of marxism, and has been directly debunked by various marxists and marxian economists.

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

>>363599 >it would be better to dump the whole stinking system of industrial society and try to recapture some variety of primitive communism. Whether desirable or nor, this is in all likelihood a utopian fantasy. Just like the emergence of stars and planets, and the development of life itself, the emergence of technology and industry is ultimately and product of increasing entropy. It's an unconscious development, natural selection as applied to polities, classes and in more recent history capital. Even if society were to collapse redevelopment would be inevitable; the only escape from this process is death.
>>363599 Kaczynski suxxx
>>368451 You can't go back to being a hunter gatherer, the reality is that hunter gatherer societies offer practically no resistance to even slightly more organised agrarian societies. See the fate of the Tasmanians, a group of people completely genocided by a society using wooden sailing ships from the opposite side of the planet.

(94.80 KB 578x743 Ourgirl.jpg)
(77.84 KB 1020x649 bad person.jpg)
Svetlana Savitskaya appreciation Anonymous 03/20/2020 (Fri) 00:36:51 No. 379528 [Reply] [Last]
Just a frienldy reminder that so called 'first woman cosmonaut' is biotrash which supports reactionary regime which supports genocide of Russian proletariat. However, second woman in space and first woman in an open space is /ourgirl/

"USSR wasn't socialist because Mao said it wasnt" - Dude I know Anonymous 03/07/2020 (Sat) 13:46:47 No. 332693 [Reply] [Last]
What do you think of his argument? Basically was talking to this guy I know about the USSR or something and he argued it wasn't socialist basically because Khrushchev privatized some industry [and dissed Stalin] and he said this revisionism eventually led to the restoration of capitalism. He also said it was a social democracy with coops rather than a socialist state. Me, I honestly just think its idealistic and intellectually dishonest af to tell people like ancaps and lolberts that our economic system really is capitalism even if it doesnt fit their idealized version of it and then at the same time the USSR wasnt a socialist state because, effectively, it was flawed. Also, I mean, idky Maoists never seem to contend with this, but i mean, have they ever thought most of the revisionist shit was mostly about the power struggle in China and not the USSR at all? Like, they acknowledge it but not its actual significance. They also never acknowledge how shite China's foreign policy was even under Mao, to the point that they were supporting and arming psychotic fascists and pretty much allying with the USSR, hell, they Deng dragged them back to capitalism before the USSR fell; why is this not spoken of?
18 posts and 2 images omitted.
>>335053 >USSR never achieved socialism, but it was on path towards socialism until Stalin died. 1. Where was this socialism being built? The right wing of the bolsheviks and their policies led to major contradictions and social tensions in the Union. They were the ones that encouraged the kulaks to get rich and then pushed with collectivzation. Where there's a line for food, people start to fight, and now you need police to keep the peace. And now you can't abolish the state. You need good production levels. There's also a contradiction between the village and city, bureacracy and people. This is what Trotsky argued, usually qouting Lenin and applying what he said to the USSR. Please just read him, and let go with the memed portayal of permanent revolution. (Building many lego buildings simultaniously lmao) 2. Wasn't it Mao who said that the USSR became a state of ideological struggle and not of building socialism. I agree with that and it started under Stalin, this was the time when "line go up", the USSR had to compete with the capitalist world non-stop and it wasn't because Stalin* was a bad guy but because of historical nesseccity, it had to keep up with the west or get behind in production thus get behind in power. So if it had to compete it had to provide workers with the same or worse conditions, thus doing away with 7 hour work day, not changing the still repressive factories. Thus capitalist exploitation still survived. (what does it change if they work in a state owned or privately owned enterprise if the conditions are the same? - trotsky) None of this is may original thought, I've taken this out of Revolution betrayed and bits of pieces of wisdom from other comrades *he was probably paranoic tho
>>378785 You are complaining that due to the competition with capitalism the soviets had to make compromises, that is true however the lives of people in the soviet union improved, that's maybe not the optimal solution but clearly one that is acceptable. Lets not forget the sacrifices that Trotsky demanded for expanding the revolution.
(367.05 KB 577x784 anti-revionist-feminism.png)
To me, this is neo-leninism in a nutshell. A lot of neo-MLs seem to love to parrot old talking points of Leninist history like it's a matter of life or death as it was in the past, without really analyzing what were the material conditions back then. I'm a crypto-ancom too and Soviet Russia or Maoist China aren't the ideal type of society I envision as "communism", but I reckon that Stalin was a committed Marxist who industrialized Russia at high-speed, did as much as he could to educate every Russian and make them secular polymaths, and reduce work hours as a whole, which is the kind of stuff Marx was envisioning when he talked about communism. Same with Hoxha, and his stance on woman's rights was based and he changed the old feudal culture of Albania forever. Mao did the same things with The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, even though it was disastrously disorganized, but for example, he intended with the Cultural Revolution to resolve what he saw as dialectical contradictions within China at the time, and I recently saw a Badiou lecture where we was saying it was a conflict between some students who wanted to form an static bureaucratic class within the party, and those who were freshly educated peasants and wanted to change things further, or something among those lines. There were basically two Red Guards, and the Red Guards allied with Deng won. Even Khrushchev wasn't that revisionist to me because he still wanted to reduce work hours like Stalin, and hoped that Soviets would work 32-hours a week by 1968. For me, real revisionism starts with Brezhnev, Deng Xiaoping, the death of Tito and Hoxha. I would say revisionism won when the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance ended, it was the death knell of the Leninist project. The Eastern bloc slowly succumbed to neoliberalism, who was booming back then. Sorry to sound condescending, but neo-leninists should really try to expose themselves to a wider range of political theory (as much OG Marx & Engels as possible of course but also autonomists/communizers, contemporary anarchists, or even neoreactionaries like Moldbug and Peter Thiel to see what are their weaknesses) instead of repeating mantras from the time when neoliberalism didn't exist like nostalgic memesters. Neoliberalism is crumbling right now, what alternative do we have to offer that is compatible with the current material conditions?
>>336385 "Really existing socialism" should be criticized though, because we don't live under socialism right now. Maybe it was due to the cults of personalities, aggressive American interventionism, and whatever, it's due to a broad combination of things, but it ultimately failed. We should reclaim the good parts and ditch the outdated ones.
>>378693 Less than a decade. Hua Guofeng was basically Deng with a mask on

(103.39 KB 980x551 edward.jfif)
Eduard Limonov has passed Anonymous 03/17/2020 (Tue) 17:56:54 No. 370690 [Reply] [Last]
Eduard Limonov one of founders of National Bolshevism has passed today. https://www.rt.com/russia/483348-writer-polititian-limonov-dies/
108 posts and 20 images omitted.
(107.92 KB 680x503 ETV8zHEVAAAPeCc.jpg)
>>375927 None of that shit matters, he never made Bosnia a muslim state. The jihadis were 500-5.000. There were Bosnian muslims,catholics, orthodox, atheists etc. This myth of jihadist Bosniaks is propagated by serbian, russian and greek religious extremists,nationalists and fascists.
>>375954 >There were Bosnian muslims,catholics, orthodox, atheists etc. What the fuck are you even talking about? You're a retard.
>>375943 ngl, but I think Limonov would've unironically been down with that
(150.52 KB 640x811 1x2XP50Khd4.jpg)
>>373601 there is a better version

(25.19 KB 117x225 117px-Emblema_KGB.svg.png)
Anonymous 03/12/2020 (Thu) 21:15:29 No. 351806 [Reply] [Last]
The KGB should've couped right wing governments.
22 posts and 2 images omitted.
>>351967 ANicePic
>>352145 It funded "terrorist" groups all over western Europe, also the USSR had a lot of influence in African politics but never heard about them couping anyone there
>>351806 Dunno about KGB, but the Polish communists rigged an election with the support from USSR resulting in 40 years of communism there
Like others have pointed out, coups of the CIA type need certain elements that generally are lacking if one wants to establish socialism. In order for them to go off as "smoothly" as most CIA coups, there needs to be considerable support among high ranking officials, particularly in the military. Since high ranking politicians, military officers, and local financial elites are almost always conservative, this effectively rules out CIA style coups from the left. There are a few exceptions however, such as the military coup in Peru in 1968 which established a leftist government, however this had no Soviet involvement. Generally the better option for spreading socialism via clandestine activity was support for insurgencies like the PLO, NLF, FARC, etc.
Contrary to what imperialist media tells you, socialist security agencies are there to defend the socialist state and prevent counterrevolution, not coup governments the way the CIA does. >>353883 Nope, the KSC won the elections and had the support of the masses.

(25.78 KB 480x360 goranpeeberson.jpg)
Jordan Peterson's Addiction Anonymous 03/18/2020 (Wed) 23:02:09 No. 375971 [Reply] [Last]
I'm sure many of you are familiar with this story. https://newrepublic.com/article/156829/happened-jordan-peterson As someone who has dealt with benzo addiction and withdrawal in the past, I am sympathetic to what Peterson is going through. However, I want to share my perspective on why his story is kinda ridiculous, and why I find it painfully obvious that he is manipulating and lying to his family and his fans in a way that is kinda hard for me to watch. It reminds me of the worst ways I mistreated my loved ones when I was in active addiction, except he is doing it in front of the whole world. First off, my theory could be wrong. Everyone responds to drugs in different ways. Some are particularly sensitive to a certain drug, and some people truly do become physically dependent on the dose he claims to have been on. I in no way want to minimize or discount the experience of people who are suffering from benzo dependence that is truly the result of a personal sensitivity or negligence and ignorance on the part of healthcare providers (not that healthcare providers deserve the blame either, there's a lot of misinformation about these drugs out there). HOWEVER, I don't believe the official story for one goddamn second, and after this brief aside you will see why. Aside: the insistence on the narrative that "he wasn't psychologically addicted" reveals a profound lack of empathy for addicts, as well as a dodging of personal responsibility. It would show a lot more strength if Peterson could own up to his addiction and use this to inform his self-help advice. Instead, he seems to need to distance himself from addicts. As an addict myself I find this downright dehumanizing. "Not like he's on meth or something." COME ON! Lobsterman and meatgirl should both know better than this. I dunno what the laws are in Canada, but meth is schedule 2 in the US, because it is a pretty common prescription drug, and benzos can be just as addictive as meth. Vilifying meth in this way is just pure drug war ideology and classism. Okay here's the conspiracy theory... The dose that meatgirl seems to think he was taking would be very unlikely to produce the kind of physical dependence she describes. It's pretty obvious to me that he was taking a higher dose, failing to take days off (a pretty standard part of benzo treatment), or supplementing with alcohol or other drugs. You can find stories of people becoming severely dependent on half a mg of kpin per day, but these people are usually naive to the effects of these drugs in the first place which leads them to not take precautions to avoid dependence. This excuse doesn't work with Peterson. He has talked openly about using all sorts of recreational drugs in the past, and being addicted to alcohol (a drug which produces nearly identical effects to benzos). Furthermore, he is clinical psychologist! He has no doubt had clients who are dealing with anxiety and benzo addiction, and the claim that he didn't know that benzos can lead to addiction is an absurd copout. I don't know whether to be impressed that Peterson has his family fooled to this degree, or furious at him for being such a slimy, manipulative fuck. Lots of addicts engage in gaslighting and other manipulative behavior to hide our addictions, but Peterson is taking this to new levels. One instance of Peterson's ridiculousness that makes a LOT more sense once you adopt my conspiracy theory, is the apple cider incident. The effects Peterson describes: severe insomnia, a sense of impending doom, sheer terror, don't make any sense at all if you accept his claim that they where caused by drinking apple cider. However, they sound exactly like the symptoms of benzo withdrawal, and the apple cider thing sounds exactly like the kind of ridiculous shit that I used to come up with when my family or friends could tell I was wasted or in withdrawals and I didn't want them to know. I think what happened is that Peterson was heavily abusing his medication, ran out a month early, and when his wife wanted to know what was wrong with him when he was clearly in withdrawals he was like "well we had apple cider today, it must be the sulfates!" He was then terrified that his wife was going to see through his bullshit so he started making a big deal of the sulfate thing around other people, maybe even internalized the cover story, and eventually went on Joe Rogan and told the whole world about how sulfates can make you not sleep for a month. For those that don't know the incident I'm referring to, I'm reposting a video I made a little over a year ago. Skip to 22:45 for the section in question. The audio on this overall video is very jumpy so if you're gonna watch the whole thing be prepared to adjust as you go. Sorry about that :/

Message too long. Click here to view full text.

25 posts and 4 images omitted.
>>375971 Knew it was u smokefag, u got a really distinctive writing style ya looser
>>377096 That’s not what that anon meant and you know it. He wants to eliminate substance abuse through fixing the base of capitalist system rather than try changing it with the superstructure. Similar to how Cuba did it. Rather than outlawing certain drugs they made it so that the conditions that pushed people into the addiction cease to exist like the lack of support dealing with mental diseases and alienation at work.
(494.12 KB 1078x1332 a3e.jpg)
It's beyond me how did anyone take him seriously ever. His political views are extremely simplistic "muh good vs evil" and his self help advice is "clean up your room bucko".
>>378551 Same reason they like zizek, daddy issues.
Peterson's only good take https://youtu.be/9ebK3-O2JKM >>378551 Rightoids will eat that shit up 'cause it means they can complain about political activism, and justify their religious beliefs. His basic personal advice is sometimes good, but most of it is not new. He'll give a talk explaining that white privilege and the patriarchy don't exist (without addressing relevant studies), and expects people to just agree that it vaguely follows from a bunch of other people he paraphrases. He's just reaffirming uniformed people's biases imo.

The year is 1916, Tsar Nicholas has announced his support for the bolsheviks, how does history change? Anonymous 03/19/2020 (Thu) 16:42:43 No. 378122 [Reply] [Last]
1916 >Tsar Nicholas II has taken it upon himself to read Marx and Lenin to understand his treacherous enemies better >Finds Marx and Lenin are actually correct, feels empathy for the proletariat and disgust with his own class position and that of his family >Decides to call a large gathering for the workers of Petrograd <"Workers, peasants, the true people of Russia! I have come to realize this war, this bloodshed, it is without reason. Amongst the crimes of my regime, my father's regime, my grandfather's regime; this war has been the greatest. Thus I have decided it is only appropriate that such a criminal government as ours step down, permanently. I will not be succeeded by Alexei, nor any liberal capitalist government, nor any military dictatorship. I ask that you, the workers and peasants of Russia create for yourselves your own government in your own interests. I will officially abdicate in roughly one week, in the mean time I will work to make peace with the Germans, depose my military generals, and return the exiled bolsheviks. After which, I will submit myself to trial for my own personal crimes against the people of the Russian Empire, I ask only that you spare the lives of my family, brought along this violent journey by my own will rather than theirs" >Nicholas then removed his royal regalia, removes his jewelry, and removes his boots >He falls to his knees in the mud <"This world now belongs to you, the workers" >He billows a red flag in his hand How does history change?
11 posts and 2 images omitted.
>>378243 ah this is what I was thinking of. Yes much more interesting history. People's Kingdom of Russia
(29.11 KB 712x526 1400762728259.png)
would probably look like the UK. Concessions made to the workers in exchange for their survival
>>378363 would be offed by another royal family memeber and his cousin would claim the throne
>>378243 /mladsoc/ general when
>>378493 >going to a dead board with one of the shittiest interfaces ever designed for what purpose

(76.74 KB 563x721 1505231764455.jpg)
British reactionaries. anon 03/19/2020 (Thu) 13:25:58 No. 377369 [Reply] [Last]
You see this mainly for British reactionaries, they'll say the usual Communism killed '50 million million billion' whatever, then they'll go straight to defending colonialism like when the British Empire was carrying out genocide it, was just justified because they built a railway and some ports do they realise this fucking double standard?
The Soviet Union also built railways
>>378229 my commie grandma also uses the same arguement about balkan socialism ,and she is more correct cause soviets(and commounists in gneral) did rapidly industrilize compared to capitalist shitholes
(91.05 KB 500x375 dawkins_hitchens.jpg)
(194.39 KB 1200x727 british_imperalism.jpg)
Burger so I've never really met a full-blown British reactionary who have their own characteristics, as ours in Burgerland tend to be fundamentalist Christians. But there was a period after 9/11 where Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens became popular with some segments of the population here, which came with their support for the wars, and they articulated the wars as being about "enlightened" Western civilization vs. Islamic barbarism. I think that is very British. Hitchens came out of a Trotskyist current (Cliffites) but by the 2000s became a full-throated advocate of the wars with this framing. And I think he had a kind of latent Brit-imperialist mentality about enlightening the savages and backwards people of the world (by dropping bombs on them). North Korea he described as a nation of "dwarves" living in a "necocracy," like something out of J.R.R. Tolkien. Britain -- transferred to the United States -- is the beacon of civilization and industry and science and produced Isaac Newton. Same ideology. I think this appealed to some American liberals whose class interest binded them to imperialism, but were more urbane and cosmopolitan in their outlook, and this was a "sophisticated" rationale for the wars. Think Bill Maher and people like that. But this was probably not the subjective experience for most American reactionaries who supported the wars. For them it was more like a religious crusade or something like that, with America "redeemed" from the blow on 9/11 via the sword, and some old-fashioned Ku Klux Klan-style racism thrown into the mix.

(63.19 KB 600x515 5845ca511046ab543d25238a.png)
people who have been cancelled? Anonymous 03/10/2020 (Tue) 14:42:37 No. 341178 [Reply] [Last]
https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/fewli6/people_who_have_been_cancelled_what_is_your_story/ To anyone who has been 'cancelled' out of left wing spaces or just in general, what caused it, did you ever come back from it, and what, if anything, did you do afterwards?
8 posts and 1 image omitted.
(57.58 KB 1000x655 stallone.jpg)
"Did you ever come back from being cancelled." Yeah it happened to me once. Well, I allegedly disagreed with reparations in my activist club, and was accused by a trans woman of being racist, so I was taken to trial before a tribunal of Council Judges, where I was found guilty. To save me, the Chief Justice stepped down and, for his last request, asked the Council to spare my life. I was sentenced to life imprisonment while the Chief Justice embarked on the "long walk", in which a retiring Judge ventures into the wasteland "to bring law to the lawless". Another activist, who freed the trans woman to frame me for the crime, became Chief Justice and instructed the trans woman to cause chaos in the city. I was then taken to the Aspen penal colony via airship. En route, the ship was shot down by the Angel Gang, a family of cannibalistic scavengers and bandits. They scavangers then brought my unconscious body to their cave. A squad of Judges investigated the crashed ship and got to the cave, intent on killing any survivors, not rescuing them. The former Chief Justice arrived just in time to save my life, but was mortally wounded by Mean Machine Angel, one of the scavengers. My dying friend revealed that me and the trans woman who set me up are the result of the Janus project, an experiment in genetic engineering and cloning intended to create the perfect activist. I then deduced that the trans woman framed me for saying things about reparations. Before he died, the former Chief Justice urged me to stop her, believing she is trying to reactive the Janus project.
> I had never held alt-right beliefs at that point but I ended up moving in that direction What a fucking cuck that guy is
Just read the posts on /r/stupidpol don't read the comments it's not that hard
>>378430 7/10 made me chuckle


no cookies?