/leftypol/ - Leftypol

Proletariat without Borders

Mode: Reply

Max file size: limitless

Max files: 3

Remember to follow the rules

Max message length: 4096

/Leftypol/ is a backup board for 8ch.net/leftypol/.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan

Open file (5.17 KB 153x166 images.jpg)
debating cuCKs Comrade 06/30/2018 (Sat) 16:50:16 [Preview] No. 6888
How do i deal with the human nature argument. I debate politics with alot people (mostly on the internet) and most of their arguments are shit but this one thing the human nature argument i dont understand how to repell which is the Communism/Socialism goes against human nature and it is really annoying so please help me how i am going to repell it.
Easy, just show them evidence of functional excisting communist societies.
There are none
There are none
>functional excisting communist societies.
404 nothing found.
obviously, its a kids dream
Human nature is not a defined value. Nor will it ever be. Rather you should use Structuralism/Agency theories to help define aspects of human nature.

Marx and Engels - Capitalism, Alienation, Class.
>Bourdieu - field and habitus, social-cultural-economic-symbolic-capital
>Max Weber - class, social mobility.
>Gramsci - hegemony
>Connell - hegemonic masculinity
>Foucault- power, surveillance
>Parsons - social action
>Goffman - impression management
>Beck - risk society

Realistically you only need Marx and Engels, the other subtheories are just that.

To believe in anything other than Marxist theory and other subsets of the theories from the left is just retardism. ie Trickle down, Neocon, Egalitarianism, Social Darwinism, all laughable pseudoscience and brainlet ideologies. dont argue, scoff at the able-minded subversion of knowledge.

Just remember when you represent the cause on the internet, people will see. Don't sperg out, know when to cut your losses. show mercy to the feeble and cunning ruthlessness towards the enemies. If you do not have an army you must be an assassin. cut them down with one strike. Be a leader and others will follow.
>Human nature is not a defined value. Nor will it ever be.
Total bullshit. Psychology has clearly shown that humans are not born tabula rasa with simple studies such as the universality of human facial expressions. The fact you are expounding this as a cornerstone of beliefs renders them worthless. Be quiet.
thank you for your input. But as I made clear there is both structure and agency. Structure is the environment that we are bound to and everything within. And agency, is our decisions that we make both consciously and subconsciously. Your ideology is essentially nestled within structure and agency dynamic.

You make a universal face expression of spite, when you see a far superior post, debunking your spiteful and pathetic attempt at discourse. You feel spiteful because the norm is to feel spiteful when you've been embarrassed socially. It is your human nature both facilitated by your autonomous decision to express spite within the social structure of being socially ridiculed.

Now I cannot actually see your face, you expression may be rage, or maybe you are hiding you expression. no matter what your expression is it is your agency norm writhin your structure. Thankyou for offering an example comrade.
So not only full of bullshit but nothing but insults when your nonsense is challenged. Be quiet, wrecker.
Off topic. What is your hot take on human nature and communism?
Kropotkin pointed out the innate human tendency towards cooperation. If "human nature" were as the Hobbesian right claim, civilization would not exist; humanity would have focused on an endless cycle of rape and murder instead. That being the case, it's inevitable that we're going to see an economic system that is based on such at some point.
We wouldn't need a government if we were good m8
The post says that people tend to co-operate not that they are good. Go have a pointless argument elsewhere.
Societies with mechanical solidarity like the Kalahari Bushmen are far more ancient than anything the dipshit hollering "human nature" at you has studied. They're a good example if you just want to point out how stupid the argument is- we've lived in communal societies before. Marx talks about that. Marxism (See The German ideology) posits there has been a departure from our ultimate state of being and that a reconciliation is necessary. Our natural state isn't rampant individualism and capitalism. The increased compartmentalization of people via identities based on gender, race, sex, political party, etc isn't natural. Only class is real, and class is determined by material conditions. All of history is the history of class struggle.

Like the guy above me said, you need to be addressing broad social structures and how they work down on people to shape them and their behaviors. The superstructure (what constructs how we are) is determined by the material base and access to the material base. Also, if whoever is making this argument wants to live purely by some made up laws of nature being pumped into their skull by a brain tentacle attached the Yog-Sototh beast known as capitalism, then they can live alone in the woods- ostracized from the group. That used to be a death sentence.
This is a good list for navigating complex social structures, every day social interaction, as well as a little poststructuralism. I recommend maybe the addition of some symbolic interactionist thinkers like Meade or Cooley or Phenomenologists like Husserl and Dorothy Smith.
You are dumb as fuck m9
"If humans are naturally greedy then why have a system that encourages greed?"
>Also, if whoever is making this argument wants to live purely by some made up laws of nature being pumped into their skull by a brain tentacle attached the Yog-Sototh beast known as capitalism, then they can live alone in the woods- ostracized from the group. That used to be a death sentence.
Didn't kill Ted K.
This, basically this
The most important human feature all other animals don't have is speech, I have a hard time imagining it developed because humans needed a way to efficiently scam each other out of resources.
studies on children have found the opposite (communism is good and natural)
The appeal to nature argument does very little for the right wing, as capitalism is the soul perpetrator of the demise in human nature.
The human nature argument should appeal more to the anarchist crowd.
There could definitely be a case made that human nature is inherently good or rather, within evolution, it should if left un touched, lead to a fulfilling life as everyone who does not adhere to their natural impulses refrain from reproduction.
There is also something sinister in pursuing an artificial life.
The case could also be made that these thoughts are simply our instincts fighting back against its own irrelevance in the modern world.
But then again, the case could be made that instincts are the backbone of our concept of morality rather than formed purely by environmental factors.
What I'm trying to say, is that we are (through capitalism) currently in the process of changing all of humans very rapidly and that an artificially created life is although good, ultimately something we should avoid simply because life itself, compels us.
Now you can go ahead and call me the exception but I don't think you are gonna.
If what humans today find ultimately in-human and downright malevolent, should we, knowing that our children's children might never adopt this notion and happily pursue such ideas, should we even allow them?
Of course it would go against the nature of someone brought up in a selfish capitalist system, but someone who grew up within a functioning socialist system they'd find capitalism immoral and to go against the human nature.
Humans are inherently social creatures, organizing ourselves withing social groups of friends, family and society on a larger degree. Mankind has from it's very birth far before agriculture relied upon one another and effective social exchanges has been THE reason we've managed to fight ourselves toward the top of the food chain and interaction between ideas and cultures have always resulted in advancement in technology, political organization or science.
You can also look at any psychological study and find that helping a fellow human being always results in a degree in happiness, while exploitation enables antisocial behaviour.
There are so many options you can argue this point, it's just the matter of finding a point that's not too complex for these gormless reactionary retards to understand.


Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)

no cookies?