/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

Yeah, I don’t believe in objective morality, god, miracles, magic, pseudoscience, optimism, immortality, physical regeneration, reanimation, ghosts, souls, alchemy, aliens, and any other self affirming optimistic shit unenlightened believers believe in. My values are might is right, materialism, and cynicism.

I’m so fucking cool, edgy, and mature unlike the rest of those stupid hordes. Look at how cool, edgy, and mature I am.

>Rather, it is a product of society at a certain stage of development; it is the admission that this society has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that it has split into irreconcilable antagonisms which it is powerless to dispel. But in order that these antagonisms, these classes with conflicting economic interests, might not consume themselves and society in fruitless struggle, it became necessary to have a power, seemingly standing above society, that would alleviate the conflict and keep it within the bounds of ’order’; and this power, arisen out of society but placing itself above it, and alienating itself more and more from it, is the state.
>The proletariat seizes political power and turns the means of production in the first instance into state property. But, in doing this, it abolishes itself as proletariat, abolishes all class distinctions and class antagonisms, abolishes also the state as state.
>State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The state is not "abolished". It dies out.
Did the USSR abolish the state as state, as "society [that] has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself", namely that of class interest? Why does the first, and third quotation sound so much more like the state under neoliberalism than under the Socialism? Is it rather that the state is justified by more than the contradiction between class interests? What are your thoughts?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch01.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch24.htm

What is the source of the endless bitching and moaning from the burger reich (who is btw the scourge of the earth, the destroyer of nations, the king of coups, the sultan of sanctions, the emir of the embargo, the autocrat of austerity, the baron of busting unions, the prince of privatization, the lord of loan sharks, the pharaoh of proxy wars, etc. etc. etc.) about "China is stealing muh intellectual property"? Is there any basis to this accusation or are the burger fuhrers really just manufacturing consent again? From what I understand mainland Chinese exchange students have their names all over research papers in burger universities, so isn't it the other way around? Isn't America brain draining everyone, and then privatizing the results of that?

Today is second-to-last day I could have started the thread with this comic, okay?

Let's try to start with discussing whenever or not dualistic religions (faiths placing on the top of the universe two Gods - one good and one evil; Zoroasthrism being the most well-known) losing to the monotheistic ones (faiths placing on the top of the universe one God - who may favor good but is himself beyond good and evil… at least, from our perspective) is a historical accident or a byproduct of the natural material development of the early and middle-stage agrarian society? It is interesting that monolatry (sort of "proto-monotheism" where there exists a pantheon of big and small deities, but one of them is a God of Gods who transcends the universe and is as powerful relative to the other deities as they are to humans) had developed independently from [proto-]Abrahamic world in China (Jade Emperor), India (Brahman) and in faiths of bunch of lesser nations. Is it possible that belief in One God is more beneficial for supporting the belief in one legitimate Emperor and/or one legitimate societal order than anything else?

–

The foundational text of Marxist understanding of religion:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/

i’ve been lurking /a/ and /lgbt/ for years and something kept popping up that no one wants to really admit. tons of guys who are deep into anime, especially the cute girl slice-of-life stuff, end up transitioning or calling themselves trans. not like one or two. i’m talking a full-on trend. they start posting with anime girl pfps, joke about being “eggs,” start asking about HRT, and boom. next thing you know they’re full-time she/her on estrogen. people just act like this is a normal pipeline and don’t stop to ask why it keeps happening

being a guy in our world is kind of trash for a lot of us. you’re expected to be emotionally dead, aggressive, dominant. no crying, no softness, no comfort unless it’s a joke or porn. masculinity is cold. and anime is the total opposite. it gives you girls who are warm, emotionally open, affectionate, kind. it hits you somewhere deep. i wrote it like this, “the femininity of anime girls is expressive, soft, emotionally intelligent and affectively warm. it is everything that masculinity is not” and that contrast feels like a lifeline if you’ve grown up feeling numb and isolated

characters like Rui from Gatchaman Crowds hit different. he’s a guy but dresses femme, looks better than any girl you know, and still commands respect in the story. not treated like a freak, just exists. i said, “Rui is gender-non-conforming and not punished for it” and that’s huge. when you’re used to being told to man up or shut up, seeing someone like Rui makes you think maybe there’s a way out. and slowly, you start to feel more like him than the angry gym bros you’re supposed to relate to. you start to post anime girls not just because they’re cute but because they feel like you

this is where it gets uncomfortable for people. autogynephilia. the idea that some dudes start getting turned on or emotionally hyped by imagining themselves as girls. and yeah, it’s real. i said, “I think anime girls function as a kind of metaphor for the concept of femininity itself, and the idea of femininity becomes eroticized through repetition” and that’s the key. the more you stare at these idealized girls, the more you start to want to be that. not just to look like them but to feel the way they feel. over time, your brain starts rewiring. “When you are constantly looking at anime girls and thinking about them and using them as your identity, you are literally conditioning yourself.” it’s not just fetish, it’s identity forming through exPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

🗽UNITED STATES POLITICS 🦅
<Prospector Saloon Vibes Edition

Thread for the hellish discussion related to the greatest, best country God has ever given man on the face of the Earth™

🏈 💵 🌭 🍔

🛠️ Strike Tracker ⚒️
https://striketracker.ilr.cornell.edu/

🇺🇸 Deeds of the Burger Reich 🇺🇸
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/main/us_atrocities.md

📺 Live News 📺
(sponsored by USAID)
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Islam apologia itself, is indeed extremely dangerous, intellectually, and socially, for several different reasons. Leftists all too often cross the line between anti racist action and pro religious sloganeering. Islam has become something of a problem, ideologically, for racists in Europe, because the recognition of "Islamic civilization" is such a widespread phenomena to begin with. And this means? Arabs, Persians, and the peoples of Southwest Asia, are denied an actual according identity, and are instead bunched up into the mythical land that is the "Islamic world". By presupposing, and recognizing the existence of "the Muslim world" (something which was never done before the Iranian counterrevolution), you do nothing but ideologically strengthen the initial presuppositions of Islamic fundamentalists. The "Muslim people" do not exist. Just as, in the same way, the "Christian people" do not. You see Christian fundamentalists talk of how "Christians" are being persecuted, but there is a reason as to why no one takes them seriously beyond the fact that we live in a secular society. No one takes it seriously because no on recognizes the existence of a "christian people" which can be persecuted. Why must Islam be an exception? These "Muslim defense" organizations, headed by Muslim spiritual leaders, should be marked by the Left as political enemies, uniting the "Muslim" proletariat with it's class enemy, in order to for fill the interests of what? Of the "Muslim" petite bourgeoisie? If the Muslim religious establishment demands religious freedom in the west, and the "fruits" of Western liberalism, they must also recognize that, this also means that they must simply deal with anti-Muslim cartoons, which, for the most part, are sparked and electrified from talk of banning them (remember "draw mohammad day"?) they must also receive the same cultural ridicule, as the Christian church does. Take for example, social conceptions of religious leaders. We make fun of pastors, religious kids, and "cool kid" priests for what they are, because they represent a backwardness which was previously surpassed. However, this concept of "tolerance" makes an exception out of the Muslim religious establishment because "They're brown people who don't know any better". As if Muslims are animals. Muslim kids must receive the same social pressure to keep their religion to themselves, or, to not care about it in the same way white children in the western world are. How are we, as CommuPost too long. Click here to view the full text.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

What was your opinion of leader of the soviet union Leonid Brezhnev I know it wasn’t like the vladimir lenin are Joseph Stalin but he still contributed a lot of contributions to Soviet Union “

Well I wasn’t expecting that. I know that Nigeria has an NYSC program for youth but that’s optional. This isn’t and it’s likely that as those terroristic assholes continue to spread, the draft is going to be expanded not just here but across the rest of the west and possibly the continent.

why are so many[*] anarchists also lifestylists, moralists, christians, essentialists, superstitious, etc and not schmittians, hobbesians, machivellians, sadeans, nechayevites, nihilists, etc. instead of acknowledging that hirearchy and authority exists objectively and that its not intrinsically "good" or "bad" so you can do whatever you want with it, they accept authority only if its the Good™ Authority, ie moral authority, the authority of god, the authority of a parent pushing their child out of the way of an oncoming car or w/e other example they use for "just" hirearchy.

it always seemed strange that an anarchist would ever accept an authority to deem what is "just" and what is not.

[*]inb4 i know the first sentance is a vague generalising presupposition, im basing it upon stereotypical internet anarchists like r/anarchism as well as the history of christian anarchism being much more developed and prevelant than say christian marxism, and mystics like hakim bey, etc, if you are an anarchist who is or is not like this pls articulate your position and critique other anarchists