/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Proletariat without Borders

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. IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(59.13 KB 620x465 sankaragang.jpg)
Leftist Hot Takes and Unpopular Opinions Anonymous 03/25/2020 (Wed) 21:24:55 No. 395988
Be nice, no bullying. (pic unrelated)
religious non-discrimination is fine but religious tolerance is not. it should be the job of Communists to tear down outdated ideology and replace it with new proletarian ideology, and that means ideological struggle. sorry theosocialists
when you know this is going to become another idpol thread
fuck reeducation. kill all porky mother fuckers
(83.52 KB 604x453 1580018220781.jpg)
I will start: Most of the community here considers radlibs to be useless and and annoying. While I don't disagree with the latter, I do disagree with the notion that they are useless. I think that radlibs can be way more easily convinced to accept socialism, or at least begin to understand it. They are clearly (usually) passionate about social issues like gay people and racism, so in theory all that is left to do is to help them understand that the root, underlying cause of these issues is more often than not (usually always) capital, and the ruling class. Any easy way to point this out would be to call out corporate wokeness (ie Disney having a gay cartoon character or something, that they can easily cut out to suit foreign markets). This should be done respectfully, because it is basic human nature to reject (perceived) unwarranted aggression or condescension. >inb4 imma radlib
Collectivist ideologies like communism are cope for losers who are not good enough to succeed as individuals in voluntary association.
>>395993 Hugo Chavez has logged off.
>>395995 If it gets out of hand, I welcome the jannies to nuke the thread.
(222.14 KB 1008x490 damn bro.png)
>>396004 >communism is collectivist
>>396004 >Muh collectivist vs individualist dichotomy Doesn't exist
>>396002 Most radlibs already "accept socialism" to some degree or other (mostly aesthetic though). That's why they're RADlibs and not generic shitlibs. They accept socialism and quote Marx and joke about gulags, but at the end of the day all they do is to bog leftist organizing down with lib faggotry like DSA jazz hands. That is because they're largely declassed individuals who prioritize aesthetics and virtue signaling over class consciousness. It's pointless to waste energy on them, just talk to the actual working class instead.
Having children is good and necessary and anti-natalists should go and fuck themselves.
>>396018 So the government will let me hoard stuff in times of crisis I wisely foresaw and freely exchange it at whatever rate we freely agree upon? >>396024 In some sense, but that is like saying sex is a social construct. You know very well what is meant by it, in practice socialist societies prevent the greatest from soaring to height they could without restrictions while providing a lower floor for those who lack merit.
>>396029 t. breeder justfying forcing a human through the hell of sickness, old age and death
Capitalists are the Chads of the economy and if you were rich you would support capitalism too.
>>396035 t. incel who wants a excuse not to breed
(43.35 KB 450x489 kropotkin.jpg)
>>396038 i mean, you can be a literal prince and still become a communist
Its more productive for leftists to talk to nazis and libertarians about socialism than it is to talk to liberals.
>>396039 I want to breed because my lizard brain will reward me for it, i just don't like having been bred myself.
>>396030 >in practice socialist societies prevent the greatest from soaring to height they could without restrictions while providing a lower floor for those who lack merit. That's capitalist societies you're thinking of, chief, where the greatest are barred from having the opportunity to succeed while the failchidren of the rich endless venues to fail upward. Also, you seem to be in the wrong thread. This is a thread for hot takes or unpopular opinions, not tepid boomerisms that have been endlessly regurgitated through media for generations.
>>396042 The share of class traitors among the upper class are negligible.
>>396026 This. The problem with radlibs isn't a rejection of socialism per say, it's that in practice they don't really place class struggle in the privileged position it ought to be in vis a vis other social struggles. At best they usually will place economic issues on equal footing with other issues, or may correctly point out that it lies at the root of things like the vulnerability of queer people. However this line of thinking often leads them to viewing socialism as a means to an end, that end being the liberation of particular identity groups, rather than an end in and of itself. This prevents them from realizing that while the struggle for social liberation can't be separated from the class struggle, the class struggle can be separated from the liberation of individual identity groups. In other words, they don't realize that even though they need socialism, socialism doesn't need them. Even if they did, their instrumental approach to socialism would prevent them from elevating it above identity struggles. To them the liberation of the working class is just a way to facilitate identity struggles, not its own end.
>>396007 let him log off! he was a natbourg revolutionary at best, at best!
>>396057 Not true. there is a reason the most skilled and talented moved to the liberal capitalist west, needing to be literally walled off by their socialist state.
>>396065 *walled in
(65.15 KB 1000x840 crystal cause large hands.png)
>>396065 ok boomer
>>396065 That's debatable. Brain drain in the GDR took place in a very specific context. Mainly open bribery by the FRG and a more or less open border. It's not some flaw inherent to socialism, the West German government was literally offering them free shit and all they had to do was take a leisurely stroll across the border. The idea of masses of people running the gauntlet of barbed wire and machine guns is a myth, the vast majority of migration to the West took place before the erection of a hard border. For the first several years after the war, Germans could travel freely between occupation zones.
>>396073 idpol
>>396030 >So the government will let me hoard stuff in times of crisis I wisely foresaw and freely exchange it at whatever rate we freely agree upon? Not that anon, but why should the individuals of society permit this either? Why should I not be able to utilize my will to power and say that you cannot act a parasite in such a way? Because it's "freely exchanged"? This is an issue I always see with those who talk about "voluntary exchange" or "non-violent societies", because it views society in vacuum which does not exist and for the other reasons I laid out here >>240992. >In some sense, but that is like saying sex is a social construct. No similar at all. The point is that the dichotomy doesn't exist. The individual exists within collective society, and collective society is made up of those individuals. Society influences the individual and his development, who then goes out to commit actions as an individual. To try to portray it as "muh individual fighting against the oppressive collective" or vice-versa is a joke. >in practice socialist societies prevent the greatest from soaring to height they could without restrictions while providing a lower floor for those who lack merit. It what way? If anything, it provides the means for every person develop their abilites and prove their worth to society. This is a reiteration of the "socialism means everyone is made equal, which is a myth even in practice. Can you name me a single socialist state that even did so "in practice"? Not even the USSR did so.
I think communists can (and should) use nationalism and patriotism, to convert nationalists and fascists to marxism. Every time when I meet a nazbol, strasserist, fascist etc. I just drop this: https://jucheireland.wordpress.com/2017/02/26/on-having-a-correct-understanding-of-nationalism-kim-jong-il/
>>395993 Trying to suppress religion just makes it stronger, the best way to kill it off is to be totally tolerant and create an open society where religion is just seen as the silly anachronism it is.
I'm straight up exhausted and blackpilled by the libertinism of the modern left. Before you say it, no this isn't about idpol. You can identify as whatever you want without being pro-prostitution, supporting the porn industry to own anti-coomer /pol/tards, defending profligate consumption etc. You can't even criticize consumerism in leftist spaces anymore except in the most general of phrases. Once the internet was full of anti-consumerist leftist critique, nowadays you can criticize trashy brain-melting pop culture and get "maaan, just let people enjoy things you bitter nerd" in response. Sometimes it feels like the modern Left's vision of a socialist future is the exact society we have now, an orgiastic consumption of commodities, except nobody has to work and only reads slam poetry. Is that a future worth fighting for? For me it seems not at all different from neoliberalism with an UBI, I guess I won't starve but existence would be pointless all the same. "Oooh, sounds like you want to make everyone live in a grey dystopia where everyone only works, marches in uniforms and listens to the Red Army Choir!" It's almost like these people can't even imagine fulfilling activities other than masturbating and watching Steven Universe. We urgently need a more "conservative" for the lack of a better word, austere culture on the Left. It's not about excluding anyone, but rather rejecting libertinism/consumerism/infantilism and promoting the value of labor and self-sacrifice again. If you think that might exclude certain identities, that is saying more about you than me.
Fascists are beyond saving
>>396080 *as a parasite *in a vacuum *Not similar *to develop I have to get some rest eventually
>>396043 >>396091 thesis and antithesis, so what is the synthesis?
>>396097 anarcho-stalinist synthesis
>>396080 Every socialist country was much more equal and those most successful and worthy in society moved a lot more often away from socialist countries than into them because in capitalist countries they could get more reward for their worth. Wage differentials were insanely lower because they were artificially kept that way, they would be much larger if you let natural inequality run its course unhindered.
>>396083 Yes, I agree. I think religion is retarded, but from a tactical perspective, this seems like a good move. Just look at this video here, a muslim is praising a communist government, how is this a bad thing? Let people have religion, as long they don't seek for political power, who cares? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B1X8Vy9WLM
>>396089 great post. Consumerism, coomerism, and capitalist realist pop "culture" needs to be fucking destroyed.
>>396099 >Every socialist country was much more equal and those most successful and worthy in society moved a lot more often away from socialist countries than into them because in capitalist countries they could get more reward for their worth The USSR trained and retained scores of successful engineers, scientists, and other skilled workers who lived within the USSR till its dissolution. Those who moved away made up a small and largely inconsiquential percentage of the total amount within the union, and were usually far from the "most successful". The USSR did not import workers to the same level the US did as well, so I'm not really sure what point your trying to make by saying less skilled workers from the West moved to the USSR when the USSR accepted less workers from the West period. >Wage differentials were insanely lower because they were artificially kept that way, Define "artificial", your wage is generally already decided by the company you are working for through a myriad of internal calculations. They aren't simply deciding upon a wage based on what is seen as a natural number within the market by itself. If anything, there is a strict limit to what they can afford, and they have incentive to always reduce those costs. The USSR had millionaires by the way, so that point is also bunk. >they would be much larger if you let natural inequality run its course unhindered. "Natural" inequality in what way? The "natural" inequality of the workers who allow the economy to function aquiring lower and lower wages in relation to production? Is it not a "natural inequality" for those workers to seize the state and utilize it for the long term benefit of the workers? And on that note, why is capitalist relations and it's wages the proper "natural inequality"? How is the application of power, the utilization of the will to use it and the eradication and suppression of those that oppose you not also a "natural inequality"? Is it only "natural" when you work in a capitalist economy, working for a wage and competing within the fine lines of an office space or a market venture? Your view on equality/inequality and what is "natural" is very one-dimensional, and devoid of the the larger historical context of power. To act in ones interest in a communist fashion even in regards to wages (which you're already overstating regardless) is as natural as it is unnatural. That is to say, it is no more or less as such then doing nothing at all. Wages do not always reflect ones benefit to society objectively as well, and you could do far better utilizing non-capitalist cybernetic planning to analyze ones use.
Socialism will reestablish natural gender norms. This is a good thing.
>>396180 but why
>>396175 Just wanted to also add that this point of "natural inequality run its course unhindered" is already laughable because it also doesn't exist. Even accepting the "natural" as a thing, there has never been a society, capitalist or otherwise, that has allowed such "natural inequality" in it's fullest to go unhindered. The capitalist society you defend right now doesn't allow "natural inequality" to go unhindered, if anything it "hinders" it far more then the previous systems before it by the metric that such "natural inequality" can only exist and be acted on within the strict confines of the market. I don't see you arguing in support of the "natural inequality" within the confines of a feudal system, or such such things with no confines at all.
>>396193 >>396180 natural as in men and women do what fits them genetically and we axe the "uwu so smol and weak girl" homosexuals?
Sometimes I just feel like this place is just an echo chamber just like actual /Pol/ but they don't really do much in reality. Yes there is some discussion about revolution, but I feel like it's just that a discussion. And let's say we do manage to revolt, take over the government and such... How will we be able to manage a system with all these left ideologies, how will eco-anarchist work with Marxist or hell queer-anarcho. Also, why so negative towards religion? I don't necessarily see the negatives towards religion in general. I don't care if you don't find religion necessary or false. How will the economy be formed, or will I have to barter 2 goats for a PlayStation?
>>396083 Agree, and I think the culture needs to have a strong emphasis and appreciation of science as it defaults religious belief to superstition without aggressively confronting it.
>>396254 It's just a chan, lol. Any actual meaningful organization happens in the streets, not here. This is for sectarian shitposting, shitposting in general and sharing ideas and perspectives on things related to socialism
>>396222 >natural as in men and women do what fits them genetically >axe the "uwu so smol and weak girl" homosexuals? Is this not contradictory?
>>396254 1. it must remain a discussion only board. if we tried to plan anything more ambitious than a legal protest action (and even then!), the site would be shut down and some people in Gitmo before you can say "PATRIOT Act". of course we should do more, but don't go around running your mouth about it if you do! 2. any successful revolution will necessarily be centered around a single party, and as such, left unity is an undesirable thing. we want unity of the proletariat, yes, but that means unity of leadership too. 3. Religion is not only false, it plays a counter-revolutionary role almost inevitably. Even in the rare situations where liberation theology was involved, it was always opposed by a far more powerful organized church (and besides, none of those revolutions are Communist). 4. you need to read Cockshott, homeboy.
The iphone meme is correct and we should spend less time consooming and more time studying and exercising.
>>396222 Fuck off reactionary, learn to stay in your lane
>>396303 t. soft femboi
cockshott is overrated
>>396305 Socialism will mean the total liberation from suffocating gender roles and, no, you will not even get a state-mandated girlfriend.
>>396273 It's really not Even in working class where women where baby machines, they still had to stay fit. >>396332 Liberation from suffocating gender roles via le cute maidoutfits
>>396347 >Liberation from suffocating gender roles via le cute maidoutfits yes, it's called liberation, you know, the choice to do what you want?
>>395995 >When you see a doomed thread
(124.92 KB 800x513 du-juan4.jpg)
>>396089 https://youtu.be/juTk1hrkk_I[Embed] Well you're not wrong to think most consumer culture is bad, but I think you risk falling into a trap where instead of analyzing why that is you misrecognize the problem (or at least risk misrecognizing the problem) as occuring on the consumption side rather than the production side. It should be no surprise after all that /r/consumeproduct is a reactionary sub, complaining about people consuming bad products and not talking about class relations at all, or the fact that these consumers have very little real "choice" in what gets created and what they consume. Most products are subjected to the most brutal kind of market-capitalist logic that leaves very little room for creative expression. I think there's often a similar subjectivist error with Adbusters-style anarchists, who focus their fire on consumers of property in gentrifying neighborhoods -- as culpable as they may be -- and the cultural expressions that emerge as such; hipsters or whatever. As opposed to landlords and developers. I agree with you though that communists should not be afraid of embracing virtues that are otherwise deemed "conservative," such as discipline, the willingness to sacrifice, etc. But it's worth re-reading what Marx wrote about "feudal socialism" as a warning against the notion that socialism is somehow about virtue or equality in mutual poverty or asceticism: >In order to arouse sympathy, the aristocracy was obliged to lose sight, apparently, of its own interests, and to formulate their indictment against the bourgeoisie in the interest of the exploited working class alone. Thus, the aristocracy took their revenge by singing lampoons on their new masters and whispering in his ears sinister prophesies of coming catastrophe. In this way arose feudal Socialism: half lamentation, half lampoon; half an echo of the past, half menace of the future; at times, by its bitter, witty and incisive criticism, striking the bourgeoisie to the very heart’s core; but always ludicrous in its effect, through total incapacity to comprehend the march of modern history. ... >In political practice, therefore, they join in all coercive measures against the working class; and in ordinary life, despite their high-falutin phrases, they stoop to pick up the golden apples dropped from the tree of industry, and to barter truth, love, and honour, for traffic in wool, beetroot-sugar, and potato spirits. >As the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord, so has Clerical Socialism with Feudal Socialism. >Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a Socialist tinge. Has not Christianity declaimed against private property, against marriage, against the State? Has it not preached in the place of these, charity and poverty, celibacy and mortification of the flesh, monastic life and Mother Church? Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat. >>396222 >natural as in men and women do what fits them genetically and we axe the "uwu so smol and weak girl" homosexuals? I find people talking about axing homosexuals pretty funny because, like, we're right here. Come axe us. I decided a long time ago that I would've killed myself if I didn't come out, but I'm alive and posting this, so people who have a problem are gonna have to kill me to put me back in, so you you better go ahead and do it because I've got more important things to do you fucking faggot. I mean that in a nice way. I'm being nice in this thread, on bunkerchan.
>>396026 >DSA jazz hands. Bad example, a radlib isn't a nerd who does weird cringey intersectional stuff. They're liberals who believe they are radical, like that writer at Vox @GayWonk who tweets about how they're a "socialist" despite working for one of the most neoliberal media outlets. >>396062 If you look under the "Issues" tab of Obama's website: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues You'll see that at no point does it talk about ending poverty, just "Equal pay" and "Urban and Economic mobility" (lol wtf???)
Adopting social conservatism is an unappreciated method for preventing idpol.
>>396377 People like you are why idpol is such a big problem, you're not a leftist pyongyang so why not just fuck off?
(30.30 KB 500x604 IMG_20200312_232548.jpg)
Speaking about homosexuality and friends. I'm assuming all rights shall be granted than any other person right? Also how 2 fem?
(203.88 KB 632x900 soviet city.jpg)
Agrarianists and all other ruralfags are big cringe, fuck those backwards pol pottists. Long live Urbanism, long live the industry, long live the city
>>396383 >how 2 fem ???????????????????????????????????????????????????
>>396029 >Having children is good and necessary Yeah for who? Certainly not them. All you're doing is making slaves for porky.
(98.84 KB 1280x720 maxresdefault (6).jpg)
>>396377 It doesn't "prevent it" at all. The idpol people won't stop doing that because you became a social conservative -- if anything it causes people to double down. Again, this is a subjectivist error that cares more about these superstructural expressions instead of the underlying material relations. And to add something I forget to say about people consuming the wrong products, well, "the game was rigged from the start," you could say. It's not like the people who are consuming had any choice the expression. But I've added my 2 cents
>>396347 >It's really not I think you misunderstand, you stated that men and woman should do what "fits" them genetically, but then at the same time stated that people who act in a particular manner should be axed. In what way are those people not also not doing what "genetically fits" them? Not to say I'm defending behavior I might find obnoxious, I would rather prefer both men and woman, straight or homosexual, be disciplined for the purpose of what the conflict for socialism will entail, but I'm not making some arguement regarding what is natural here. However, you are, which is rather nonsensical because whatever they do is technically "natural".
>>396386 Wrong. t. Just About the only Socialist in the Village.
>>396180 The existence of LGBT+ and masculine/feminine spectrums is natural and seen throughout the animal kingdom, anyone who knows about evolution can see this basic scientific fact. But modernists are anti-science and cannot abide conflicts with their black/white binaries that form the basis of ideological control over nature. REEEEEEEE THE HUMAN SUBJECT MUST BE MADE GENERIC!!!! >>396332 >you will not even get a state-mandated girlfriend. Nationalise the dating websites, Make Farmers-Only Great Again!
>>396392 t. pol pot
>>396394 >modernism is anti-gay ????
>>396394 LGBT only exists under capitalism as a means of reducing labor reserve army population.
>>396407 what?
>>396407 what the fuck are you on, hetero
(86.73 KB 567x636 cringe bro.jfif)
>>396407 holy shit dude
>>396415 The reserve army is too big, so porky made a product out of sexual deviency to help shrink it and make a new market at the same time.
>>396407 Literal autism. What you don't think gay sex work in anarco-primative?
>>396407 Are you trolling or just retarded?
>>396422 then what the fuck was going on in ancient greece, dipshit
>>396422 What anal lube hahahahaha Lesbians don't need lube though
>>396029 Wrong. De-birth yourself, faggot.
>>396427 Girls can do anal too pegging is hot and should be encouraged.
>>396029 >>396429 here's another fun take: both sides of this argument are retarded because there's no justifying giving a shit, changes in birth rates are predictable and you can't easily force non-breeders to breed or breeders not to breed.
>>396422 Holy shit, I can't imagine what kind of wonders go on in your head.
>>396437 zero child policy mattafacka
>>396035 >>396388 >>396429 >>396445 Ecofascism, on my /leftypol/? It's more likely than you'd think
(54.39 KB 902x854 image0-7.jpg)
>>396436 Mommy pls pegg me lmao
>>396449 You think ecofascists are anti-natalists? How the hell are you going to have white children running through wheat fields without children?
>>396383 Which areas of femininity do you wish?
>>396038 >kings are the chads of the economy and if you were a king you would support kings to
>>396462 I mean honestly no one can really pull off looking like astolfo, But honestly just having no body hair. I hate having hair grow back like in 2 days. I'm also rather slim built body wise so that's ok, but if I were to say dress in a particular manner, it's like bruh moment. Lastly I like to note for anyone who knows psych. If people usually call me an egg, a tranny or female pronouns I second guess myself on who am I. Maybe I can get help with that. Sorry for derailing
(290.27 KB 640x480 concerned huh... ok.png)
>>396099 >natural inequality Buddy. My dude. Fellow human being. That's a eugenics you're doing right there. That's nazi shit. You sure you're on the right board? >>396453 I guess it would be more accurate to say anti-natalism is a viewpoint with ecofascist leanings. Ecofascists are almost universally anti-natalist, but when you press them on the subject they're almost always selective about it. It's not a huge leap for an ecofascist to go from "The world would be better if there weren't as many people" or "The world would be better if we didn't breed so much" to "Well, people here have their shit together, so they're fine. But things would be so much better if THOSE PEOPLE didn't breed so much... you know the ones..." Excuse the lib reference, but it's like how Thanos wanted to delete 50% of all life, but of course he gets to choose precisely what 50% is exterminated, with him and those he likes spared.
>>396494 >But honestly just having no body hair. I hate having hair grow back like in 2 days. There are laser things you can get (though very pricy) to have it so they don't grow back. >If people usually call me an egg, a tranny or female pronouns I second guess myself on who am I. Maybe I can get help with that. Talking to a expert on the subject can help you with that. Your identity is internal, if one day you like more identifying yourself as a «tranny» or as a feminine fellow, go ahead.
>>396451 Sorry not a mommy and have a benis so no pegging On to hot takes, trotskyist and stalinism can work together but because of the purging no one takes trots seriously and sre consider tratiors. This cns be fixed if they all embraced thenideals of J. Posadas and the intergalactic proles around the galaxy and the universe. Hot tske number 2 the war on catgirls was the biggest coming together of leftypol and after that there was nothing but splitting of the boards. We need to wage more culture wars against our enemies of reddit and twitter for alyunas honor.
>>396407 >>396422 It is time to close this thread.
(320.38 KB 1562x1171 crossdressing_SS.jpg)
>>396362 become a libertarian if you don't want people to react to your retarded rich faggotry >>396394 >post-modernism is good >you commies want everybody to be the same huehuehuehuehue >>396407 >>396377 and fucking galaxy brain takes
Cyberpunk is bad
>>396386 Dude the whole point of the hammer and sickle is the alliance between the rural peasant and the industrial laborer. You can't have socialism without both.
>>396516 Thank you! Yeah I've heard about the Lazer thing it takes multiple procedures too. And yeah a therapist is what I really need to talk about that. I appreciate the help!
Anarchism does not abolish the state, it only ruins a potential state of the majority >>396531 >trotskyist and stalinism can work together Google Marcyism >>396502 >natural inequality <Buddy. My dude. Fellow human being. That's a eugenics you're doing right there. That's nazi shit. You sure you're on the right board? I have my new copypasta.
>>396502 >Ecofascists are almost universally anti-natalist No, just no.
>>396494 >If people usually call me an egg, a tranny or female pronouns I second guess myself on who am I. Trannies call everyone an egg, they are killing the femboy industry with their pushiness.
>>396537 >you commies want everybody to be the same Is not what they were saying though. It's a demonstrable fact that defining gender and sexuality as strictly cisgender and heterosexual is completely unscientific and actively harmful to any leftist movement. Also, opposition to modernism alone does not make one a postmodernist.
(49.09 KB 481x331 Congress in session.jpg)
>>396565 Prove me wrong, bitch.
>>396035 You can kill yourself if you want.
(13.89 KB 306x245 1433482493635.png)
>>396422 >>396407 Counterpoint - straight people only exist in class society because heteronormativity is enforced to maximize population growth.
>>396573 Malthusianism =/= anti-natalism. Fascists will kill off poor people for some magical natural stability because they are malthusian, anti-natalism is a moral position on creating life.
Solarpunk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cyberpunk > all the other dumbass genres that end with punk
>>396587 Steel punk is cool >:(
>>396580 >Conflating globalism with internationalism 80% of socialists don't understand what this actually means
>>396585 Do you think fascists will let those they deem "unfit" breed? Fascism doesn't just stop at outright murdering people, especially in this post-holocaust world. Modern mainstream fascism greatly prefers other forms of genocide, as it's far more marketable.
>>396608 If you're implying that encouraging certain ethnic groups not to reproduce, then moving large numbers of people of different ethnic groups into the place where that people traditionally live thereby making them a minority which will gradually cease to exist is genocide, then it sounds like you're a fascist.
>>396614 Excuse me what? Yes, targeting specific ethnic groups, encouraging them to not reproduce with the explicit intent to eradicate them is absolutely genocide. That's literally one of the things the United States and Canada both did to Indigenous peoples, after outright eradication became unpopular. Sounds to me like you're trying to poison the well, acting like I'm preaching some "white genocide" bullshit. White genocide is a bunch of horseshit. The idea that genocide is more than just death camps and SS raids is plain fact.
>>396646 Certainly not, as no one wants white people to stop existing and as such there's no intent. I certainly don't want white people to stop existing and I'd assume you don't either, nor anyone else. I agree with the residential school thing as well. We of course agree then that every ethnic group is valuable and each government should use their available means to preserve their endemic ethnicities from any threat posed by capitalist greed on their existence, traditions and unique way of life?
>>396580 so the working class is what, inherently national conservative? why would that be the case
(57.19 KB 460x575 aXYZWQg_460s.jpg)
>>396587 synthesis:
(32.57 KB 480x584 D5lf7ziXoAENut2.jpg)
(34.33 KB 552x552 D5lf7zYWsAIVhU7 1.18.30 AM.jpg)
>>396659 This is some good cyberpunk
>>396569 interesting take, at least if you are a fem and get older, you can act like everything in the past didn't happen lmao
>>396569 I'm not gonna tell you that I'm representative but as a femboy admirer, two of my exes (out of like, 3-4) have told me that they're trans now lol.
>>396608 Bro you're missing the point so hard. Eugenics are also not equal to anti-natalism.
>>396655 It's simply an observation. Consider the victory of Trump or the Fascists. They were able to win by appealing to these National-conservative urges and also promising socialist policies, that is national-socialism. Of course, this was a lie and socialists like Strasser were purged. Trump only cares about Israel and muh economy. Not the working class or their conservative values. This is also the case in the middle-east with Nasserism, Baathism, etc. which admittedly were not as deceptive as Western equivalents. If a truly national-conservative socialist movement were to arise in the West, like a mix between Bernie Sanders and Trump. It would completely dominate our political field.
>>396651 Issue is, "white people" isn't an ethnic group. It's a skin color. Not to mention, why are "endemic ethnicities" more important than others? What danger do you see capitalism posing in that context? Do you see migration as a threat? It sounds an awful lot like you're trying to sneak in an ethnocentric nationalism there.
>>396669 Trump isn't very conservative at all. He is actually fairly progressive for a Republican.
>>396669 It's not whether the working class is receptive to national conservatism or not. It's why they are receptive, when they are. Also, it serves nothing to ignore the fact that: 1. although gaining working-class support is partly important for those movements you mentioned, the linchpins are all bourgeois 2. the ideologies held by workers depend on a wide range of circumstances that affect them, including whatever Communists may do to change worker's minds on these questions.
>>396407 This, The trans movement, which primarily targets men, is a big part of that. Pushing men, that normally get no support from society at large, into sterilizing themselves. Many of these men experience a sense of community belong for the first time only when they decide to become trans. Liberal society withholds that from them until then.
>>396680 More women transition than men if you look at the raw numbers.
>>396680 >>396651 >>396580 There's a lot of thinly-veiled conservative ideas being posted here all of a sudden...
>>396686 >More women transition than men if you look at the raw numbers. LMAO No
>>396698 thinly veiled? this nigga from /pol/, prove me wrong
>>396698 The main part of Conservativism that is incompatible with socialism is the love of capitalism and the free market.
>>396698 Your chapocels mods ban wrong think. Don't be surprised when you ask for honest opinions for once you get people that don't fit your rigid cypto lib thinking.
>>396704 >thinly veiled? this nigga from /pol/, prove me wrong >It's all one person Cope
>>396711 Fuck off Pyongyang
>>396710 >The main part of Conservativism that is incompatible with socialism is that it is reactionary.
>>396671 Ethnonationalism as /pol/ or stormfront wants it isn't feasible or desirable, but neolib/neocon civic "nationalism" is just a buzzword at this point. You need a healthy in between.
>>396726 Nah, it's all bullshit, nationalists get the bullet
(219.57 KB 1000x573 demons-be-gone.jpg)
>>396711 >crypto lib lmfao what? Apparently the most basic of basic Marxism and Marxist analyses are "CrYpTo LiB" now. Glad you went mask-off and admitted to being a reactionary tho. >>396710 Wrong. Far right ideologies like Nazism, in the end, would need to get rid of capitalism eventually to further solidify their national hierarchy. Obviously they wouldn't do socialism, but there wouldn't be capitalism anymore. >>396719 Don't denigrate Pyongyang by attaching them to this bullshit. >>396726 all nationalism is reactionary and counterrevolutionary. Have you read literally ANY leftist literature? Not just Marxist, but ANYTHING?
> Marxism-Leninism is a form of Marxism that was forged in the 20th century in the Soviet Union. Marxist-Leninists heavily favor the use of a communist political party as the platform for both achieving revolution and establishing socialism. Many Marxist-Leninists are somewhat more nationalistic and patriotic than many other Marxists, and may favor industrial progress over environmental goals. Am I not unreasonable to assume that MLs will actually be pretty internationalistic and environmental??
>>396737 I read the Communist Manifesto. Some of it was agreeable, but I hated a lot of it.
>>396742 ML accepts proletarian internationalism as a crucial part of its theory, and this was the basis of the split of the 2nd International. and, I don't know of a single serious Communist (of any tendency) who isn't in favor of keeping the planet Earth habitable.
>>396748 Read TANS
>>396737 >Wrong. Far right ideologies like Nazism, in the end, would need to get rid of capitalism eventually to further solidify their national hierarchy. Obviously they wouldn't do socialism, but there wouldn't be capitalism anymore. Funny how they never actually do though. Fascism is just a false promise fed to the underclass while the bourgs know what's really going on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC4jgcT2N_0
>>396762 Marx would have been smart enough to realise that the manufactured controversy over LGBT people is an obvious ploy to divide the working class
>>396762 not that the gender question was ever at the center of this debate, but since you bring it up <some of leftypol is cool with trans <some of leftypol isn't <you don't belong to the latter camp <because you're a fascist and not a leftypoller.
>>396764 >LGBT is manufactured to divide the working class This. Also making abortion and immigration the main rallying cried of the democrat party was a mistake.
>>396748 If that's it, you haven't even scratched the surface of Marxism, let alone Communism. What specifically did you like and dislike? Maybe check out "the ABCs of Communism" (which I've uploaded here) which is a very accessible look at communism. There's still more you'd need to actually have a full understanding of dialectical materialism, Marxist/scientific philosophy, and communism, but it'd be a start. >>396742 As for this, I'd highly recommend "Marx's Ecology" for a look at how Marx and Marxist-Leninist thought deals with ecological concerns. >>396762 Okay, I need to hear this explanation. How am I a eugenicist?
>>396669 >If a truly national-conservative socialist movement were to arise in the West, like a mix between Bernie Sanders and Trump. It would completely dominate our political field. That was basically George Wallace in the late 1960s. But Nixon still won so dunno how successful it would be. >>396726 >Ethnonationalism as /pol/ or stormfront wants it isn't feasible or desirable, but neolib/neocon civic "nationalism" is just a buzzword at this point. You need a healthy in between. Not sure how big of a difference there is between these things tbh. The neocons during the Bush years were obsessed with Muslim birthrates and circulated books in the WH on it. >>396737 >Wrong. Far right ideologies like Nazism, in the end, would need to get rid of capitalism eventually to further solidify their national hierarchy. Obviously they wouldn't do socialism, but there wouldn't be capitalism anymore. Well the Nazis described it as a "nation of rulers." I read a description of the Nazi economy as like a "barbaric" mode of production. Essentially take all the "native" / "Aryan" men and conscript them into layers of the unproductive military and bureaucracy. Stick them in guard towers. Idea being to destroy the working class of the country so there would no longer be any workers. Then replace the people you've removed from the labor force with your own native women (housekeepers, often, unpaid kind of slave labor) and also literally just slaves imported by the millions if necessary.
>>396790 Note he said manufactured controversy over LGBT, not LGBT itself (though I do hate the term).
>>396790 This fucking baby thinks the Dems are there to put forward policies for the public lmao
(73.38 KB 565x648 Mio pfft.jpg)
>>396790 >Implying that the Democratic party actually gives a shit about women's liberation and international solidarity with those in need
>>396797 I'm a Canadian. The NDP is just as obsessed with neolib idpol and it turns off most voters.
>>396801 Liberation from what?
>>396803 The NDP is a shit example. Leftypol generally agrees that liberal idpol is false, but what does that have to do with accepting or hating gay and trans people?
(38.95 KB 274x299 edgy hitler.jpg)
>>396804 Oh boy, here comes the part where the reactionary says that all feminist theory and any struggle for women's equality is idpol, completely ignorant of the dichotomy between bourgeois feminism and real feminism.
(153.05 KB 630x354 newsom-marriage.gif)
LGBT people will do their thing regardless of what "the left" or "socialists" think or demand of them. People on bunkerchan act like chess masters playing with pawns, like LGBT people are pawns, and philosophize whether to sacrifice their pawns to get in a better position, but most of the people here are 20-year-olds and literal teenagers who don't know anything and don't even have any fucking chess pieces. You're not playing chess... you're not even playing fucking checkers. LGBT people won political victories and some narrowly-constrained "rights" (in a bourgeois legal framework) and had been struggling to achieve those democratic reforms for decades and accomplished most of them without your help, and they don't owe people here anything, and if you dumped LGBT stuff or somehow denounced it or postured as social conservatives, it won't really matter either way. >>396803 >I'm a Canadian. The NDP is just as obsessed with neolib idpol and it turns off most voters. So they vote for Trudeau instead? This doesn't make any sense.
>>396815 Women should be allowed to vote as much as any other citizen should. Modern feminists are just advocating for women to work (why?), use contraceptives (don't have sex if you don't want children) and abort any children that might inconvenience them. If we need workers bad enough to force women to work and import new workers from overseas, we shouldn't be aborting our future workforce.
A lot of leftists refuse to analyze the failing of their own respective movements and would prefer to believe that their failings are related to that of the individual scale, and that if they only had the perfect mix of individuals they would have or currently would succeed. For them it's not that their praxis failed, it's that it would have succeeded if X didn't exist, without realizing either how X came into existence or how X was is or are largely inconsiquential in regards to the movements larger failings.
>>396821 Well no, if you like liberal idol but hate socialism, you vote Liberal. If you're willing to support socialism, but have conservative values socially, then you'll either vote Conservative, PPC or not vote at all.
>>396790 That's the opposite of what I was saying fucko. Just let people put their dicks where they want, fuck does it have to do with socialism?
>>396824 >If you're willing to support socialism, but have conservative values socially Good thing 'conservative socialists' don't exist or we might have an issue there
>>396825 Exactly. It can be true independently of socialism, but I think nationalism and conservative social values compliment socialism best. It is about caring for every member of our community equally. Giving families the resources they need to survive and live fulfilling lives to enable the country to flourish.
>>396836 >It is about caring for every member of our community equally That's the opposite of actual conservative values though. Shit on liberals if you want but conservatives make them look like fucking saints.
>>396822 >for women to work they have always worked, in the lower classes. the question is, are they a tradwife working for free at home, or a proletarian working for wages outside. >contraceptives many people want to enjoy casual sex, or even just have sex with their partner but not reproduce. why are you upset about that? is it the "white baby fetish"? >muhbortion Medical reasons (safety of mother) Moral reasons (rape) Practical reasons (not ready or able to care for a child) yes, there are many good reasons why a woman may need to abort a pregnancy. but ultimately the most important one is that she ought to decide what happens in her body.
>>396839 That's the opposite of modern "Conservative" Party or Republican values.
>>396842 It's hardly a modern innovation, conservatives have always hated the poor and the outcasts while liberals at least sometimes try to throw them a bone or pay lip service. Conservative parties the world over are the same and they've been that way for centuries.
>>396841 Yes, the difference is whether they along with their husbands are providing their own flesh and blood with the resources and values they need to survive or working for some corporation just because they need the money. As far as the casual sex thing, I don't understand how this has become a central tenet of the Left, but I think it's clear all the reasons why it's harmful to everyone involved. The risk of pregnancy and STDs. The child, if allowed to live by its' mother will not grow up in a stable household. The orgasm is just as much an addiction as any drug. Promoting contraceptives and abortion as the best way to avoid having children is really a perfect example of everything wrong with the West. Having healthy children should be viewed as the best possible thing one can do with one's life, to bring forth new life into the world and continue on the community. The state should help families succeed all along the way with any care for >muh free market. That's the socialism that will appeal to good people. That's the socialism that peasants fought for in France and Russia. They didn't care about any of this other garbage, they wanted to feed their kids and take care of their family.
>>396849 This. The reason working class conservatives think the republicans give a shit about them is because they have learned to associate themselves with "America", so when the talking heads on TV say republicans are doing good things for America, then that means they're doing good for them.
>>396859 What's the point in fighting for freedom from the bourgeoisie when we just have to be enslaved by your Christian parochialism instead? You think casual sex is icky? Great, why not try not doing it then.
>>396859 If you value the making of babies this highly, we won't stop you from making all the babies you can possibly make. Not all people value babymaking like you do, mate. Some of us just like fucking. Even among those who raise good families, some people like to have sex without reproduction as well.
>>396822 >Women should be allowed to vote as much as any other citizen should. Bourgeois electoralism is just as useless to working class women as anyone else, but ok sure. >Modern feminists are just advocating for women to work (why?) Women have always worked. What feminism is asking is that they be paid for it and seen as equal to male workers. >use contraceptives (don't have sex if you don't want children) Look at any real-world application of that philosophy, and you will see a long record of teen pregnancy and shitty parents. Abstinence doesn't work. People WILL have sex, and they should be informed and able to plan whether or not they want kids when they do it. This isn't even abstract theory, this is tested policy. >abort any children that might inconvenience them Abortion has never been about convenience lmao. When Roe v. Wade was going on, women were dying by the thousands because they either couldn't support a pregnancy, or they couldn't support the child and had an unsafe abortion. Even if you see a fetus as a person, surely you could agree that it's better that one person dies than two people. There isn't a scenario where women just won't get abortions or wont need them, people WILL die if abortion is criminalized. Their body, their choice. Stand aside. >If we need workers bad enough to force women to work and import new workers from overseas, we shouldn't be aborting our future workforce. The scale of abortions isn't even close to as extreme as you're making it out to be. That said, regarding potential people as a "potential workforce" really does showcase how capitalistic your mindset is. >>396842 No, conservatism has never, ever been about "caring" about other people. You're romanticizing conservatism, looking at it through rose-tinted lenses. Let go of it, you can do better.
>>396863 I'd rather to be slave to icky "Christian parochialism", (though Islam, Hinduism and every other non-Christian religion has evolved very similar hierarchies and divisions of labour, because they work) than to my own hedonistic desires.
>>396823 Sometimes you can do everything and still fail
>>396867 Did you ever consider that you can follow your own dumb belief system in your personal life without trying to impose it on everyone else?
>>396824 This is just idpol by a different brand. Like a conservative version of radlibs. A radcon if you will.
>>396865 Encouraging abstinence worked fine for many years. There were bastards even in medieval times, but William the Conqueror was raised by his father instead of aborted and the fact that he was conceived outside of marriage was regarded as wrong. No law or moral code is going to stop everyone from doing whatever it is that they feel like doing. I'd rather them fail at abstinence than fail at using a condom though.
>>396865 >because they either couldn't support a pregnancy, or they couldn't support the child and had an unsafe abortion. So most of those abortions were forced by capitalism?
>>396869 No, because that's wrong. We can and should do both. Obviously a lot of it is more cultural than political. You spread conservative values through social media and word of mouth and people take them to heart and, as individuals, live according to them. Then you start winning elections.
>>396876 >There were bastards even in medieval times, but William the Conqueror was raised by his father instead of aborted and the fact that he was conceived outside of marriage was regarded as wrong. This is hardly proof that it worked
(9.38 MB 350x233 mind.gif)
>>396873 >radcon
Adolf Hitler would be a lot more bearable if Heinrich Himmler was never born
>>396890 People like you are a caricature of what a libertarian thinks all leftists are, a bunch of moral zealots and busybodies trying to interfere with other people’s life.
>>396891 There was less sex outside of marriage before the 1960s than after it. Look at the measures in place in the Middle East. I'm opposed to the death penalty, but through social stigmas and a proper education alone people can be influenced to live in a conservativism way if their financial system allows it.
>>396900 >We should emulate the middle east Jesus Christ just go back to /pol/
>>396900 Proof? If anything teenage pregnancy sharply declined after the 60s
>>396900 >Look at the measures in place in the Middle East. NIGGA REALLY?! okay that's where my limit's reached. have fun trying to advocate for Saudi-socialism, dipshit
>>396895 You are. If the state doesn't "interfere" with people's lives than the private sector will. Anyways even socialist states always have pushed values on people, just negative instead of positive ones.
>>396876 >Encouraging abstinence worked fine for many years. Different anon, and I have no problem with abstinence and in fact live in a family which has practiced it, but this is just flat out wrong. Victorian England claimed to be for abstinence and encouraged if, but then it also tolerated wives having to prostitute themselves to supplement income and husbands using prostitutes to keep their "animalistic desires" in check. It doesn't work in keeping things in check at all, we have objective statistics analyzing that. >I'd rather them fail at abstinence than fail at using a condom though. That's retarded though, your arguing on behalf of what makes you feel comfortable rather then the actual inevitable consequences of such. Your just dressing it in such a way that you can aquire a feeling of being morally superior ("Yeah they both failed and the consequence was the same, but at least mine failed at acheiving this morally rightous attribute I've set up for society")
>>396905 One can assume teenage sex rose though.
>>396912 Less teen pregnancy, more teen sex... I'm not seeing the problem here?
>>396876 >Abstinence worked for many years >Bastards were extremely common throughout history Seems like abstinence really didn't work lmfao. Not to mention when a bastard child was born, who was punished? Wasn't the man, that's for sure. Maybe this nice lady, Miss Polly Baker, could explain things: >"May it please the honourable bench to indulge me in a few words: i am a poor, unhappy woman, who have no money to fee lawyers to plead for me. . . . This is the fifth time, gentlemen, that I have been dragg’d before your court on the same account; twice I have paid heavy fines, and twice have been brought to publick punishment, for want of money to pay those fines. This may have been agreeable to the laws, and I don’t dispute it; but since laws are sometimes unreasonable in themselves, and therefore repealed; and others bear too hard on the subject in particular circumstances . . . I take the liberty to say, that I think this law, by which I am punished, both unreasonable in itself, and particularly severe with regard to me. . . . Abstracted from the law, I cannot conceive . . . what the nature of my offense is. I have brought five fine children into the world, at the risque of my life; I have maintained them well by my own industry, without burthening the township, and would have done it better, if it had not been for the heavy charges and fines I have paid. . . . nor has anyone the least cause of complaint against me, unless, perhaps, the ministers of justice, because I have had children without being married, by which they missed a wedding fee. But can this be a fault of mine? What must poor young women do, whom customs and nature forbid to solicit the men, and who cannot force themselves upon husbands, when the laws take no care to provide the many, and yet severely punish them if they do their duty without them; the duty of the first and great command of nature and nature’s God, encrease and multiply; a duty from the steady performance of which nothing has been able to deter me, but for its sake I have hazarded the loss of the publick esteem, and have frequently endured publick disgrace and punishment; and therefore ought, in my humble opinion, instead of a whipping, to have a statue erected to my memory." >>396890 I can't wait to see all the support you'll get by preaching at people lmfao. You're worse than the people constantly boasting about how much theory they've read. >>396912 And?????
>>396886 What?
>>396083 fuck no. religion needs to be kept on a least or else your populace goes retarded overtime. then you gotta kill it off hardcore.
>>396868 Idealist take. This kind of attitude is what led to most dumbass sectarian criticism here. Especially in the anarcho sphere regarding the criticism of MLs. Most of their arguments can be boiled down to “ML countries collapsed or reverted to capitalism therefore anarchism is superior” while ignoring the complete utter failure of the anarchist movement as a whole and how it only seems to take root in the West with no solution to combating imperialism in the developing world. If you failed, you have to do something wrong. That’s what MLs has done right throughout their movement, self-criticism. Every ML here can point at the faults of the Soviet Union while praising what’s done right (with most “did nothing wrong” being just lighthearted memes). While anarchists seems to be impervious to any self-awareness and keep digging a hole into historical revisionism to justify their own failures. It’s sad that every single anarchist sectarian threads can be BTFO’ed by MLs just by admitting to their mistakes while returning with questions about “the successes” of anarchism.
>>396917 So Victorian England was okay except for capitalism and low-quality of living for the poor. Exactly my point.
>>396089 Paint your version of society then. If it isn't this one but also not a grey dystopia then what exactly?
>>396180 you're wrong on both ends cringcel.
>>396029 >should go and fuck themselves I mean...
>>396539 Based. This is an accurate caricature of pretty much every chan user
>>396698 Smart tit poster >>396822 Dumb cuck poster holy shit off yourself. Every post you made further down the road makes you very deserving of the ultra gulag.
>>396821 True, Most who do that are Larpers. I used to see that same shit on /pol/
>>396912 Yea and? This is another plot to push anti-cooming by incels?
>>396928 >If you failed, you have to do something wrong. Sounds very idealist. Sometimes the conditions aren't right or beyond your control.
(650.81 KB 500x422 ECH!.gif)
>>396931 >So Victorian England was okay except for the part where it wasn't Any society that oppresses the working class and enforces a rigid patriarchal hierarchy is not okay. Punishing women for having children out of wedlock is also not okay, in any setting. If you think that women deserve to be punished, and that such policies work, and that a society that actively oppresses women is a good one, you are delusional and not a socialist. >>396900 If you seriously think that men aren't forcing themselves on women in Saudi Arabia just like in any other puritanical society, forcing them to bear children which the women alone will be punished for, then you're once again delusional.
>>396958 Miss Polly Baker didn't seem to view having children as punishment, but certainly viewed the fines this way
>>396964 I never said that having children was a punishment. Nobody is saying that. The whole point is that she was being fined for something that she had no choice in. If you're a woman in such a society, you can't say no. If a man wants to bang you, you have no choice. In many parts of Europe and the British Empire (Miss Baker was an American colonist) rape was outright or de-facto decriminalized. Particularly rich people could get away with anything. But if the you get pregnant, then you're the one punished. How is that good or just?
>>395993 ye, iirc marx regards religion as superfluous and ultimately unnecessary in communism
>>396859 >I don't understand how this has become a central tenet of the Left It isn't >The risk of pregnancy and STDs Which people have addressed and come with suitable countermeasures to. Regardless, this idea that socialism inherently has people going around dicking each other on a whim and requires some social moral code to keep it in check is a joke, and one predicated on a reactionary mythology of socialism. Actually analyze the material reasons why people would desperately engage in short-term relationships rather then viewing it as a consequence of upholding some idealistic moral value or not, as there are reasons why in capitalist societies people do so. >The child, if allowed to live by its' mother will not grow up in a stable household. Why is the mother unable to provide for the child in socialism and how is an unstable household permitted to exist? >Promoting contraceptives and abortion as the best way to avoid having children is really a perfect example of everything wrong with the West. No one is "promoting" them, they are at best taking Lenin's line where one can believe abortion to be an unfortunate but necessary measure, particularly when compared to the alternative. Of course the material reasons people have to seek out an abortion should be reduced (most of them being material in nature), but banning abortion (particularity in early stage socialism) leads to more problems then it alleviates. It is not a solution to populations or preserving capitalism though, which was Lenin's issue with the rhetoric surrounding it. >Having healthy children should be viewed as the best possible thing one can do with one's life, to bring forth new life into the world and continue on the community. Having children is fine, but I do not fetishize or idealize their existence. They are necessary, whatever you add on to it after that is your choosing. >The state should help families succeed all along the way Most socialist states have >That's the socialism that will appeal to good people. >Good people Were not in this to be good people, or at least you should not be. We're here to do what is necessary, to achieve victory by whatever means available to us. If you want this to about being "good" people, you can join the leagues of dead socialists in the past who tried to do so in a world that would not afford it to them, and so paid the price. >They didn't care about any of this other garbage, they wanted to feed their kids and take care of their family. And that's fine, but rhetoric about contraceptives isn't what drove them. They also didn't flake off when it was introduced. >>396867 >divisions of labour, Read Marx >than to my own hedonistic desires. I am against hedonism in the modern sense, which is ironically partially why I am arguing against you. What frustrates more then open hedonists who declare their hedonism are people like you you attempt to hide it behind moral platitudes. You don't stand for what is necessary, you don't pursue by conviction even at the expense of personal desire. You simply act on what feels good, on what stimulates your moral sensibilities. It you be more pleasant if people were abstinent, and unpleasant if they weren't. Never does it occur to you to do what is unpleasant and disgusting to you in order to achieve results, or to destroy your once held idealizations of what should be to acquire the what is necessary to work with what is. >>396900 >Look at the measures in place in the Middle East. You mean the middle east with child prostitutes and woman being both forcefully pushed into sexual relationships and ironically subsequently punished if they fail to? If these measures were intended to garner the results you spoke of, they seem to have failed in practice.
>>396957 >Sounds very idealist. Sometimes the conditions aren't right or beyond your control. Not that anon, but that also means you did something wrong. Praxis and theory should be based on those conditions, not attempt to force conditions to meet the praxis or theory.
>>396539 tech is cool, but everything else past that in the genre (mega corps ruling everything) is not so cool. whenever I see people asking how to help cyberpunk come along, I tell them to go work for a mega corp, like a faang or something. it shouldn't be an ideal to strive for if you look past the clothing or razorgirls
>>396982 Obviously, but sometimes you either a) don’t know enough about said conditions due to limitations or b) fail to consider or factor in external factors.
>>396984 Exactly. I think most people are in it for the aesthetic, the fashion, the funky neon shit, and don't think about the actual conditions of such a society. Like I'd be super down for cool robot bodies and neon, I ain't down for society being run by megacorporations. I want all this cool shit to be for everyone, not just the moneyed few.
>>396991 >a) don’t know enough about said conditions due to limitations Then test it out for real and change it according to the outcome rather than jut sticking to you ideals until it work. There’s no better way of finding out about the material reality through experimentation. That’s what separates scientific Marxism to idealism. Your goal of praxis is to rally the workers to your socialist cause. If that fails then that’s on you. Blaming the failures on others will just lead to defeatism. >b) fail to consider or factor in external factors And how is this not your fault again?
>>397003 Life isn’t a laboratory for you to test what works and what doesn’t nor will conditions stay the same for previous results to be repeatable. You usually need to act now. I am not even saying that experimentation is bad or unneeded but it is a luxury few can afford, especially in unique times like this that needs immediate actions. >And how is this not your fault again? Nobody is the master let alone aware of their future
>>396663 Really, hmm I don't know what to say about that. What if I go through that... Hmm spooky. How do you feel about it.
>>396043 You make a solid point, libertarians are pretty just one conversation away from learning what empathy is and realizing they support socialism instead
American leftists have utterly failed because they don't understand the mindset of the Ameican worker, they're not apolitical, they're ANTI-political. You need to convince these people first and foremost that one, politics does affect them and two, they can use it to change and better their lives and be their own advocates.
>>397089 How exactly can they do that other than what they're already doing?
>>397102 Not that anon, but personally I haven't seen American parties make any serious effort to create any kind of dual-power, and instead are largely devoted to electoralism. When most American workers hear of communists, they think of a snobbish trust fund baby in a college ineffectually preaching at them about equality and Marx. The only way to change this is to actually put action behind our theory and defend their interests outside of government systems. Tenants/workers unions, food aid programs, community policing, medical aid, etc. should all be mobilized and consolidated under the banner of communism/socialism to show them that a better life is possible and that it's theirs to take, rather than just telling them to vote for Bernie Sanders so that he can "fix America" from above.
>>397114 When most Americans think of communists, they think of the McCarthy propaganda stories and images of tyrannical dictatorships of Russia, China, Cuba, and Venezuela or a society of "a bunch of lazy millinials who don't want to work and just want a handout". You're absolutely right that step one of the process is education and destroying these preconceived notions, and reclaim the words "socialism" and "communism" by putting real, practical and feasible actions behind our words.
>>396089 >Sometimes it feels like the modern Left's vision of a socialist future is the exact society we have now, an orgiastic consumption of commodities, except nobody has to work and only reads slam poetry. Is that a future worth fighting for? For me it seems not at all different from neoliberalism with an UBI, I guess I won't starve but existence would be pointless all the same. It sounds like someone never defined their own purpose in life and wouldn't know how to give themselves meaning if they had the liberty to truly live a life without capitalistic survival struggle, so they want to enforce a way of living as a "correct guideline". Not advocating for hedonism or brain rotting consumerism, but if some day in the far future we can achieve ideal communist society where technology is so advanced we barely have to worry about human laboring and are free to enjoy leisure, why shouldn't some simpleton be allowed to use their leisure to just masturbate and watch Steven Universe?
The only reason bernie wasnt completely hummiliated was because of the hispanic vote that mede him win nevada and california, thus proving that sakai was both right in claiming whites don't have revolutionary potential but wrong in that blacks don't have it either
>>397114 Aren’t the DSA attempting all those community outreach?
<But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only - for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal. You never have any trouble saying that chads deserve to be chads and incels incels because that is their natural merit. That you obscure that with muh individual free choice outside of society like lolberts does not change that.
>>397198 Are you making a comparison between dating and the economy?
>>397170 I'm not talking about the hypothetical far flung future of FALC, because that is pointless. I'm talking about right now where it seems like most leftists are totally on board with the capitalist superstructure and would abandon the revolution because it would cancel their favorite cartoon show.
>>397217 >seems like most leftists are totally on board with the capitalist superstructure and would abandon the revolution because it would cancel their favorite cartoon show. Proof?
*ahem* China is Socialist
>>397225 >proof Any leftist forum, twitter or subreddit except this one (mostly) <lmao you're online I'm not even a westerner so the internet is my only window to this supposed "global vanguard" of western leftism. And it's not reassuring.
>>397198 >You never have any trouble saying that chads deserve to be chads and incels incels because that is their natural merit. Yes life isn't fair but what do you want us to do about it that wouldn't be more immoral than the status quo?
>>397173 >black don't have it either It's not "blacks" it's American PMCs. The socialist movement is alive in France, South Africa, India and elsewhere. Hot take; Bernie being out of the way is good because there is no longer a valve to release revolutionary energy. We're already seeing it in LA and Oakland. People are seizing empty homes and getting away with it. Next it's abandoned factories. Everything between 2008-2020 has proven succdem is dead and isn't coming back.
>>397250 >morality Sounds pretty reactionary.
I thought this was a hot take thread not a shitty one >If you care about people voice liberal representative democracy>>>shitty Soviet system that was more indirect than sex through letter's >If someone votes communist or for the leftist candidate or wtvr is a comrade , maybe nit if he is a pedo or a weird rapist but anyone else is ok >99% of people itb have very slim chances of having an impact in politics , either cause they don't want to or cause they use their edgy political ideology as a personality >Edgy kids are good for recruiting if they are working class that is anyone else on their right is firstly a sociopath anti-commounist and then has any problems with how things are
>>397170 >tfw the class struggle is far more fun than what comes afterwards
>>397376 >>397376 Another one >Pmc theory is shitty, not only is retrarded but also make "true proles" a minority in many western countries >I don't expect random ecelebs to act as official mouthpieces of leftypol and neither should you
Someone who inherits talent, good looks, intelligence etc. is worse than someone who just inherits money.
>>397233 holy based
>>397238 I am not a westerner either and I don’t see it.
>>397386 How are we gonna redistribute intelligence dipshit?
>>397405 Exactly.
>>397419 So what do you want to be done about it and how is it 'worse'?
>>397423 The rich might lose their money and with that their privileged position, the naturally gifted never will.
>>397438 Never heard of "from each according to his ability"? The must gifted will be expected to shoulder a heavier burden too
>>395988 1. hating the rich is good, even if they're still proletarian. 2. if the class character of patreon users and other paid internet content creators is not (petit-) bourgeoise, a new class description is required. accepting them as proletarian is inane. 3. actual social democrats (of the 40+ year old full employment type) are for want of a better word good. they are the main potential allies against the status quo, and their preferred system creates opportunities for the left (in trade unions etc.), unlike the radical left they have the advantage of being boring so radlibs don't latch onto their ideas. (unlike the mainstream "social democrats" that currently sit in government or, more often, in opposition around the world.) while opportunities to do so are few, the left should materially support this small and marginalized group in retaking their political parties and purging the liberals that currently own them.
>>396089 excellent post. >Sometimes it feels like the modern Left's vision of a socialist future is the exact society we have now, an orgiastic consumption of commodities, except nobody has to work and only reads slam poetry. Is that a future worth fighting for? i remember a similar point was made in a long post on /leftytrash/ i think you'd like (unless you made it), but i didn't screencap it. i'd submit a related side note - we've stopped daring to imagine that we can change the way people behave in general. perhaps fantasies of constructing a "new soviet man" were always excessive, but we tip over into the naive - imagining that man must always have acted something like we do, ignoring the massive influence society has over us, and the duty any new society would have to bring out our best tendencies while repressing our worst. >>396933 my personal preference is to gesture at the future the 60s-70s socialist and social democratic states thought we were going to have. that can handle much more social liberalism - but it pushes us on to new heights, new duties, a new sense of purpose. to conquer space, to control the earth (stop climate change!), to master the sciences. not everyone has to do the big jobs, many people will contribute simply by doing mundane tasks that keep things ticking (has the present crisis not highlighted the value of evil the shelf-stacker?) - but we simply must get out of the pointless dead end we're currently living in. the lesson i have learned in my personal life is one i would apply to society as a whole: it is absolutely essential, beyond anything else, to set yourself a goal. even a pointless goal. you can then throw yourself at working towards it. is that a particularly coherent vision? no. but few dare to dream an alternative, so my primary option is to look backwards to stave off a collapse into total pessimism. >>397170 it's not about preventing it, necessarily. the thing is we shouldn't encourage it. someone wasting their time (their short period on earth, my god!) under socialism ought to be an aberration, a tragedy, not the idealized end state. i suppose in my own personal philosophy, the core of a man is his creative endeavors. everyone should be set free to that end, in the broadest sense possible. art, literature, film, sports (even the odd ones like car racing!), people should be set upon serious endeavors and challenges. we should foster a spirit like that, the development and nurturing of talents.
>>397466 Can i ask what do you do for a living?
>>397466 >hating the rich is good, even if they're still proletarian. You people are a joke.
>>397511 data entry, paid below the national average. >>397513 the culture of the upper middle class and beyond is the most alienating thing i have ever encountered.
>>397517 So you don't actually hate rich people, you hate their culture , who you know that not all rich people share you are not retarded, you just sound angry about your job
>>397561 lol fuck the rich
>>397561 Socialism/communism are not niche ideologies. They haven't been ignorant to their existence; they're avoiding it, pursuing capitalist greed fully knowing about the destructive behaviour they enact. FUCK THE RICH
>>397561 their culture and their income have a correlation nearing 1. not having a serious income constraint naturally breeds a similar culture everywhere. it's not like i've said they need to be punished under socialism, just that it should be acceptable to hate them in leftist groups.
china isn't, and will never be socialist if they keep following the same path they are right now. Dengiods and Xi shills are just edgy liberals who hate the west just for the sake of hating it.
(489.80 KB 693x1154 edgy_unicorn_by_epesi-dbpbvyn.png)
>>397592 i think most leftist despise the rich in leftist circles ,stop acting edgy we al know that when you get a better position and make some money you will turn in to the archetypical boomer
>>397598 >stop acting edgy there's nothing edgy about not liking some people
>>397598 >ponies
>>397598 Wealthy hooves typed this post
if a politician ever suggests "guaranteed jobs", increase in the minimum wage, an increase in "unemployment insurance", and/or "means tested UBI", rather than UBI, i hope they get an aggressive form of cancer. 90% of human jobs are a complete waste of time and people identify with their abusers rather than admit they wasted their life doing pointless shit. if you try to create a guaranteed jobs program i hope you die excruciatingly. as if i want to give my support to someone who will in return give me a guaranteed torture program.
>>397619 how can you have both "guaranteed jobs" and "unemployment insurance"
>>397466 >hating the rich is good, even if they're still proletarian. You mean like engineers or doctors? Are you dumb? You know they will still exist and quite possibly still earn more and have a higher status than the average prole under socialism, right?
>>397721 They will still exist, but we will try to limit their higher status and earning more under socialism. Income disparities breeds resentment.
>>397721 >implying the only rich proles are doctors and engineers >implying many engineers aren't doing useless or actively harmful work like for arms manufacturers
>>397619 Hard disagree plus anti-work is cringe and bluepilled. Regardless of what you think about jobs, a guaranteed jobs programme would take millions out of lumpenism and have a positive effect on class consciousness and worker organization. It would be particularly grand if coupled with punitive measures against Uber and the like. UBI on the other hand would be another nail in the coffin of class consciousness.
>>397619 >90% of human jobs are a complete waste of time like what? First thing that comes to mind is advertisement and graphic design for corporations
>>397744 Don't many proles also work in arms manufacturing? Why are we villifying engineers now? are you a liberal-arts-fag?
(138.83 KB 1000x510 tommy bloom.png)
>>397604 There is literally nothing wrong with being a massive faggot. >>397751 UBI and M4A would permit people to go on strike and know that they've got grocery money. People could quit their jobs more easily or remain unemployed for longer as they fished for a place worth working at. It would substantially tilt the balance of power in favor of those selling their labor. Repealing UBI would also be nearly impossible, which is even now, with a clear emergency situation that has a clear and imminent end the State Guardians of Capital are afraid to institute it. >take millions out of lumpenism Workerism is idpol.
>>397774 >Why are we villifying engineers now? we aren't. you're projecting.
>>397739 Dude, people dont resent each other because they earn more. I am completely fine with doctors earning more than me because they do a lot of work and have major contributions to society (like saving our lives), same thing with engineers. I have a problem with people making money by exploiting others. I'll always prefer a rich doctor who only makes money of his labor than a poor petite bourgoise owner who exploit his staffs surplus value. >>397794 not addressing the first sentence though, your argument is still garbage.
>>397786 >Workerism is idpol. <class analysis is idpol The real hot take right here
>>397807 >workerism is class analysis That's just wrong.
>>397870 Class analysis must account for the chronically unemployed and the Uberized precariat as being fundamentally different from the traditional proletariat, or it is incomplete. "Everyone who isn't a top-hatted capitalist is a prole!" is a nice idealistic canard to make NEETs fell good, but it ignores real relations to the means of production.
>>397807 Workerism is not the same as class analysis. Workerism is when you use the group worker and its perceived markers as an identity group.
>>397804 People are absolutely resenting other people who have more material goods and higher status than them. A successful socialist society will have to try to minimize the difference between groups of people otherwise that resentment will fester.
>>397895 no you dingus, thats not what socialism is for. Marx literally said that equality is pretty shitty, because it always means inequality in another metric. Very simplistic example: Bob and Kenny earn the same amount of money in the same job under similar conditions (equality), but Bob works 10 hours a day while Kenny works 2 hours a day, so Kenny has a higher per hour wage (definitely inequality). Bob should definitely earn more money than Kenny in that Case, and if "resentment festers" in Kenny, then well, fuck kenny, hes a lazy piece of shit. Socialism is about getting rid of class, which is how you relate to the means of production, not about making a doctor as equal as possible to someone who jerks off all day.
>>397189 >DSA The DSA is mired in delusional electoralism. Their "community outreach" doesn't generally extend further than canvassing for Bernie. Some local chapters might do more, but the DSA as a whole is moronic.
>>397966 I'm aware of what socialism is and isn't. I'm just arguing against societal inequality because it creates a lot of problems. There is nothing in Marx that says that a doctor or an engineer should earn a lot more than a janitor and I think you are aware of that.
>>398004 I would imagine that in a society where education at all levels is allot more equitable and society pays your way through higher education, that becoming a doctor would be allot easier and as a result, wouldn't require such a high paycheck. The reason why doctors and engineers get paid allot under capitalism is because of their scarcity. Under socialism you can and considerably increase your theoretical supply through elimination of class based barriers to educational attainment. A good example is an argument against socialism i saw from a liberal, that if you pay taxi drivers the same as doctors, no-one will want to be a doctor: Ask yourself this: what would you prefer? To spend your 20s in University learning to become a doctor, or to spend your 20s as a taxi driver doing a relatively boring, menial job. I would argue that a socialist society would have to reduce the wages for doctors, or they would end up with a large oversupply.
>>397492 >everyone should be set free to that end, in the broadest sense possible. art, literature, film, sports (even the odd ones like car racing!), people should be set upon serious endeavors and challenges. we should foster a spirit like that, the development and nurturing of talents. Good reply, don't disagree with it at all. What I do want to clarify, because it seemed like >>396089 wants to curate culture so that people can act accordingly- is that there is no need to. Human Nature already is wanting to discover, contribute to the world, and explore your creativity and take on those endeavors. Even under our capitalist system I was able to realize for myself what goals I want to accomplish in my lifetime outside of trying to survive this capitalist society. If it seems like people are too eager to lead hedonistic lives and indulge in whatever you consider "wastes of time", I'd say it's because they've simply been living too long with the weight of surviving on their shoulders and need some indulgence in order to discover their own personal purpose, how they want to give back to society.
>>398115 This has always been my opinion too. Most people don't want to do menial work if they can avoid it.
The socialist state once established, should unironically agree on one particular school of thought on any subject and then use violence to destroy followers and advocates of contrary ideas.
>>395988 Perchance an alternative theory that no-one cares for You can change the system from within; It 's actually incredibly difficult not the rewards are immense. Otherwise all these pricks wouldn't be rigging it to send their mates, themselves and their kids to become the next batch running "the system." >In b4 but NOOOOOOO you will become like them and sell-out You have to Corona-the systems often based on class, connections and inter-personal networking with enough good people.
>>395995 RISE OF THE IDIOTS
>>395988 Many use leftist discourse and intellectualism for getting better standards of higher level sexytime-partners
>>396038 BUDDHA
>>396089 You are SDP UK Good
>>398993 Bit rude to call him a retarded wrecker.
>social democracy is socialism, but that is the problem <fascism has the same function as social democracy >capitalism is not in it's terminal stage <communism is neither inevitable, nor is the chance that it the chance that it will ever be archived rising >people don't protest because of ideologies, but for immediate, material reasons. ie. nobody cares about the ussr, catalonia, the Paris commune, etc. <instead of fascism, neoliberal capitalism reverts to passive-authoritarianism ala Putin, Orban, Erdogan, Xi, ... to deal with crises. >fascism would have handled climate-change better than we currently do (as such Trump is anti-fascist) <the rise of ml/mlm-teens is exclusively bad >jazz is ok
>>400875 >social democracy is socialism, but that is the problem Meh take. SocDems are bad, but they aren't socialist by definition. They're capitalist with some selective social welfare funded through imperialism and exploitation. They're social fascists. >fascism has the same function as social democracy Good take, depending on what you mean by "function". See above. >capitalism is not in it's terminal stage I feel like this is believed by most people who aren't insufferable idealists and/or anarchists >communism is neither inevitable, nor is the chance that it the chance that it will ever be archived rising Agree with the first part, the second part remains to be seen. >people don't protest because of ideologies, but for immediate, material reasons. Pretty much universally accepted by anyone who's read theory. >instead of fascism, neoliberal capitalism reverts to passive-authoritarianism Would you not consider Putin, Orban, and Erdogan to be fascists? They're passive-authoritarian for sure, but that's not mutually exclusive from fascism. >fascism would have handled climate-change better than we currently do Seeing as the current world order leans toward fascism, I tend to disagree. Not to mention a further fascist government, like that of the Nazis, would have simply seen eradication of people as the solution to climate change and the resultant supply shortages. See ecofascism. >as such Trump is anti-fascist BAD TAKE Trump is, at the very least, enabling fascism just as much as any other American president, if not moreso. To call him an anti-fascist is lunacy. >the rise of ml/mlm-teens is exclusively bad While they can be annoying, I strongly disagree. They are what we were at their age: annoying little squirts with no real understanding of dialectical materialism or how to actually engage with people. Give them time, a nurturing environment, and the means to act, and they will become steadfast allies. We can't let some inter-generational squabbling segregate us, because they have the passion and numbers necessary to move us forward and we cannot afford to pass that up. >jazz is ok good take.
The sixth mass extinction is a good thing because it will force us into managing 100% of our resources directly or die trying.
>>396407 ABSOLUTELY BASED TAKE.
>>398895 This. Kill anyone who isn't a Strasserist.
>>403660 lol Strasser and his lads all liked to die instantly. "Strasserism" is shit where you get cucked by the other Nazis.
>fascism as an ideology should get back to its more left wing roots >most leftist "communities" are absolute jokes even /leftypol/ has degenerated quite a bit since the glory days >most prominent leftist figures are either old boomers on the brink of death or upper-middle class retards and frankly that should be terrifying

Delete
Report

no cookies?