/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

many speak the language of morality rather than machiavellian realpolitik, but their actions reveal ruthless self interest which betrays their moral principles. however sometimes people will betray their own material interests to make themselves feel good. But they won't do that a majority of the time, just on a small occasion. It's like bourgeois charity.

>>2657953
Isn't this view of "homo economus" widely rejected, including by leading experimental psychologists and even behavioral economists. Even if it was true its hard to imagine a productive violent action in a developed country that would be worth it for the actor who would inevitably be caught and put in the aforementioned cages.

I think it was Houdini who linked the following [^1] last year which I read in passing about the United Freedom Front (UFF) which seemed to indicate that a large part of what they were doing was in solidarity with the third world. RAF if I remember correctly trained with Palestinians, and there were a number of other groups which strongly advocated these causes. So it's not entirely outlandish to say that this might be the motive. The state of the people.

:[^1] https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/18717/

>>2658554
>Isn't this view of "homo economus" widely rejected, including by leading experimental psychologists and even behavioral economists.

They also reject communism.

>>2659182
>They also reject communism.
That's true, perhaps I can think of a better argument than appeals to authority. Based on my limited knowledge, but our shared experience as human beings, we know definitively moral emotions exist, that these can be contrary to self interest, and that people can act on them. For me the trouble seems to be this action, but it applies to self-interested action also.

The only question that follows is are our moral emotions, goodness, the crown of mind, or are there other higher moral or rational factors that should govern us. In fact people with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions, where emotions including moral emotions are processed in the brain, are completely capable of making "rational" moral choices if given as a thought experiment, but in practice act completely out of line with their stated morality. Lastly experiments have shown that "rational" morality in practice largely serves to retroactively justify moral emotions. The conclusion is that reason can at best influence our moral emotions which is foundational to moral action.

More than this, even if we accepted "homo economicus" it would be difficult to justify first-world revolution in its terms.

>>2657951
Morality, as a set of taught principles that one must live by, is conservative. Every system of rules has loopholes that let us out of a bind when the rules get in the way of the powerful.

Empathy is when you care about other people. This is a motivating factor for people, but it's hard to be empathetic all the time, and it's especially hard to put empathy over self interest when they conflict.

Solidarity is the understanding that our fates are tied up together, so what hurts you hurts me and what uplifts you uplifts me. It is a motivation derived from self interest that supports combined efforts and pro-social behavior.

I think we should focus most on solidarity, some on empathy, and least on morals.

>>2660563
This is a good post, I've never thought of solidarity like this - as rational self-interest. It sort of pains me to place significance on rational self-interest at all, even in the form of solidarity, perhaps for fear of chauvanism, and opposition to broad coalition building (some of which you in fact see). The trick, I guess obviously, is to identify with the right things.

It's critical to note that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex is in addition to being responsible for moral emotions, is also responsible for formation of identity. That these areas are processed in the same region has lead some to speculate that our identity is inseparable from our value system. So perhaps the political project, and what justifies revolution (to those not directly in dire need) is change in this identity moral emotion conglomeration.

How much of the enlightenment and subsequently modern culture could just be an attempt to identify with (non-slave) humanity or more precisely as a (free) human.

>>2660563
>>2661893
ugh. no. no. no. I doubt you meant self-interest is just a matter of identity here. There's a rational calculation at play. I need to think again.

>>2660563
>I think we should focus most on solidarity, some on empathy, and least on morals.
I'm really struggling with how different this mode of thinking is. My basic understanding of the position is that solidarity is effectively rational self-interest with coalition building as a means. I don't see how this mechanism serves to justify for example working men to have supported women's liberation or Israeli Jews to oppose genocide - chauvinism.

Even if it's just feelings one gets the impression that there's some difficulty in convincing others or oneself without there being reasons even if these aren't entirely rational but thought experiments designed to elicit emotional responses. Another example is prison liberation where prisoners are often seen as having "deserved" their situation, and so as to justify their imprisonment without even any moral feeling but rightful.

is there any actual organized revolutionary movements in the west anymore?