/hobby/ - Hobbies

Entertainment, Education, Games, etc.

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


(16.96 KB 500x344 smonk.jpg)
Self Improvement Anonymous Comrade 04/09/2020 (Thu) 00:19:11 No. 8024
Hello comrades. ITT we talk about what we are doing to improve ourselves. I'll go first: I am trying to quit smoking. This is probably my sixth attempt but I am going to try and take it more seriously this time. I have been cutting down for the past few months and had gotten down to 3 cigarettes a day but when I tried to quit earlier this week I ended up buying a pack at the end of the first day and smoking the whole thing that night out of anxiety about quitting. I am a drug addict in recovery and this leaves coffee and kratom as the two substances I can use. The kratom seems to help with cigarette cravings or at least incentivizes smoking because I feel sick when I smoke on it. I might try NRT too. I am going to try and get back into running too since that helped me get off heroin the first time.
I suspect I have ADHD and am using the pomodoro technique to get stuff done. It's working so far and when I finish all my chores, projects, exercises, etc. I like to reward myself by allowing myself to watch 1 or 2 hours of YouTube, but the catch is that I only watch things in a language i'm learning so that I can get practice in that language while i'm being rewarded. It's a pretty effective system for me. I am also doing NoFap and Noporn because I do not want to be addicted to masturbation or porn. When I get urges I go outside and wait it out because it only lasts 2 minutes and that's all I have to endure.
>>8024 Best of luck, OP. I'm doing a lot to improve myself, but what I'm focused on right now is learning how to let go. Ever since I was a child I had a bad habit of getting tamper tantrums over having these uncontrollable daydreams where I imagine people I hate to provoke or attack me in some way or I relive shit memories. While I improved in various aspects of my life this has been an enormous psychological crux that stifles my ability to be contempt with life. It's like having demons in my head, it's torture. But I do daily meditation and informed myself a lot about emotional intelligence and how to let go. Managed to not indulge in any of these daydreams or aggressive monologues for a good while now, so it seems like I'm actually getting over this. >>8078 >by allowing myself to watch 1 or 2 hours of YouTube, but the catch is that I only watch things in a language i'm learning That's a very interesting idea. I'm learning Japanese at the moment, so I could try that out.
(3.09 MB 1530x1142 character and destiny.png)
(64.36 KB 571x235 Hoxha degeneracy.jpg)
Reposting a cleaned up old /leftypol/ post One of the biggest problem of the modern left is the open display of decadence and lack of discipline. The alt-right memes about leftoids and radlib effeminate soyboys, sexual deviants and limp-wristed middle class kids come from the most vocal minority of the left, and it's pathetic that the left delivers right-wingers more and more material to mock us with by trying to defend this, which transpires into the already problematic mainstream opinion. In my opinion, there are several things to tackle on a personal level for success: - Sexual deviancy and promiscuity: Who you fuck and what your kinks are belong into your bedroom and nowhere else. Get pronouns and self-proclaimed sexual fetishes out of your bio and political analyses if you want to run a serious political or philosophical account. Put that crap on a private account if you want to. - Scruffiness: Groom yourself and work out. Get decent clothing. By treating your body with respect you will raise self-esteem and passively demonstrate that others should respect you as a person well. Moreover a healthy mind, resides in a healthy body, so working out regularly, not doing drugs and eating properly is important. Simple attire but not too casual. No punk shit either. The Communist Party isn't a Social Club, a minority or gay advocates rights group, or some shitty Mac Store where your faggot boss wears a Turtleneck sweater and asks you if you've had a good fuck; it’s a group dedicated to socialist discussion and thought. - Behave in IRL political events: Don't show up intoxicated, don't use leftist events as an excuse to party and chill, do not aimlessly riot, whatever you do, try to outcompete your political opponents, the libs and the right-wingers, in terms of respectability: If they drink a beer and sit in a camping chair, don't drink a beer, and don't bugger yourself into a camping chair. If you want to have fun, don't use your politics and do this with your friends. Disciplined public behaviour =/= no fun whatsoever in your life. You can easily have three beers later in the evening, with your comrades, or maybe with some people who got interested in you, just don't start bingedrinking while still in a political sphere or shout shit like "kill all white people tbh XDDD fukkk I want trap dick LOL". - Anti-work rethoric: Do not ever try to make you look like you want free shit. Reduction of the work day is reasonable, nonsense like "abolishing work" will make you look bad and it is utopian, it straight-out ignores the material conditions of production, especially the reliance of the material wealth of the western service economies on Third World labor. Wage labor isn't "work". Wage labor is a historical phenomenon. Nobody abandons the ideals of communism by working within the framework of what is materially possible - see Cockshott's schemes of organization of labor in socialism. You won't get your Star Trek replicators anytime soon unless you want to greatly reduce the living quality of everybody. - LARPing/sloganeering: What we need is actual relevant political knowledge, we need to equipped with actual modern data and statistics, so we can uncompromisingly maintain our claim to be scientific. While defending the USSR or other socialist countries is important, it is also important to understand the current political climate and the differences of today. That being said; When most normies think of Communists, they think of Red Army, Commissars, "COMRADE WE KILL THE CAPITALIST EXPLOITER", and that sort of Spartan mindset of "destroy the Decadent West". Seriously, there is such an appeal to Communism I think every Communist is initially attracted to but because there's so much in the way of Theory and History it just becomes more and more implicit until it is just fades completely at the back of his or her mind. Think of it is as a sincere - as opposed to ironic - self-awareness. If we want to "rebrand" we don't act like the Right and pretend we are something that we are not, we simply use the perception people already have about us and amplify it positively.
>>8120 > self-improvement is actually self-flagellation fuck off
(284.16 KB 1000x793 ravish.jpg)
>>8103 Thank you anon! I broke down and had one yesterday but I didn't buy a pack so that's good at least. >Agressive monologues I think a lot more people do this then even realize it. I've caught myself doing this a few times. It's never been so prevalent that it causes problems for me though. Best of luck and I'm glad you are letting go if it was impeding functioning! >>8120 My god... both those pics are cringey as fuck. What is wrong with long hair? The copypasta makes some decent points. >One of the biggest problem of the modern left is the open display of decadence and lack of discipline. I agree. >it's pathetic that the left delivers right-wingers more and more material to mock us with by trying to defend this Who cares? There are much bigger problems with the people he's criticizing then the fact that they defend soyboys... I think we need to address their lack of any theoretical understanding before we fix their boring senses of humor and decadent social mores (because that's really what this is, let's not delude ourselves) >Sexual deviancy and promiscuity: Who you fuck and what your kinks are belong into your bedroom and nowhere else. Get pronouns and self-proclaimed sexual fetishes out of your bio and political analyses if you want to run a serious political or philosophical account. Put that crap on a private account if you want to. I agree, but the fact that anyone would think this is the biggest issue facing the left is extremely juvenile. >Scruffiness: Groom yourself and work out. Get decent clothing. By treating your body with respect you will raise self-esteem and passively demonstrate that others should respect you as a person well. Moreover a healthy mind, resides in a healthy body, so working out regularly, not doing drugs and eating properly is important. Simple attire but not too casual. No punk shit either. The Communist Party isn't a Social Club, a minority or gay advocates rights group, or some shitty Mac Store where your faggot boss wears a Turtleneck sweater and asks you if you've had a good fuck; it’s a group dedicated to socialist discussion and thought. Yeah I agree although I am pretty scruffy most of the time. I do try to clean up when I go to political functions... >Behave in IRL political events: Don't show up intoxicated, don't use leftist events as an excuse to party and chill, do not aimlessly riot, whatever you do, try to outcompete your political opponents, the libs and the right-wingers, in terms of respectability: If they drink a beer and sit in a camping chair, don't drink a beer, and don't bugger yourself into a camping chair. If you want to have fun, don't use your politics and do this with your friends. Disciplined public behaviour =/= no fun whatsoever in your life. You can easily have three beers later in the evening, with your comrades, or maybe with some people who got interested in you, just don't start bingedrinking while still in a political sphere or shout shit like "kill all white people tbh XDDD fukkk I want trap dick LOL". Yeah I agree and the kinds of people he is criticizing do exist and are annoying. I don't find it to be very prevalent though, at least not in the organizations I work with. >Anti-work rethoric: Do not ever try to make you look like you want free shit. Reduction of the work day is reasonable, nonsense like "abolishing work" will make you look bad and it is utopian, it straight-out ignores the material conditions of production, especially the reliance of the material wealth of the western service economies on Third World labor. Wage labor isn't "work". Wage labor is a historical phenomenon. Nobody abandons the ideals of communism by working within the framework of what is materially possible - see Cockshott's schemes of organization of labor in socialism. You won't get your Star Trek replicators anytime soon unless you want to greatly reduce the living quality of everybody. Yeah I agree. >LARPing/sloganeering: What we need is actual relevant political knowledge, we need to equipped with actual modern data and statistics, so we can uncompromisingly maintain our claim to be scientific. While defending the USSR or other socialist countries is important, it is also important to understand the current political climate and the differences of today. Yeah I agree. We shouldn't rely on common statistical methods though. Quantizement is turning out to be a dead end in the sciences and if we can avoid going down that path we should. When these methods are applied to social sciences it just leads to these cargo cult behaviors like the null ritual. I think we should be trying to do theoretical / economic calculations geometrically or algebraically rather than primarily with statistics. >When most normies think of Communists, they think of Red Army, Commissars, "COMRADE WE KILL THE CAPITALIST EXPLOITER", and that sort of Spartan mindset of "destroy the Decadent West". Yeah and that's kinda based. I don't think the first world communist inclination to appear non-threatening is constructive. Lift weights >Seriously, there is such an appeal to Communism I think every Communist is initially attracted to but because there's so much in the way of Theory and History it just becomes more and more implicit until it is just fades completely at the back of his or her mind. Think of it is as a sincere - as opposed to ironic - self-awareness. If we want to "rebrand" we don't act like the Right and pretend we are something that we are not, we simply use the perception people already have about us and amplify it positively. We do NOT need to rebrand. The communist "brand" is very effective. Red is the best color from a marketing perspective. The hammer and sickle looks dope. It has name recognition. It has been shown to be effective in the past. I don't see why we need to stoop to the level of burgoid propoganda... the point of having a communist party is to consolidate the most advanced and resolute sections of the proletariat after all.
>>8132 How is pic 1 cringe tho? Its true. If you don't self-reflect you may swiftly find yourself careening onto a whole different path, this happens quite often considering how many avowed communists ended up being traitors (ironically Yeltsin is a big example). >what's wrong with long hair Its more of an over-all description of druggie metal-heads who have mush for brains. >the fact that anyone would think this is the biggest issue facing the left is extremely juvenile. Have you seen /GET/? Or hell the furry thread and their sheer COPE in trying to defend furries as being "totally legit" as part of a movement and that they should be appealed to. It is very apparent that sexual deviancy is a massive part of many modern leftists who attention whore their idpol as a method of gaining acknowledgement, and then justifying their egoism with a red coat of paint. >Who cares? Non-class-conscious workers who we are appealing to. Socialist movements can't work without the people going along with it and they'll only go along with it if they wanted it. >I think we need to address their lack of any theoretical understanding That's important, but The repost is addressing personal self-improvement. Reading Theory is sort of obvious. Thanks for the decent response. >>8127 Great argument there
>>8148 >How is pic 1 cringe tho? Its true. If you don't self-reflect you may swiftly find yourself careening onto a whole different path, this happens quite often considering how many avowed communists ended up being traitors (ironically Yeltsin is a big example). Yeah the actual message isn't cringe. The whole format of motivational posters is pretty cringe though, don't you think? It just reminds me of what was plastered all over the walls when I was institutionalized. >Its more of an over-all description of druggie metal-heads who have mush for brains. Fair enough. What became of hippies and metalheads though? It just kinda passed. I think that the decadence of the left since the 1970s is a symptom of a left that is without a head (an international vanguard) not the primary issue. >Have you seen /GET/? Or hell the furry thread and their sheer COPE in trying to defend furries as being "totally legit" as part of a movement and that they should be appealed to. It is very apparent that sexual deviancy is a massive part of many modern leftists who attention whore their idpol as a method of gaining acknowledgement, and then justifying their egoism with a red coat of paint. Yeah this is exactly my point. The fact that the biggest issues for you are the degenerate behavior of posters on GET tells me that you spend too much time on the internet and aren't involved in IRL politics. I also spend too much time on the internet and am not involved enough in irl politics, and I could be wrong about you but it's what it kinda looks like when you say "one of the biggest problems on the modern left" and then go on to describe kids shitposting on GET and I assume twitter. This is a symptom of a problem, not the problem itself. The real problem on the left is that we don't have an international vanguard party that can help us impose discipline on people in our ranks. I think our efforts should be focused on building an international vanguard using the tools that are available to us (ie the internet). I've been working on a party program for my vision of what this would look like and if you're interested I can fill you in. I'm a leftcom not an ML but we may have more in common than you think if you are anti-revisionist.
>>8173 >It just kinda passed Yeah, into something even worse. At the time they were the lowest degenerates, though now by comparison they look like them make art. >The fact that the biggest issues for you are the degenerate behavior of posters on GET tells me that you spend too much time on the internet and aren't involved in IRL politics. Except that It's VERY present IRL too, as I know through actual political events I've either been in or observed. >The real problem on the left is that we don't have an international vanguard party that can help us impose discipline on people in our ranks Very true, but a vanguard is formed of people; people who are come from the left and who attempt to adhere to the discipline I was stating. Degeneracy is not the biggest issue, sure, but it is part of a set of issues that make the modern socialist movements outside Russia and the Third-World a fucking joke. I recently posted about an absolute nutcase Succ-dem LARPing as Rosa Luxembourg on their blog spot where they spend article after putrid article about how the USSR wasn't real people's movements and how it was so terrible and outright stated that Soviet people were subhuman trash who didn't stand up for themselves and their lack of support for the USSR in 1991 meant that they and the USSR weren't real socialism... She then goes on to cite Hong Kong Protests as a legitimate and SUCCESSFUL socialist protest as well as the Pussy-Parade from when Trump was elected... I can only compare her examples to a real socialist protest in India made up of over 1 million people, spanning months and backed by people marching with banners of Lenin and Stalin, and who are even now, agitating against Modi's corrupt rule and obviously faked election.
(546.86 KB 2008x3071 antifascism.jpg)
>>8178 Read your post. Do you see why I am getting the impression that you are basing this assumption off of too much time spent on the internet? When I go to IRL meetings of communist organizations, the biggest issues that I encounter have nothing to do with decadent behavior or whatever. Sure, there are people with died hair and too many pins or whatever, but it's not like they show up drunk or spend the whole meeting talking about HRT or whatever. It also isn't that they have bad takes on the Hong Kong protests or whatever. Most of the crypto-trots in the PSL are pretty based on that stuff. The biggest issue I find at IRL organizing meetings is how much time and resorces people are willing to devote to preventing what is apparently an imminent rise of fascism in the United States (meme related) and how much time they want to devote to arguing about which side in the Syrian civil war they should announce their support for (as if this critical support actually accomplishes anything). Idk, that's just my perspective which comes from working with trots and crypto-trot MLs in the US. I think we really do need to get our priorities straightened out, and I'm afraid that I don't think some degenerate larping as Rosa Luxemburg on her blog is much of a problem at all.
>>8185 >The biggest issue I find at IRL organizing meetings is how much time and resorces people are willing to devote to preventing what is apparently an imminent rise of fascism in the United States Yeah that must be in your area, and a good point. >getting the impression that you are basing this assumption off of too much time spent on the internet Except that I'm comparing both? > I don't think some degenerate larping as Rosa Luxemburg on her blog is much of a problem at all Given that her point of view is often repeated by "leftists" I've met... it really is. Again, maybe not where you are but that's an individual issue. Regardless your point doesn't make ME wrong, it just means that YOU know of other issues to address as well.
>>8318 I'm actually not saying you are wrong exactly, I more want to suggest that we look at this problem structurally rather than in terms of opinions and aesthetics. Is "leftists" holding incorrect opinions really a problem? Why should we care about peoples hot takes? It's only a problem if those incorrect opinions gain traction within the vanguard organization, and since we literally do not have a vanguard it is a moot point. Maybe I have a one track mind but my stance is that the reason the international left has stagnated since the 70s is that we do not have such an organization to impose discipline among our ranks. I think all of these aesthetic and opinion related issues can be solved by reestablishing an international vanguard, and they only really matter as problems if they are preventing us from doing so (which I don't think they are for the most part). The responsibility is on US as actual communists to build the revolutionary organization and we really need to stop worrying about changing peoples opinions, because peoples opinions are ultimately pretty inconsequential. That's just my take, and I'm not just responding to you. It seems like a pretty typical mode of discourse on the internet and also in the left in general to be concerned primarily about getting everyone on the same page about whatever issue (vanguardism, discipline, professionalism, etc), and the idea is that once we are on the same page about it then we can apply it. While theoretical unity is important I think this approach is backwards. We need an organization to maintain theoretical unity, and that unity is only relevant if we have an organization. Thus, the organization itself must come first. Does that seem to hold up? I'm kinda just now grasping the totality of how backwards this disorganized form of sectarianism is so I could be overstating it, but it seems to me like we are in a position where sectarianism is no longer just about actual organizing issues or theoretical considerations, because it's not just being engaged in strictly in organizational settings. It has also become a way to signal things about your identity. When those of us who aren't in an actual vanguard party (so all of is since there really is none) call ourselves Leninists are we really saying anything constructive? It might be nice to feel like we're engaging in polemics and that our online or in person debates are matters of theoretical necessity, but we aren't talking about actual organizational matters as they relate to OUR material conditions. It's always done vicariously in a sense. Which side in the Syrian civil war do you support? When exactly did the USSR become revisionist? These questions are extremely important, and need to be addressed theoretically whatever the circumstances. But is convincing people that your answer is correct even consequential if it isn't in the context of maintaining party unity? And if not, what is the function of engaging in these debates as individuals and as sects? Is it just a way to signal something about your identity? Is tweeting "victory to hezbollah" any or arguing with people about vanguardism any different from idpol??? I don't know the answers. I'm just losing faith in this "overton window" model of politics and I think we need a more structural way to address the issues. I really do think it's up to us as communists and marxists to just ignore the BS, find eachother and get organizing. All these arguments in the current situation are just distractions.
>>8331 >holding incorrect opinions really a problem >why care Because you can't get a unified front when everyone has different opinions on what to do. It is better to streamline things and be pragmatic than ideological. >Does that seem to hold up Your point makes sense. It's just that the issue is individuals of various ideologies cannot be controlled and many will disregard this for "fuck you, got mine" mindset. >we need a more structural way to address the issues. You're absolutely correct... unfortunately we lack charismatic leaders like Lenin and Stalin and Castro who can influence people enough to focus on current problems. Ironically reddit is doing this better than any chan. They have a giant google doc dedicated to debunking anti-communist myths of every country and this ought to free people up to discuss real world politics instead of bitching and moaning about "muh evul Stalin purges" for the 2000th time.
>>8350 >Because you can't get a unified front when everyone has different opinions on what to do. What can a unified front accomplish if it is not lead by a party? > It is better to streamline things and be pragmatic than ideological. Ah, but it is better still to be SCIENTIFIC. >Your point makes sense. It's just that the issue is individuals of various ideologies cannot be controlled and many will disregard this for "fuck you, got mine" mindset. And if such individuals adhere to an ideology rather than a scientific approach, what will they accomplish? Why do they matter? >You're absolutely correct... unfortunately we lack charismatic leaders like Lenin and Stalin and Castro who can influence people enough to focus on current problems. See, this is exactly my disagreement. We don't need charismatic leaders when there is nothing for them to lead. We need to build the party and in that process we will figure out who is charismatic enough to be the face of the party. >They have a giant google doc dedicated to debunking anti-communist myths of every country and this ought to free people up to discuss real world politics instead of bitching and moaning about "muh evul Stalin purges" for the 2000th time. And I'm saying that debunking these myths is inconsequential and a waste of time. Well, not exactly inconsequential, just that they have already been thoroughly debunked and that info is out there to be found by anyone who actually cares about the truth. Instead of convincing normies that Stalin was good, we should be identifying who already knows this and try to get together and actually build something. If our theory is correct then that will be demonstrated through the success of it's implementation.
>>8383 > if it is not lead by a party That's the point, nobody can agree which party ought to lead, and a single party won't arise because no-one can put aside their differences long enough to do anything worth a damn > if such individuals adhere to an ideology rather than a scientific approach, what will they accomplish? Why do they matter? They matter because they can still influence other people and lead them in their own direction and to spurn "us" and thus undermine any efforts other than their own. Why do you think Anarchists were crushed by the Bolsheviks after the main Revolution ended? It's a well recorded fact that they kept leading revolts and insurrections, destabilizing the country and forcing the Red Army to divide its attention between them and the Interventionists/White Guard, setting back the movement for years. > I'm saying that debunking these myths is inconsequential and a waste of time Its not a waste of time, to debunk them, but it is a waste of time to rehash the same debunks over and over. At this point we shouldn't engage in arguments about "gorillions" and "gulags" and just link them to pre-written debunks and continue current-world discussion, which is my point. >we should be identifying who already knows this and try to get together and actually build something That's what I'm saying... I'm agreeing with you m8.
>>8387 >That's the point, nobody can agree which party ought to lead, and a single party won't arise because no-one can put aside their differences long enough to do anything worth a damn This might be the difference between those of us who believe in organic centralism and those who instead want to maintain democratic centralism, but I don't think these differences matter. Marxism is science. Whichever party correctly implements this science will be able to demonstrate it's tactical superiority through its correct party line and it's effective actions. I don't think we need everyone on the left to be in the same party or all parties to agree, we just need one party that does have the correct theory, and if it's theory is correct it will outperform all other parties and become the international vanguard. We know that there is currently no such party. >They matter because they can still influence other people and lead them in their own direction and to spurn "us" and thus undermine any efforts other than their own. Right, but this undermining will only be effective if our forms of organization are equally as ineffective as theirs. If we have the correct political formation then it won't matter. >Why do you think Anarchists were crushed by the Bolsheviks after the main Revolution ended? It's a well recorded fact that they kept leading revolts and insurrections, destabilizing the country and forcing the Red Army to divide its attention between them and the Interventionists/White Guard, setting back the movement for years. Right, and why could they crush the anarchists? Because they had a centralized party to organize the broad masses of workers into an army, where as the anarchists did not. We won't be able to silence the contemporary anarchists until we have a party, so what is the point of arguing with them when that time could be spent trying to organize a party? >Its not a waste of time, to debunk them, but it is a waste of time to rehash the same debunks over and over. At this point we shouldn't engage in arguments about "gorillions" and "gulags" and just link them to pre-written debunks and continue current-world discussion, which is my point. Fair enough. I don't really come across new things that need debunking though. TBH I think reading blackshirts and reds is a sufficient way for most people to be redpilled on this issue. Instead of trying to constantly defend Stalin's legacy I think we should just recommend that book and then move on. It is their choice if they want to read it or not. >That's what I'm saying... I'm agreeing with you m8. Great! I have been trying to draft a party program for a 21st century international vanguard party. I think some technological developments have brought the potential for certain organizing strategies to be outmoded. We still need to have IRL meetings and such to actually put things into practice, but I think the theoretical work can be done online. What tendencies do you think could be included in a true vanguard party for the 21st century? I would be willing work with anyone who actually believes in revolutionary socialism as science rather than ideology. This may include Hoxhaists and MLMs and maybe some MLs... maybe even some Cockshott fags. I don't know if other Bordigist's would be interested in such a project since they tend to be offended by my overall positive view of ML states.
>>8390 >What tendencies do you think could be included in a true vanguard party for the 21st century Cockshottists definitely, MLs and MLMs are definitely a positive (excluding thirdworldists). Hoxhaists tend to also have good ideas and are generally agreeable people. Leftcoms are definitely out. Some are really good on theory but this never goes anywhere and they like to deride pragmatic socialist takes like those of Lenin, Stalin and Parenti as "not adhering to Marxism". The main direction is to approach things from pragmatic and logical positions, based on science, but also on human interaction. After all, people follow understand and like simple slogans far better than lengthy, dry facts. >Work, Land, Bread >From each according to their ability, to each according to their need and other such phrases are good examples. However those are outdated and appeal more to simple workers and peasants rather than today's people. >technological developments have brought the potential for certain organizing strategies to be outmoded Definitely. It also creates new ones as well. >theoretical work can be done online 100% this, though it will need proper moderation since we don't want /pol/ 2.0 >We won't be able to silence the contemporary anarchists until we have a party, so what is the point of arguing with them when that time could be spent trying to organize a party An excellent point, which is why I tend to avoid arguments with ankids unless they outright spout anti-communist myths, which is when I refer them to articles debunking them. ...It's ironic that this relatively simple conversation is already far more productive than the dozens of "what to do" threads in /leftypol/.
(42.66 KB cybercom.pdf)
>>8397 >Leftcoms are definitely out. Some are really good on theory but this never goes anywhere and they like to deride pragmatic socialist takes like those of Lenin, Stalin and Parenti as "not adhering to Marxism". Yeah this can bug me sometimes. It's the derisive attitude I don't like though. I do hold that mode of production in the USSR was capitalist so I am a proper leftcom in that sense, but I don't really see there being much common ground between myself and anarchists or council coms or even most "contemporary" leftcoms. I don't like the Stalin and Mao bashing in these circles because I see these people as the greatest revolutionaries to ever live, even if they where romantic revolutionaries who established capitalism from feudalism rather than communism from capitalism (which seems to be the ML line). It kinda leaves me in a weird spot in terms of who I can work with though since other leftcoms don't like that I have a positive view of Stalin and national liberation movements and the third world, and MLs don't like that I hold the mode of production in the USSR and PRC and DPRK to be / have been capitalist. >Definitely. It also creates new ones as well. I agree. >It's ironic that this relatively simple conversation is already far more productive than the dozens of "what to do" threads in /leftypol/. No kidding! Especially since it is in /hobby/ lol. I sorta treat /leftypol/ as a place to blow off steam rather then to have super serious discussions. I like the alt boards since it is a little slower and people tend to be a bit more thoughtful. What do you think of this take? I sorta think we need to rethink what "scientific socialism" means today from the ground up. There have been developments in science and technology that have some drastic implications for what a science of revolution might look like. I don't mean revising Marx or Engels, and I also don't mean trying to make Marxism conform to Bourgeois science. I do mean looking at the successes and failures of bourgeois science though and thinking seriously about what we should and should not emulate. There are people like Anwar Shaikh that are taking a scientific approach to Marxian economics, but I think this approach is revisionist and it is limited by the fact that it is being done within the confines of academia. It is based on this trend in economics towards quantizement, which is inspired by certain approaches to particle physics that are turning out to be something of a dead end (theoretically that is, they are useful experimentally). Then there is Cockshott who is also trying to rethink socialism. I like his anti-revisionist stance quite a bit, and that he bases his theory more off of Marxism then Marxian economics, but there is also a sense in which his approach is utopian. I don't want a science of what communism will look like. I want a science of revolution! Cockshott moves away from centralization which I think is kinda problematic. It may have advantages from an economic planning perspective, and maybe there are ways this can be implemented once we have a workers state, but the revolution is not going to happen in a decentralized manner. That is just wishful thinking. Maybe that isn't what Cockshott is actually saying but it's something I hear a lot from his disciples. We need the most advanced and resolute sections of the proletariat to all be in communication with each other if we are going to develop the correct party line. Maybe this can happen over the internet, but the actual structure of the organization is not going to be decentralized. I think if we can develop a modern science of revolution (a project which I believe Marx, Engels, Lenin, and also in some ways Mao all contributed to) I think it will be quite different in appearance then what we have seen before. I think democracy is going to be completely outmoded. If our theory is really science, then shouldn't we be able to make theoretical calculations? We already do this by hand in in our heads to a degree, and a lot can be accomplished this way, but on principle shouldn't computers be able to do part of this work for us? I know it sounds kinda crazy, and even if it is possible it is very ambitious, but think about the enemy we are up against: the technological capabilities of alphabet soup. The cyberwarfare capabilities of Israel and the US and South Korea. It's a totally different playing field then what we had in the 20th century and we have barely mastered the mediums of blogs and imageboards. This is somewhere that the DPRK is doing a very good job, but there is no way that I know of for the international left to actually collaborate with them in that regard. Idk, that's just what I've been thinking about. I'll attach the PDF of the program I've been working on, it's very much a work in progress and you might have already seen it in the /cybersocialism/ thread, but this conversation provides more context. I'm already rethinking the line on the ICP / PCI in the introduction because idk if it's realistic to say that they where ever the international vanguard, even if I agree with most of the theory they articulated. If you've got thoughts on any of this or ideas of your own to share I'd love to hear them.
>>8024 Bumping for good yet underrated thread
The obsession with "degeneracy" and "idpol" and people with "too many piercings" or the "wrong coloured hair" that posters in this thread and on /leftypol/ generally have is pathetic and pointless Perhaps if the average hardened internet ML wasn't a cringing little boy who'll write paragraphs on an imageboard defending every spec of shit on the NKVD's boots or argue about whether this or that tiny sectarian cult movement was revisionist or based and actually managed to do some IRL work with people that didn't look exactly like them they would realise how meaningless those kinds of words and the ideas behind them are. At best, its a kind of ignorance born of inexperience, more usually its red elitism, the poor, stupid proles won't follow us revolutionaries if we have people that look a bit different, or, Marx forbid! have unusual ways of living or seeing the world in our vanguard party,because of course, such betrodden, unenlightened workers couldn't possibly have their own opinions on what normal looks like, or if its OK or not to be not normal, at worst, its internalised reaction and bigotry masquerading as "anti-idpol" and "historical materialist" stances, with no real reasoning behind it other than "it makes me uncomfortable, so it must be idpol, it must be idealist nonesense" I have seen more IRL work done and more people convinced by a blue-haired punk trans anarchist than I have by any Iron headed, straight laced communist, maybe if any of those actually managed to pry themselves away from their keyboard and come out into the world more people would take them seriously, and maybe they would realise that its not the 1970's, the average worker was born anywhere between the early 80's to the late 90's and don't piss and shit everywhere at the site of someone slightly different breathing the same air
>>9865 Nice trash >The obsession How is there an obsession? Its brought up A) When some lib starts shilling their "there are 500 different genders" and other rubbish B) When /pol/ starts baiting with liberal talking points C) when discussing some of SEVERAL issues of the left in America and Europe. All of these instances are pretty rare and the conversations only tended to spiral out of control in the idpol containment threads which was essentially a troll and sjw piranha tank that the mods used to prevent talk on these irrellevant subjects >the average hardened internet ML wasn't a cringing little boy >defending every spec of shit on the NKVD's boots <Muh whitey tankies <Muh NKVD! See pic 1 and GTFO liberal. Defending the USSR is done on the principle of defending the primary example of socialism in action. This does not exclude self-crit >argue about whether this or that tiny sectarian cult movement was revisionist or based <implying that only MLs do this and that it isn't a pointless wankfest >work with people that didn't look exactly like them <what was the Red army, what was Vietnam <If you don't actively state love for black people and gays you're a racist homophobe! <If you think that pandering to minorities, fetishists & liberals is wrong and enables dumb shit you're not doing anything IRL See pic 1 again. People who do actual shit IRL don't care about these things at all, and its fairly obvious that this is the majority opinion of /leftypol/ majority. The only complaint regards liberals dominating public left-view and shilling idpol 24/7 to where even the most tolerant of socialists are rolling their eyes. Not only is it token "bailing capitalism" but also used to shut-down the urge to revolt by appeasement and distraction. >its a kind of ignorance born of inexperience <if you're not a woman or gay or black or a punk then you don't understand, wah!!! Pathetic. If people of different races, sexes and cultures cannot empathize with one another then there is no left unity to be had. Human experiences are never 100% the same and yet somehow that has never stopped empathy before. >red elitism <Muh commissars! How delusional are you? Majority rule is a principle part of communism. Pandering to a minority is counter-revolutionary. You're replacing capital with race or gender, which makes it no-longer about communism >poor, stupid proles won't follow us revolutionaries if we have people that look a bit different See pic 2 and stop making shit up. You're obviously referencing the shit with "muh furries are workers" and the shite about "muh fat is healthy" which are so esoteric and retarded that its not even worth serious consideration past a simple understanding: There is no point pandering to a minority fetish subculture with divisive radical left politics when its supposed to be addressed towards the working class as a whole, irrelevant to what your legal bedroom antics are. Keep your personal-private life out of politics because rallies, protests and other activities are not places to "have fun". >Marx forbid! People reference Marx because he and Engels and Lenin and even the highly anti-Soviet Orwell considered such bullshit to be counter-productive. That's why /leftypol/ has always been derisive of 'muh free love' hippy movements since their biggest success was being annoying to the US government during Vietnam. > unusual ways of living Differences in culture is not the same as "why can't I parade my gimps in public during the gay parade?!" and "what's wrong with young children being drag-queens!?" and "Why can't we lie about fat being beautiful and healthy?!" If you defend any of this you're part of the problem. >betrodden, unenlightened workers couldn't possibly have their own opinions Their opinions lack class consciousness and reek of a complete lack of genuinely caring. Everyone should not have the right to an opinion, but the right to an informed opinion, because parroting Fox and CNN gets you nowhere. The majority of the US lower class are lumpenproles. Hormone-loaded 'bread' and constant low-brow 'circus' give them the endorphins needed to keep them docile, and the long history of defending "the right" to sexual fetishes and other tertiary bullshit over the right to live as decent human beings. They care more for their short-term pleasures than the long-term good for themselves and others. >if its OK or not to be not normal Stop trying to take this out of context as if its "le evul cis white male" persecuting the X-men for no reason. >actually managed to do some IRL work with people that didn't look exactly like them they would realise how meaningless those kinds of words You're contradicting yourself. Moreover the argument of those "MLs" has always been that idpol and the FOCUS on pandering to it, ENCOURAGES segregational views. Being a furry should be irrelevant in a movement, because its not part of your identity as a prole, it is a private fetish. If your sexuality is a major part of your identity to the point where you can't talk about workers rights without bringing up something specific for your minority before the revolution, then you have no personality... something capitalism encourages. This is something Lenin stated and even more liberal leftists have noted as well. People turn their minor sexual activities into major identity issues because the alienation and shallowness of capitalist life leaves people hollow and looking for something to fill this gap.
(1.63 MB 2036x3051 idpol.jpg)
>>9867 >>9865 >it makes me uncomfortable, so it must be idpol <if you dislike idpol you're just closeted! <bourgs supporting idpol? Nah fuck that, u just hate gays See pic related I know plenty of gay people who, for example, think gay parades as repulsive because it turns their private lives into a public circus and creates an association with perversion and fetishism in the public mind. The fact that capitalism pushes this as "major step in progress" and actively funds such activities should speak for itself >no real reasoning behind it <I'm just going to ignore the clear evidence that focusing on idpol as something important to be flaunted is a liberal idea created by the CIA and which actively divides people by telling minorities they're special and oppressed, rather than the actual oppression of the working class Most identity oppression is of material basis, perpetuated by material conditions and thus can be solved through the change in material conditions by institution of socialism. Everything else is attention-whoring. Dividing focus for petty issues before revolution is counter-productive, period. Trans issues and gay issues should not be tip-toed about. There is no doubt on leftypol that gay people are humans, the debate is that, for example, "(little) kids can be gay too!" is retarded and ought be discouraged from socialist discourse. >seen more IRL work done and more people convinced by a blue-haired punk trans anarchist Sure, you're totally not making that up. But fine lets pretend this is real. Was their IRL work independent from their identity of being a "trans anarchist punk? If yes, then you're confirming the point; identity is irrelevant and shouldn't need to be brought up. If you start bringing it up as something important to support, then you're being just like /pol/ about "muh trannies" from the other side of the coin >muh blue hair punk No-one has a problem with dying your hair, so stop emphasizing that. No-one brought up punk at all considering that punk-rock is pretty well known and supported here. >internalised reaction and bigotry masquerading <People CAN'T have legitimate arguments against idpol, you're just hiding reactionaries and bigots! Help, help I'm oppressed! Stop making shit up >by any Iron headed, straight laced communist Yeah, no honey. For every gay and trans person in America there are far more straight people. This difference of population is reflected in socialist movements as well. It is far more likely that because your supposed "trans, punk, blue-hair, anarchist" stood out, you noticed them in comparison to others. >if any of those actually managed to pry themselves away from their keyboard <ur all keyboard warriurs 1) A large number of /leftypol/ users are active IRL 2) Doing shit doesn't exclude posting online considering the sheer ease of this 3) Online agitation and debate is also important in the internet age >they would realise that its not the 1970's LOL for all the bitching about how "its totally not idpol guyz" you chose the wrong time-period to reference, considering how most liberal idpol movements started then. Moreover said movements were confirmed to be A) The basis of things like third-wave feminism and other related political movements today B) Involved CIA assets who were sown to shill "cultural marxism" and "degenerate Americans" In short, that's a bad example >he average worker was born anywhere between the early 80's to the late 90's You don't seem to realize that the 1990s was 30 years ago >don't piss and shit everywhere at the site of someone slightly different breathing the same air Woooow you sure showed us... by stating obvious facts and trying to relate the utter indifference of most people to blacks and gays and /leftypol/'s 'outrage' against blatant obnoxious faggots and deliberate snowflakes. You're proving the point again by pointing this out, because people don't care about gays or race as long as its not some overt identity politics and isn't flaunted in public. TL;DR: Idpol is trash and no amount of 'muh white cis leftypol!' will change that
>>9868 just came flying from the overview to call whatever this poster a retard. seek help idpol fag.
@9879 imagine seeing a poster dismantle an argument and resorting to ad hominem buzzwords
>>8024 My reward system is fucked. I can barely feel positive emotion, it's mostly just stimulation I feel. This extends to everything, I can only emotionally bond with people who are emotionally stimulating to be around and I can barely get shit done because I receive no emotional reward no matter how well I do something, if the action of doing it isn't stimulating then the end result doesn't matter. I think I'm damaged far beyond what I could ever fix by myself and should probably go get screened for personality disorders or something.
(39.51 KB 470x581 capsuff.jpg)
>>9908 >personality disorders You're probably suffering alienation.
>>9913 >You're probably suffering alienation Well of course, CSA is very alienating.
(347.54 KB 1332x1949 impulse control.png)
(558.39 KB 1037x1597 no fap progression.jpg)

Delete
Report

no cookies?