/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

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


/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join our matrix! https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(13.13 KB 220x220 Photo_%282%29.jpg)
Anonymous 05/17/2020 (Sun) 11:54:39 No. 509204
Are there any Marxists who reject Psychoanalysis? It seems like a load of bunk to me, yet I see tons of people desperate to embrace people like Freud (who just seems like a total hack).
>>524042 >You are just moving the goalposts I originally called the statement that saying most 20th century Marxists took psychoanalysis seriously bullshit. And I'm still calling it bullshit. Most 20th century Marxists lived in Asia, same in this century. Do you really believe that even a tenth of Marxists subscribe to Freud? I also said that taking Freud seriously is a Western Europe thing. So here's my ebin goalpost-moving admission: I admit that slightly more than exactly zero "Freudo-Marxists" exist outside of Western Europe. Woopdefuckingdoo. It is still very much niche and that niche is mostly in Western Europe (and to be clear, most Marxists within Western Europe aren't into Freud) and calling it anything else than a niche is delusional. It is a much smaller niche than Christian Marxists or Muslim Marxists or Vegetarian Marxists and having any sort of belief that it is less idiosyncratic than those things is just western student wanker myopia on your part.
>>509204 Surprised that Freudposter hasn't appeared yet to call you a retard and order you to read Lacan.
>>524117 >Do you really believe that even a tenth of Marxists subscribe to Freud? I really don't give a shit because most of them didn't study Freud in depth. You could just as easily say that "not even a tenth of every Marxist subscribe to a hydrogeophysicist journal" and it would hold just as much value in my eye as a supposed criticism of hydrogeophysics as a discipline. You could say that, "sure, but almost all Marxists accept the validity of hydrogeophysics," (while less then tenth of them even heard about it), but then we'd see that they rely on the authority of experts and not their own intelligence. I love having to share this board with such intellectually lazy asses as yourself, who rely on third and second hand accounts (with such glaring misrepresentations as >>520556 and mere focus on biographical nothingburger drama >>521469) and completely ruled out of even consulting second hand accounts (or unbiased intro books) on the subject, not to mention the original material. You must view this as a contest of taking sides between "cringe" and "based" people, like a good little sycophant. "Lenin said Freud a shit, so I don't need to read him to critique him" is an attitude Lenin would despise, and one that actually hurt 20th century socialism.
>>524066 >>524094 Huh, the more you know. I only assumed as much since Psychoanalytic Marxism only really came on on the scene with the Frankfurts and associates.
>>524094 Did they happen to turn into libertarian leninists
>>524238 >libertarian leninists Wew.
>>521396 I love him shitting on Chomsky
>>524197 >I really don't give a shit That's not an argument, that's narcissism. It is wrong to claim that most 20th century Marxists took Freud seriously. Your analogy with hydrogeophysics doesn't work because it isn't in conflict with Marxism, whereas Freud was an anti-communist who subscribed to the great-men view of history.
>>524664 Psychoanalysis is not in conflict with Marxism either, you dishonest little rat.
>>524877 >Freud was an anti-communist who subscribed to the great-men view of history >not in conflict with Marxism
>>524948 What Freud himself thought about Marxism is irrelevant, what actually matters is whether his ideas are in conflict with Marxism or not. Please elaborate how they are, if you think so.
>>524964 >what actually matters is whether his ideas are in conflict with Marxism or not. Read Civilization and Its Discontents.
>>524998 Care to explain what you mean instead of giving me a book recommendation?
>>525004 Just read it. It's pretty short.
>>525087 So you can't. Good to know.
>>525094 >I win by not reading anything Oh hai muke.
>>525107 It's extremely annoying to come across intellectually lazy people who cannot even formulate an argument. You should work on that if you care about convincing people.
>>525116 I can lead a horse to water but I can't make it drink.
>>525141 You should still practice your arguments so that you can convince people IRL
>>525107 >i don't have to argue my position in the slightest Oh hi retard.
>>525146 It's useless. Have you ever tried to deprogram Freudfags IRL? Your options: >1. bring up a short excerpt <This is out of context and you are ignorant :^) >2. give them the whole text <tldr :^) >3. try finding the golden mean between 1 & 2 <This is out of context and also too long :^)
>>525173 There is another option. Formulate an argument (don't quote) and explain to Freudfags why they're wrong. I think your main problem is that you aren't capable of doing that.
>>525185 No, you know what, you are right. Being a Freudian fits very well together with being a communist. Now that you have decided to be a Freudian communist, go read Freud's Civilization and Its Discontents and enjoy the coherence.
>>525190 You still haven't been able to formulate an argument. How are you different from a "it's not my job to educate you" radlib?
>>524964 >what actually matters is whether his ideas are in conflict with Marxism or not. They are, because Freudism is unscientific garbage
>>525238 Explain how it is unscientific garbage. Back up your claims.
>>521157 >Murdered his wife Irrelevant to works he produced before going crazy.
>>525203 In fact you can't teach people by spoonfeeding them. If I tell you what to think of Marx and what to think of Freud and so what to think about how they relate to each other, how are you supposed to know that they do indeed relate to each other that way? I could have made a nebulous gesture towards the works of Freud, but I didn't do that. I did not ask you to go read an entire bookshelf. And it isn't an obscure text, those in the pro-Freud camp should already know its contents in and out, so I'm not offloading an unfair burden onto the pro-Freud camp in this discussion. If my stance on Freud is wrong, you should benefit from reading it.
>>525262 If we're going to have a discussion you have to formulate criticism that we actually can respond to. Otherwise, it's completely pointless. If I want to verify what you say I will, but I can't do that unless you actually say something. You are trying to dodge actually making an argument and I suspect it's deliberate. And I'm actually not that much of a Freudfag, although I have read him, I just find your attitude extremely lazy and unproductive.
>>525203 Not that guy, but my issue with guys like Zizek, Lasch, Nagle, etc is that they tend to emphasize that the problem with capitalism is the instability of the market, the lack of communal connection, the lack of a sense of purpose, rather than the market being a repressive force that keeps people from growing. Of course they probably wouldn't disagree that the market is repressive, but my impression is that what they think is repressive about it is not the same as what someone like Delueze thought was repressive. Chapo Trap House thinks in a similar way too, especially when they talk about alienation in a way that is separate from how Marx thought about it. It all really goes back to this spat between Striner and Marx, and I think some Marxists tend to write off Stirner because they have a shallow reading of Stirner. I think you should be a Marxist because it's in your own self interest, not because it's the right or moral thing to do, basically.
>>525273 Thank you for actually explaining what you mean. I really appreciate that. Personally, I don't see any problem with focusing on the psychological effect that capitalism has on individuals. I get what you mean with that it's somewhat dissimilar to what Marx's actually talks about (his concept of alienation is different from the colloquial definition of alienation for instance) , but the effects are still real and felt by people. Surely it's just as much in our self-interest to escape that as it is in our self-interest to escape wage slavery?
>>525271 >I have read him What exactly?
>>509204 Freud was a retarted drug addict. Psychoanalysis isn’t theory. It’s just crackpot retardation. Marxism as a theory is upheld because it’s description of how capitalism operates and historical trends are by and large true. Psychoanalysis can’t be proven like Marxism can.
>>525286 There's only so much a therapist can say to you or do for you, and while that can be relieving, you'll still be depressed if you're oppressed. I don't think being depressed is a bad thing, it's good to feel bad; it's your body telling you something's wrong. I'm not opposed to psychoanalysis or psychiatry as a tool (a very limited one), but I don't like the mentality a lot of Freudians push: that it's the individual's inability to cope with the system, rather than the systems inability to provide for people that causes neurosis.
>>525302 Mostly the case histories, but it was a long time ago. >>525324 When I'm talking about escaping the detrimental effects capitalism has on your psyche, I'm not talking about therapy, I'm talking about revolution.
>>525313 >marx was a retarded drunk. Communism isn't theory. It's just crackpot retardation. Gottem.
>>525330 How about reading this: >The communists believe that they have found the path to deliverance from our evils. According to them, man is wholly good and is well-disposed to his neighbour; but the institution of private property has corrupted his nature. The ownership of private wealth gives the individual power, and with it the temptation to ill-treat his neighbour; while the man who is excluded from possession is bound to rebel in hostility against his oppressor. If private property were abolished, all wealth held in common, and everyone allowed to share in the enjoyment of it, ill-will and hostility would disappear among men. Since everyone’s needs would be satisfied, no one would have any reason to regard another as his enemy; all would willingly undertake the work that was necessary. I have no concern with any economic criticisms of the communist system; I cannot enquire into whether the abolition of private property is expedient or advantageous.* But I am able to recognize that the psychological premisses on which the system is based are an untenable illusion. In abolishing private property we deprive the human love of aggression of one of its instruments, certainly a strong one, though certainly not the strongest; but we have in no way altered the differences in power and influence which are misused by aggressiveness, nor have we altered anything in its nature. >*Anyone who has tasted the miseries of poverty in his own youth and has experienced the indifference and arrogance of the well-to-do, should be safe from the suspicion of having no understanding or good will towards endeavours to fight against the inequality of wealth among men and all that it leads to. To be sure, if an attempt is made to base this fight upon an abstract demand, in the name of justice, for equality for all men, there is a very obvious objection to be made — that nature, by endowing individuals with extremely unequal physical attributes and mental capacities, has introduced injustices against which there is no remedy.
>>525273 I wouldn't group zizek together with people like nagle. For zizek, alienation is not a problem with the simple solution of returning to a holistic society but by shifting the perspective on what alienation means.
>>525357 How about you use words to explain what you mean instead of just quoting a passage? Why is that so hard for you?
>>525364 Actually, I'm just quoting myself there. What do you think about my opinion I'm expressing in that post?
>>525392 You're not, so I'm not going to have an opinion.
>>525400 Yes I am.
(18.85 KB 280x180 4e5rtz.jpeg)
>>525357 not all men are created equal, but that doesn't mean we have to create yet more inequality with class society. Do you understand that capitalism is not the result of biological inequalities of people but rather just adds artificial inequality on top of it. making it worse. If you look at the processes of how wealth and power are distributed in capitalism it's essentially random. People have created models that had agents engage into capitalist economic exchanges except that the agents they modelled behaved randomly and the results were exactly what we see in reality, meaning that the statistical effects of money market schemes are so powerful the individual biological characteristics play no role in it. Rich people just like to pretend they have special biology because it's better apologetics for stealing the surplus that others have created, then to admit that they just got lucky and it might as well have been somebody else. Oh by the way eventually people get good at manipulating biology so that it gets possible to fix health and looks of everybody, maybe even find out how to improve the mental capacities of people. So even biology is not an eternal thing.
>>509359 I'm the guy in the third post, this was one of our raids we did back in the days of 8chan, we spammed IR on 4chan and 8chan /pol/ boards and other Alt-Right leaning boards to demoralize them. It's one of the best strategy we have against the resurgence of wignatism.
>>525592 Sure I believe you, /pol/yp. These pics are all totally fake and if they are not it was a false flag and if it wasn't that it was an individual case. Just like usual.
>>525599 >/pol/yp I don't even browse there nor do I ideologically agree with fucking nazis, especially when I'm a non-white. What I'm saying is that we conducted false flag operations, we created fake IR discord to grab /pol/tards' ip and dox them, like i mentioned previously, we would spam ir threads on 8chan and 4chan to demoralize them/lure them into our IR discord for doxing.
>>525709 You won't mind posting the results or other form of proof of these operations then, I am sure. Subtlety is not your forte.
>>509413 It's physics-envy. People are afraid to acknowledge that good psychology is dependent on study of the "humanities" rather than just pure statistical "hard science."
>>521469 https://www.konformist.com/2000/psych-lies.htm >And since wherever Nazis congregate, U.S. intelligence is never far away, it's not surprising that Freud had impressive connections to the OSS 'Old Boys' network as well. Particularly close was William Bullit, one of the driving forces behind the OSS, who spent several months working with Freud in Vienna. Yeah, I'm sure Freud being close friends and co-authoring a book with one of the top elite men behind the proto-CIA (the OSS) of the US empire for the last 2 decades of his life has absolutely zero fascist implications.
(54.91 KB 169x265 Snip.PNG)
>>525790 >Posting the results Easy, just go on the /pol/ catalog, these retards are already demoralized, also the comments are a goldmine of /pol/tard tears.

Delete
Report

no cookies?