[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / 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


Do they think that the human condition as it is isn't a disaster that needs to change and needs to change fast? do they not see how problematic our current cultures are? are they fine with human trafficking? child abuse? crapitalism? for how long? forever? till the sun engulfs the earth? how are they not seen as the mad ones?
I can never see conservatives as anything but the gatekeepers of the hell that is the current human condition.


File: 1708540485348.png (299.68 KB, 600x315, 1682204306177-1.png)

Some are stupid, some don't give a shit, some like an easy paycheck. There is always and forever marks and conmen. If you grew up sheltered the world looks different to you than if you grew up in "a rough neighborhood". There is a whole lot of "intersecting" issues but that would take forever to adequately summarize.


because they're conservatives
they're anti progress because they're conservatives
it's in the name


Nah you don't get it, we need suffering because otherwise we aren't real men and we become squishy and decadent


unless you were making a psychological assessment, what I meant was, and to be phrased in a slightly different way, why are they conservative in the first place? it's a bit rhetorical, as there is no simple answer of course.


They're not "anti-progress" they're pro- things staying the same. Conservatives/traditionalists believe the world (society) was better before, and they blame the perceived negative changes on change itself.

Peterson loves to talk about The Pill and what a revolution it was. And it was, but not in the way Peterson/conservatives think. So in true right-wing/reactionary/fascist fashion they recognise the problem but completely miss the explanation. Liberals/progressives on the other hand think that all change is good and either deny the negatives, frame them in a positive light or simply say that is the price of progress and hope the next change fixes them.

That's why (unironically) conservatives can be convinced by leftwing/Marxist rhetoric and explanations. e.g. Žižek who is now the darling of conservatives; probably why he's trying so hard to endeae himself to the progressives now cause he's always been a lib.

Even Marx said the way to find a solution to a problem is to ask the right questions, cause the kernel of the answer is found in the question/problem.


>are they fine with human trafficking? child abuse? crapitalism? for how long? forever?
anon I


Most conservative intellectuals are neocons.

Alot of them started out as moerate or liberal.
And thy still live like such while spouting neocon blabber.


The traditional intellectual has always been a chickenshit status quo shill, even millennia ago


Because they're white.

It's as simple as that.


Dođi vamo


numbers shlarm


File: 1708545252927.jpg (24.16 KB, 275x314, come here meat.jpg)


All of this is a failure of character. If everyone had a better character, all of society's problems would be solved - without the need to change the society in any way!


File: 1708546820003.jpg (63.43 KB, 623x598, 1681820136666.jpg)

>the way to find a solution to a problem is to ask the right questions
Wow I say that too. And I didn't need any Marx for that.


SEO incentives reactionary sounding content.


/cuckquean/ pls


File: 1708547705236.webm (1.13 MB, 654x480, it is a mystery.webm)

>why are conservative intellectuals conservatives anti-progress


Intellectually, they seek to frustrate the possibility of unity and to fog consciousness, to actively sew false consciousness through chauvinist rhetoric. They could certainly be afraid of progress, but it might also be justified, since they occupy the ruling class, and don't want their rule threatened, because they are the beneficiaries of profit, as in exploitation.


File: 1708743678290.png (75.86 KB, 266x259, not ok.PNG)

>mfw pic
The Sexual Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster to the human race…


I wish she was my gf


File: 1708744479242.png (81.92 KB, 211x174, Tedsmile.PNG)

Check your mailbox. I think she sent you a love letter bro!


Most conservatives aren't really conservative tho. They're far more progressive than actual liberals. What they want to conserve is the pace of material progress. Look how they pretend to oppose female reproductive rights but the moment say a Muslim woman decides to wear her hijab and choose to not partake in the labor market they collectively screech and seethe and accuse Islam of being outdated. They're actually the firmest and most rigid defenders of material progress. They just try to sway public opinion that would otherwise be on the side of traditionalism to their cause of material progress. It's a fake dichotomy. Actual conservatives like the Amish or Buddhist monks are pacifist and choose to live a life of complete resignation, knowing fully well it entails extreme hardship due to the lack of access to technology.
Conservatives like Jordan Peterson are too pampered and enslaved to technocapital to handle a life like that.


My proof of that is by looking at "conservative" parties in Europe defending gay rights because Muslims are opposed to it kek


Troon/gay shit is not progress but yeah, Peterson types are still retards


you mean, pseudo-intellectuals


Nah that's dumb, yes they attack Muslims for XYZ but it is purely opportunistic, they don't believe in a word of it. American conservatives support anti-gay policy abroad with their actual money.


Me too, anon, me too


very simple
people are selfish and care about themselves. communists pretend to care about everyone, and they think they can balance the justice. the reality is that everything is a spaghetti monster, and you're a good little girl angel trapped in the asylum for angels from going mad insane


of all the imageboard pseuds that exist, I think I dislike schizoposters the most

yes yes you're very smart because you know how to combine word salad into a pseudo-coherent dopamine trigger


File: 1712078694877.png (346.37 KB, 1001x524, 1702831943397525.png)

Do marxists need to be involved with modern identity poltics? Sure there are many troons amongst the poor but they aren't guarenteed to be a part of the working class. PoCs, women and the gays sure. That is something that isn't created by the capitalist system but the concept of gender fluidity and troons? Isn't that artificially creating another class of people for no reason who deserve "better" treatment despite that shit for the majority being entirely within their control? It's a genuine question. I don't think they should be repressed and researching that stuff might genuinely be good for the personal health of many to come but I really can't see it being part of the worker's struggle to break their chains


anti-progress is definitionally what a conservative is.
they think the human condition as it is IS a disaster, and that is precisely why a return to prior iterations is necessary because it is progress that has brought us here.
rest of your post is nonsense babble.
these words should ostensibly mean different things yet leftists can only every use them synonymously. its really reudctio ad fascism, and good on you for being able to make the logical connection, but you really need to synthesize your vocabulary because this just seems schizophrenic. please make it so words mean discrete things again.


It's more like you are already involved.
>concept of gender fluidity
This concept needs the concept of gender in the first place. Just follow the rope to the end.
Yes, the worker's struggle is not the trans struggle or whatever. That is because you can be many things at once.


what the hell is my man northernlion doing in berlin


File: 1712154649807.jpg (130.71 KB, 1280x704, FNh_FfeVkAEVKT5.jpg)

>They just try to sway public opinion that would otherwise be on the side of traditionalism to their cause of material progress. It's a fake dichotomy.
Right, the Society That Must Be Defended is still modernity for them, and if anything the danger of Jordan Peterson is that he's Bush neoconservatism wrapped in self-help, of a type that can legitimately be powerful if you haven't encountered it before.

>Troon/gay shit is not progress but yeah, Peterson types are still retards
>Do marxists need to be involved with modern identity poltics?
I dunno. Make up your own mind. Aren't you guys supposed to be the social scientists who can figure this stuff out? I'm being a jerk today, but it always comes up when Burger King tweets "gay rights" (which is cringe and doesn't mean anything) but what am I supposed to do about it? It's a dumb sideshow and probably 80% of gay people complain about it or know how transparently fake and performative that stuff is – it's the trad-workers who are falling for it more than the libs are. "Damn, Adidas really believes this." They use corporate PR as an excuse to call LGBT people degenerates. Like, ok. The trad-workerists then have to say that the emancipation of the proletariat from the chains of commodity society can only happen once we embrace straight up gay-panic politics Southern Baptist grandma style.

Capitalism has done this kind of thing for a long time. Back in the 90s the oil companies started "greenwashing," trying to cultivate a environmentally friendly image. It's not like trying to stop climate change is some sellout position now. When Amazon says they are prioritizing the safety of their workers, do you also take this slop at face value with no contextualization or critical thought? That's Marxism, baby. Well, for some people. You know, telling people what to think and not how to think.


Not always, Benjamin Israeli and some conservatives in Europe and even in America during the 1800s supported things like health care, public infrastructure, etc. to improve the lives of workers, granted these came from the angle of increasing profits for industry but I would still consider these things progressive for its time, and even now considering our backward neoliberal era.


I think you're substituting what most people mean by "conservative" and replacing it with your own made up definition.

OP I really think it's as simple as: some monkey brains just really just don't like things. There's an environment in which they'd feel most comfortable and are simply trying to craft that environment through philosophy or force. Some people REALLY don't like anything that they haven't been preconditioned to accept. If they were raised into a christain culture they want to maintain that, if they were raised in a muslim culture they'd be equally fine. Hell some liberals are probably crypto-conservatives: they were born in a liberal-area with a liberal family so that's simply the environment they adapted to; it's why they push against leftism as "too far". PDF very related.

Unique IPs: 24

[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 / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]