[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives

File: 1656182891026.jpg (319.45 KB, 900x600, Karl-Marx-Quotes-2.jpg)

 No.1033882[Last 50 Posts]

In any case…

I ran through a search on the totality of MECW (Marx & Engels Collected Works) – the most complete works of the two – and found not a single occurance of them calling themselves "Left". M&E referred to themselves as communists. There's ZERO implication there that communists should self-identify as "Left."

I did the same for Lenin's, Stalin's, and even Kropotkin's, and Bakunin's works, with the same result. Based on this, any anarchist and Leninist who calls himself a "left-winger" is a fucking clown.

Can we face the fact that naming ourselves "lefty"pol was a mistake or do we concede to the so called" Left," riddled with reformists, woke-tards, and anarcho-imperialists?



By your logic: only liberals are considered "leftist."


i dont even disagree this time


File: 1656183238267.png (97.83 KB, 400x400, crowdchart.png)

"By my logic" – which is the objective POV inside "politics," so called "leftists" are indeed rightists in actuality, lol.

But this is outside of OP's main point: if you are a communist (anarchist or Marxist), by definition, you can not be on this retarded politico-scale.


My thesis is the following:'



Aren't communists supposed to be dedicated to building a political economy fundamentally different from capitalism? Seems we might have a bit of a problem calling "Marxist-Leninists" communists.


What is "leftism"? If you define leftism as being an ideological umbrella term, then communism is still leftist given the high association between communism and leftism. Give us your definition of leftism right now, OP.


Communism is "leftist" relatively speaking when it comes to your average overton window in most places. But yes, it isn't the most "leftist" thing imaginable which is we have the terms "ultra-left" or "leftcom".


Here, OP. Skip to 1m 40s


>If you define leftism as being an ideological umbrella term, then communism is still leftist
If you define "birds" as "mammals" under an umbrella term, you are still fucking retarded, tho.


More like if you define birds as dinosaurs (and this one is actually true).


leftoid hands posted this


>watch a youtube video about a non-issue

First, are you retarded?
Second, are you an anglo?

Because in my country they teach basic fucking history – and from that we know that the French rev. doesn't "define" for all eternity the fucking political "spectrum" – which is also already retarded.

We, communists, be they Marixsts, MLs, or anarchists, don't ascribe to your idiotic shit. We are communists – neither "left" or "right."

We have a rather specific set of demands, fyi, none of which succumb to your bourgeois graph.

Go kys.


Fuck off Haz, no one cares about your shitty Dis.cord.


Birds are aves, not mammals


literal retard.

Communism has NEVER been "left" just like how MAMMALS have NEVER been "birds."

read a fucking book.


>muh /ISG/


>make a thread about a non-issue
It's where the terms originate from, and therefore is meaningful to understanding how they apply to the contemporary world. You're a dumdum


<make a thread about a non-issue
I smell a raid


You know who's definitely a mammal?
The dog from animal crossing







Yep, and she's a better communist than Haz


>see facts


>we must adhere to the classifications of our class enemy
<and the more we do, the more "Leftist" we become



……… if you keep calling yourself "left" as opposed to "communist," you have been duped.


thank you for the correction Dr. Haz


>it may be only Haz who can tell you that Marx & Engels (etc.) weren't considering themselves """"""""lefist""""""""
can you teach me more?


File: 1656185607892.jpg (65.51 KB, 567x773, 1655657717102.jpg)

OP here.

Prove me wrong. Cite me a single passage wherein Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Bakunin, Kropotkin (etc. etc.) call themselves "left!"

Can you? OMG! You can't! Because they literally didn't!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Shut the fuck up you Haz-tard. Go back to your stupid fbi.gov server and keep listening to a petite-bougie burger retard pretending to be "arab/mongol".


who cares


>You should strain every effort to try and send Höglund here, or the most Leftist and most reliable Norwegian, so that they should be here for certain not later than Sept. 3. (They should telephone me from Berne at Sörenberg, Hotel Marienthal (Kanton Lüzern)
>As regards restoring the International, I would advise you not to say anything, either directly or indirectly. I am sending you an article (a very good one!) on this theme (translate it and send it to Russia).We shall keep silent on the question of restoring the International, and stay on the side lines. We must bide our time. The Leftists are beginning to stir among the Germans: if they have a split, then, maybe, the International will be saved from rotting.
>t. Lenin to Kollontai in 1914

>I shall try to formulate and send you the draft

Your proposal to establish contact with other Leftists (Britain, Sweden, France, etc.) meets with our whole-hearted
>I am very glad that we agree in essentials. What we need is not the solemn declarations of leaders (against which Pannekoek has written so well), but a consistent revolutionary declaration of principles to help the workers find the correct path. This is most essential. I was particularly pleased to hear that you are in touch with the Belgian friends (we could send P. Golay’s pamphlet for them, if you haven’t already seen it 389) and wish to talk personally with some of the Leftists in another country. If the Belgian anonymous group “Étoile” and another, German, group published a declaration of principles together with your and our party—this would be a good and serious beginning. The Swedish Left with Höglund are on our side: I received a letter today about this. It would be a good thing if you wrote to England and persuaded some group there (if only a small one) to draft a joint declaration. Sincere regards and wishing you success. Yours, N. Lenin
t. Lenin in a letter to Dutch Communist Wijnkoop in 1915

>The position is extremely complex and exceptionally interesting. We are publishing pamphlets on tactics.525 The Soviet wants a general, international socialist congress. We want only a congress of the Left, against the socialchauvinists and against the “Centre”.

>t. Lenin in 1917 to Hanecki and Radek


File: 1656188687027-1.jpg (41.43 KB, 421x540, sans culottes.jpg)

Are you suggesting that Marx and Engels didn't identify with the Jacobins, Sans-culottes, et al? Because that is what is meant by "Left" since the French Revolutionaries were seated to the left of the president in the national assembly.


based and 100% correct op


I actually think it's good communism and socialism is attached to the general tradition of the left. That way, we don't forget our roots in the revolutionary tradition, progressism and rationalism. As the far-left, we are defined in the totality of this program, by sweeîng away capitalism.


Breadtube Serves Imperialism, by Caleb T. Maupin, and Keaten F. Mansfield


Communism and socialism undoubtedly carry forward the revolution ever since the feudal ruling classes started to crack. The bourgeoisie hasn't carried anything forward for the past 150 years so what else can this motley collection be other than the left, as it began in the French revolutionary National Assembly?


OP been real quiet since this dropped


If you are Marxist-Leninist and not an anarchist, maoist, etc, you are not left, you are merely a fucking communist.



OP is a faggot

SAGE goes in every field


disingenuous shitposter bros…. we're getting btfo by the leftists……


Max was not a communist
Lenin was not a leninist
Stalin was not a stalinist
Mao was not a maoist
Gonzalo was not a gonzalist


all of that is true except the first one


File: 1656193591940.png (478.2 KB, 457x671, ClipboardImage.png)

Marx was a Stalinist




>op discovers that the left-right spectrum is subjective obsolete nonsense through a dumb fallacious method


I hate political compass.


Left and right deviation both equally bad


File: 1656224170269.png (350.75 KB, 2000x2000, ClipboardImage.png)

Communists are Leftists-Uppists.


>Marx didn't mention pooping on the toilet, that means I shouldn't have to!
>pooping on the toilet is reactionary!


If you read "ultra-left" or "leftcom" texts you'll find that these terms are generally not affirmed within the milieu except maybe Dauvé has said something like "they call us that". I don't think Bordiga or Pannekoek ever called themselves "left communists", tho. In the 60's-70's era "ultraleft" texts there is a lot of shitting on "leftists", meaning the "left wing of capital" (succdems, libs, etc).
However in some cases there is affirmation of the term "communist left" in order to contrast against MLoids ("rightcoms"?) lmao
lenin was referring here to a different "left", being the "left" camp (revolutionary communists/maximalists) within the social democrat movement in contrast to reformist/gradualists like Bernstein at the time when everybody was a social democrat
cursed image
Ummm you're supposed to poop IN the toilet, not on it fam


File: 1656236044188.jpg (68.2 KB, 960x959, polcomp surreal.jpg)

Communism is not left simply because communism lies outside the Overton window. You could say it's so much to the left it is off the political spectrum and the reason for this is that the left and right both would like to keep their version of capitalism while communism wills to do away with all of capitalism entirely. It's no longer a matter of reform with them or the official political process. 'Far left' would be pretty much this and what OP describes. Far right, likewise, wills to replace capitalism with its own systems. The left and right are directions towards more and less horizontal, truly democratic and egalitarian structures respectively. That is why communism is considered far left and reactionaries are considered far right. It's more or less just terms of convenience in a conversation.


>all the most libertarian people have never held political power
really makes you think


What a retard OP is, incredible.


OP at Hogwarts school of socialism be like:
>its leftist not communist!
Remember fellow potterheads: Gotta say the right magic words to emancipate labor!


Ron, pass me the spliffendor. This vvizard vveed you got from Bagrid be some gas on Merlin bruv


I don't think the application of "Overton window" makes much sense if you're trying to deny communism as a "leftism," because the analogy of the "window" implies that communism is just somewhere outside of the current window's framing. That suggests the frame of the Overton window could be "shifted" (which way?) to have communism in view.

I think it's more useful to consider the issue in terms of paradigms. So there's a left and right of the political and economic "Keynesian" paradigm, much like there's a left and right of the neoliberal paradigm. Orthodox Marxism (not Marxism or communism as such) was the left within the paradigm of post-classical/post-Ricardian political economy, what Marx termed "vulgar economy," and this Marxism tended to mirror the post-Ricardian paradigm, after the death of Marx and even more so after the death of Engels, which is why many Orthodox Marxists later had the label "vulgar Marxism" thrown at them.

Partly contra the OP, I would contend that many Marxisms at present are still within the leftmost coordinates of neoliberalism, and that virtually all of us operate in relation to it in some fashion, because its presumptions are ubiquitous in practice and very hard to avoid in theory because we do have to make use of prior intuitions that can't be detached from the accepted forms of (social) objectivity. Vague "neoliberal" presumptions have assumed a kind of common sense, easily derivable from our acculturation and practices.

As is true of every political alignment right now, many communists also do not read, and even those who do read typically do not read people outside of Marxism and perhaps related traditions, which gives a one-sided picture of prior eras and risks projecting current assumptions onto the whole in order to "complete the picture." Sometimes Marx, Engels and Marxist theorists present ideas analogous to this neoliberal common sense with little or no genealogical relation to it. The sensed analogy is rarely entirely wrong at the conceptual level, nor wholly useless for understanding the ideas, but analogizing from one to the other requires some care.


Pretty sure this entire communism isn't left talk originates from the desire to distance oneself from the cringe left-libs. But then again expecting more from Mr internet opinions man can't be expected


Leftists are not our allies. Communism had a left and a right wing, fascism had a left and a right wing, the very concept of left and right wings began under monarchies. The term "leftist" on its own only makes sense in the context of the dominant politics, which is liberal of course.
You can easily find self-identified "leftists" also calling themselves anarchists, communists, socialists, etc., but a quick investigation will show that such is almost always lifestylism, since practically none of them are engaged with revolutionary politics whatsoever. I do not trust "leftists" at all, they are smug elitist LARPers at best and establishment shills at worst. I refuse to call myself "left-wing" and I am perfectly content with having to constantly explain to normies why being a communist doesn't make me a "leftist". Try it yourself and notice how quickly decent people will warm up to socialist economic principles. Why? Because anything associated with the "left" is rightfully perceived as being loaded with liberal bullshit.
Yeah, fuck "leftism". Fuck democrats, fuck progressives, fuck nu socdems, fuck bourgeois socialists, fuck breadtubers, fuck lifestyle anarchists, fuck twitter and reddit commies…they're nearly all parasites, pseuds and poseurs. I will proudly celebrate the day when the rest of my communist and anarchist bretheren have finally divorced the "left" to stand on their own as a distinct political force.
Change the name of this board and site.


File: 1656247844491.png (199.8 KB, 1190x838, ClipboardImage.png)

Huh i wonder why there's suddenly an influx of people wanting /leftypol/ to change its name under the pretext of some ultraleftist semantic dispute


>ultraleftist semantic dispute
Pushing for a clear distinction between communism, anarchism and liberalism is what counts as "ultraleftism" now? Seems pretty odd to me, considering that the label of "leftist" seems to be the opposite in effect.


File: 1656249000116.jpg (87.31 KB, 600x450, 1456788127736.jpg)

i see marxoids are finally waking up


Let me restate in clearer terms: the term "leftism" lumps liberalism, communism, anarchism and social democracy together, and therefore secretly elevates liberalism by equating each ideology.
Don't listen to those who claim such a point is mere semantics, for only a vulgar materialist will argue that knowledge has no effect on our behaviour. Do not allow this false equivalence muddy the consciousness of decent people.


File: 1656252734261-0.png (93.24 KB, 1180x321, all egoists karl too.png)

File: 1656252734261-1.gif (248.84 KB, 664x1000, stirnerboobers.gif)

What we need is a soviet of Egoists


>2nd pic


The greeks also didn't call themselves part of ancient philosophy. Are they not part of ancient philosophy?
Are racists who call themselves not racist no longer racist?
Your epistemology sucks my nards.



left right spectrum is trash that dates to the french revolution but the general understanding that we are to the "left" of fascists, capitalists, liberals, social democrats etc. is well understood.

>Marx was not a communist
he wrote manifesto of the communist party during the 1840s. why did he think he could speak for communists if he wasn't one?
>Lenin was not a leninist
Lenin's ideas were codified as Leninism after he died. This is "Christ was not a Christian" style argument. The proper response is "Ok. And?"

>Stalin was not a stalinist


>Mao was not a maoist

>Gonzalo was not a gonzalist
Gonzalo was a maoist
Mao created mao zedong thought which is separate from "maoism" (why people insist on this confusing nomenclature is beyond me, but it seems to have stuck_)



OP got BTFOd.
OP was a retard from the start anyways….

OP, you probably don't want to check each of these quotes, so I say number 3 and 6 are the strongest and I want you to read at least those. What's your answer?
<Endlich deckten wir den parlamentarischen Kretinismus (wie Marx es nannte) der verschiedenen sogenannten Nationalversammlungen auf. Diese Herren hatten sich alle Machtmittel entschlüpfen lassen, sie zum Teil freiwillig wieder den Regierungen überliefert. Neben neugestärkten, reaktionären Regierungen standen in Berlin wie in Frankfurt machtlose Versammlungen, die trotzdem sich einbildeten, ihre ohnmächtigen Beschlüsse würden die Welt aus den Angeln heben. Bis auf die äußerste Linke herrschte diese kretinhafte Selbsttäuschung. Wir riefen ihnen zu: ihr parlamentarischer Sieg werde zusammenfallen mit ihrer wirklichen Niederlage.
Engels in MEW volume 21, page 21
<Einen rechten und einen linken Flügel hat jede Partei, und daß der rechte Flügel der Sozialdemokratie kleinbürgerlicher Art ist, liegt in der Natur der Sache.
Engels in MEW volume 22, page 84
<Wenn dagegen die Bewegung wirklich national ist, werden unsere Leute dabei sein, ohne daß sie dazu aufgerufen werden brauchen, und unsere Teilnahme an einer solchen Bewegung versteht sich von selbst. Dann aber muß man sich darüber im klaren sein, und wir müssen es offen verkünden, daß wir als unabhängige Partei teilnehmen, für den Augenblick mit den Radikalen und Republikanern verbündet, aber völlig von ihnen unterschieden; daß wir uns im Falle eines Sieges keine Illusionen über das Resultat des Kampfes machen; daß ein solches Resultat, weit entfernt, uns zu befriedigen, für uns nur eine gewonnene Etappe, eine neue Operationsbasis für weitere Eroberungen sein wird; daß sich noch am Tage des Sieges unsere Wege trennen; daß wir von diesem Tage an der neuen Regierung gegenüber die neue Opposition bilden werden, keine reaktionäre, sondern eine fortschrittliche Opposition, eine Opposition der äußersten Linken, die zu neuen Eroberungen vorstoßen wird, über das gewonnene Terrain hinaus.
Engels in MEW volume 22, page 442
<Es ist falsch, daß die „Neue Rhein. Zeit." „sämtliche" Parlamentsmitglieder „angriff". Sie stand in der freundschaftlichsten Verbindung mit vielen Mitgliedern der äußersten Linken.
Marx in MEW volume 30, page 508
<Die fieberhafte Tätigkeit Bismarcks, die alles in Unordnung und aus den Fugen bringt, ohne das geringste Positive schaffen zu können, die die Steuerkraft des Philisters für nichts und wieder nichts bis aufs äußerste aussaugt, die heute dies und morgen das Gegenteil will und die den Philister, der so gern zu seinen Füßen schwanzwedeln möchte, mit Gewalt der Revolution in die Arme treibt - das ist unser stärkster Bundesgenosse; und daß Sie mir die dabei unvermeidliche Linksschiebung aus eigner Anschauung als tatsächlich bestätigen können, freut mich sehr.
Engels in MEW volume 34, page 446
<Darüber, daß es eines Tags zu einer Auseinandersetzung mit den bürgerlich gesinnten Elementen der Partei und zu einer Scheidung zwischen rechtem und linkem Flügel kommen wird, habe ich mir schon längst keine Illusion mehr gemacht und dies auch schon in dem handschriftlichen Aufsatz über den Jahrbuchsartikel gradezu als wünschenswert ausgesprochen (…) Haben sie sich erst als aparter rechter Flügel organisiert, so kann man mit ihnen von Fall zu Fall eine, soweit zulässig, gemeinsame Aktion verabreden, sogar Kartell mit ihnen schließen usw. Obwohl dies kaum nötig sein wird: die Trennung selbst wird sie in ihrer Ohnmacht bloßlegen. Sie haben weder Anhang in den Massen, noch Talente, noch Kenntnisse - sie haben nur Prätentionen, die aber dicke. Indes, das findet sich. Jedenfalls wird dadurch Klarheit in die Sachlage gebracht und wir von einem Element befreit, das gar nicht zu uns gehört (…) Wenn es zur Auseinandersetzung mit diesen Herren kommt und der linke Flügel der Partei Farbe bekennt, so gehn wir unter allen Umständen mit Euch und das aktiv und mit offnem Visier.
Engels in MEW volume 35, pages 334–336
<Politische Stagnation, d. h. zweck- und zielloser Kampf der offiziellen Parteien, wie jetzt, kann uns auf die Dauer nicht dienen. Wohl aber ein progressiver Kampf dieser Parteien mit allmählicher Linksschiebung des Schwerpunkts. Das ist, was jetzt in Frankreich geschieht, wo der politische Kampf sich wie immer in klassischer Form bewegt. Die einander folgenden Regierungen gehen immer mehr nach links, das Ministerium Clemenceau ist schon in Sicht; es wird nicht das äußerste bürgerliche sein. Mit jeder Verschiebung nach links fallen Konzessionen an die Arbeiter ab…
Engels in MEW volume 36, page 160
<Die Tätigkeit der Opportunisten (neben ihrer flagranten Korruption) treibt die öffentliche Meinung immer mehr nach links und zwingt zur Nominierung immer radikalerer Regierungen.
Engels in MEW volume 37, page 47


this thread is hilarious. who gives a shit if the greats called themselves leftists?


>Based on this, any anarchist and Leninist who calls himself a "left-winger" is a fucking clown.
Who gives a shit

This whole conversation is about words and what you call yourself as if that's what determines the reality. It's the most postmodern thing I can imagine really. You sound like the guy from the Nike ad in the 90s who was like "we are the stories we tell about ourselves" and you're getting very upset these communists are telling the wrong story or something.


Y'all know Marx and Engels spent a lot of time making fun of people making distinctions like this, right. If attempting to place yourself under the 'leftist' label is helpful, then you should do it. And if it's not helpful, then you shouldn't. You have to pick your battles, and sticking to your guns about being outside of the left/right dichotomy is pretty pointless. Like, in the best case scenario, all you've done is piss off a bunch of theoretically sympathetic people. And the rightoids will still think of you as the same anyway.





>correct post
<no responses


This. Read Wittgenstein anyway hes more detailed on this concept


ok so these historical communists didn't call thesmselves left
what is the problem with current communists calling themselves left
you left this part out OP


there's nothing to say in response to a correct post, which is why they usually get few to no responses


>leave leftypol for two years, disappointed
>get bored, check back in
>takes this many posts and y'all still haven't collectively concluded that the left right spectrum is useless liberal bullshit
It's almost comforting in a way to see you all still stuck in the same mud. OP is right except that you acknowledge left and right have any meaning at all, stay slow leftypol.


its obvious that they were based when feudalism was still around, but now theyre the new feudalists.


Leftist is a term used by baby actual socialists and communists or liberals. But you should never call yourself a leftist if you know better. I, for one, am a marxist-leninist


Has it occurred to you that the userbase is not a static entity


>Leftist is a term used by baby actual socialists or liberals
>I, for one, am a marxist-leninist
These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves




>neither "left" or "right."
oh cool thats very unique and special
you should call it something like "third position" so people don't mistake you for something else


or if you are not retarded and know that liberalism is right wing you could employ phrases like "scratch a liberal" etc and inform people of the distinction like leftists have been doing for decades


Will never understand this irritation of some to be considered part of the "left" politcal tradition.


Communism was never and will never be "left."

Deal with it already, holy fucking shit.


You seems to be the angry person here :)


blame the french. this terminology is straight from the french revoluation


Did the enlightenment era philosophers call themselves enlightenment era philosophers?
Communism IS left because of it's association with leftism.
The left and right system is shit but it doesn't mean you can ignore communism's relation to leftism.


You're never going to build a coherent political movement if you use the language of the dominant political ideology. Fuck identifying with the "left", I refuse to play on their terms.


>third position marxism
Go back to the Piazzale Loreto square to get beaten like a meat pinata faggot. You dumb fucks disgust me.


thats literally the case


The point isn't that communism is "neither left nor right" but that it creates new modes of leftism and rightism, we saw this even before 1917. Not knowing this is actually historically illiterate.
Communists don't neatly fit into the current left-right paradigm because nobody outside of the ruling ideology does, so there are multiple positions on both sides that communists can occupy.


this is such an important issue when i saw this post i forgot to pull out of op's mom and spurted goo all up in her pussy out of pure shock and anger at leftcucks. i'm literally shaking right now.



fuck i just came in op's mom AGAIN! i too think it's vulgar materialism to not give a shit about what impotent subcultural weirdos on the internet call their political tendency!


It's only materialism if she cums first


communists that call themselves leftists gave me chronic premature ejaculation.


Primo's only a handicap if you don't go for multiple rounds


well i guess op's mom is a good materialist, because i usually cum on her face upwards of nine times a night.


No they aren't. The Jacobins were basically proto-socialists. They had the limitations of their time period, all their actions were informed by the struggle against feudalism with limited understanding of the capitalist society that was to follow, but they weren't setting out to create a new class society.


>first more militant neonazies want to distance themselves rejecting the left right spectrum
>now some anon here suggest the same but for communis
can you guys be original atleast once?


>distance themselves from cuckservatives and reactionaries




File: 1659991013944.jpg (53.49 KB, 323x454, bayeux tapestry.jpg)


To distance communism from the left is to distance it from the French Revolution, and thereby distance it from humanity, from beauty, and from God.

"Patsocs" and other reactionary socialists are prisoners of their own stupidity and ugliness, something they wish to inflict on all of us.


this is pointless


>there's nothing to say in response to a correct post,

say "damn, this is correct. everyone else is coping and seething right now."

>which is why they usually get few to no responses

they get no responses because everyone is coping and seething and trying to bury the correct post under mountains of shit.



correct posts that got no real response


>left wingers dividing themselves even further because of shitty semantics
More than 100 years have passed and you guys don't learn anything


Op is based. You likely are on the spectrum though



Fine by me!


File: 1660029420005.jpg (39.35 KB, 510x510, 1659653063380.jpg)

OP don't be such a redditor about this. Left and right are just useful shorthands. I know relation to the means of production is a more useful measure, but one must be willing to use multiple lenses to convey these sort of things to different audiences, lest one risk sounding like an incomprehensible fool to those who don't understand your preferred lens.


This would be okay, but again and again the same issue arises, namely that the almost exclusive focus on the "left vs. right" lens gets to be taken quite literally and becomes the only lens through which our audience (and with time, our own members, supposed communists) perceives this issue.

This is why emphasizing that communism is something entirely different and stands aside (or rather, parallel to) the left - right dichotomy is of utmost importance. Good, you understood that you are a "leftist." Good, you came to identify as a "communist." Now understand that 1) communism isn't "left"; 2) it's scientific and historically very specifically determined (unlike the trans-historic label "left"), 3) and so on and so forth…

Thanks, I guess.


File: 1660030961327.jpg (79.92 KB, 1876x1877, f23.jpg)

Yeah I do think people lean way to heavily into the left-right spectrum lens. In middle school I was super reactionary but burned out once I started thinking to hard about political compass models and realized my beliefs were too abstract to be actionable, so I swore to start from scratch without using the lens as a crutch.


Pretty much yeah. Language can be pretty limiting and you can feel trapped when you say something and others misunderstand you or they think of something else then you do but being pedantic about language usage is the most braindead thing you can do, just engage in the language game like everyone else


Anarchists aren't all communists tho. Communism today mostly refers to Marxists, and a good portion of anarchists (and I'm going to leave ancaps out of this category for the sake of brevity) are not Marxist or ancom. Although there's also a huge rift in what "communist" even means post-ML - Marx's description of communism doesn't really match the societies which emerged to identify themselves as ideologically "communist." "Leftist" as a vague term alluding to a set of positions which are relative to historical context is unironically a less confusing way to describe anarchists, communists, communalists, and socialists as a loose group than just calling them all "communist" is.


why is he giving witt rosary beads


language is the liquid

that we're all dissolved in

great for solving problems

after it creates a problem


There are things which can't be expressed into language which can make you feel trapped in a cage, to get over this you can make use of mysticism which transcends language itself ( the rosary being a symbol of mysticism). Wittgenstein was interested in religion and in mysticism because of this, you can see this in some passages of Tractatus. He wasn't some weird esoteric or into magic and stuff like that though, I'm saying this so people don't exagerate the importance of mysticism in his life


Communism is leftwing though. Why? Because what could be more typically leftwing than spending time arguing over the most inane, inconsequential questions like "Is Communism leftwing or not?"


The CIA were right when they considered the left to not be a threat to anyone because they fight more among themselves then fight others

Unique IPs: 70

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]