/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2769645
No
Fuck the wide audience
The wide audience says yessum massa when pedophile child eating retards whip them in the back and call them and incel

Those retards will accept what we give them or we just fucking kill them and their families

>>2769866
Honestly this seems like the more correct take. Most people are basically cattle and should basically be told what to do. I'm not much different truthfully. Most people just put on appearances to make themselves look better than what they actually are.

>>2769645
This is dumb thinking, at least as you present it.
First: because many people are more tolerant than you think, or at least more indifferent to differences which aren't relevant. (E.g. many theoretical racists are actually perfectly at ease with their minority co-workers)
Second: because things become normalized. Should female communists have eschewed trousers until someone else took the lead in changing tastes?
Third, because it's just plain bad marketing. People want interesting things, not bland ones. In politics this means it's better to have people love some parts of you and hate others than it is to have them be indifferent. The most conventional communist possible is not a communist at all - he gave that nonsense up to fit in better.
Finally:
People's political sympathies are in large part rooted in their personalities. The average communist today is: high openness, high agreeableness, high neuroticism, mid-low conscientiousness (rule following), and extroversion is a wash. The average rightoid is low openness, low agreeableness, low-mid neuroticism, mid-high conscientiousness. By tailoring yourself as a conventional conformist you face a choice: conform to what? If you conform to the demands of "mainstream" society as it actually exists, you'll express your gay furry little heart out. If you conform to the imagined normie of your fever dreams (a much more right tilted balance than the actualité), you're trying to sell communism to rightists opposed both dispositionally and theoretically to you. Perhaps as your next step after that flops you could take up marketing mutton flaps to vegans?

>>2769645
You are terminally socdem. It is inoperable. No amount of decorative hammers and sickles will be able to disguise it.

>>2769645
Better men than you have tried to convince radical fringes this is something we need to do, but I wish you the best of luck.

>>2769866
>Those retards will accept what we give them or we just fucking kill them and their families
Yeah history actually says this approach always goes horribly.

>>2769645
Trvthnuke

You are the jewish nigger.

>>2769927
Some truth to this as even though I'm not a rightoid, rightoids think I'm adorable and based. I don't think they're actually listening to what I say, just the way I say it.

Works on women too because the women agree with just enough of the parts that the confidence and the aggression make their pussies wet. It's pretty basic stuff.

I'm not suggesting agreeable introverted people pretend, that doesn't work and they shouldn't have too. But I'm adding upon what you said that it's something to consider when contemplating the human condition and how we interact.

>>2770827
I haven't met a single Leftist male I would describe as being confident or having a capacity for aggression.
I'm not sure what causes this as a former Chud Retard but it's definitely a phenomenon I have noticed. I even see it browsing more Leftist content now; almost everyone looks like an actual Soyjack Meme.

>>2770977
>>2770754
>>2769645
You lot have been doing this for over a hundred years.

>>2770977
>I haven't met a single Leftist male I would describe as being confident or having a capacity for aggression.
Jackson Hinkle. Haz. Hasan. Zohran Mamdani. Bernie Sanders.

>>2770977
Because political sympathies are downstream of personality. The great thing about the big 5 is, people use it for research!
So let's go with my description of leftists/rightists in >>2769927 and cross check it with what research on violence says
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9560051/
>the result showed a significant positive correlation between extraversion, neuroticism, and violence involvement. Agreeableness, openness, and consciousness were negatively correlated.

So: agreeableness and openness, left-liberal traits, are against violence. It's not pleasingly smack-down decisive thanks to neuroticism and conscientiousness falling on the wrong sides of the fence, but on the others there's a good correlation between non-violent traits and leftist traits.
And in reality, you can't take each personality trait in isolation: a low agreeableness, low openness neurotic probably isn't left-wing and may well be violent, and a high agreeableness, high openness neurotic probably isn't right wing and certainly won't be violent! People are complete personalities, not individual traits.
(And even then we shouldn't get confused: most rightists and most leftists aren't violent. In my view, we've generally been drifting more left-liberal, more non-violent and civilized, over time.)

>>2769892
Retarded non materialist understanding of society. Epstein is relatively far away from the proletariat and does not affect the way the US labor aristocracy enjoys their life so they won't do shit about it

>>2770977
US """""leftism""""" promotes anything but revolution. As such, no preparation is needed and US """"leftists"""" behave accordingly

>>2770979
What's this, "You" shit?

>>2771000
This is a bad explanation. US society is anomalously violent - more violent not only than every other first world country, but also more violent than many developing countries.
If the explanation was simply what was socially promoted, one would expect US leftists to be more violent than the average American and - if we continue to assume that violence and "revolutionary-ness" are correlated - that China and Vietnam would be much more violent than the US. (They are, in fact, much less violent, despite being poorer!)

>>2771039
(You) and “You” as in succdems

>>2771039
OP is very transparently an identifiable long-term poster on this board, "Red anon" of Norway, who shilled "Red Party" (a post-ML, Kautskyist reformist party) as being the "new era of Marxist parties" for many years. Then their grift hit a plateau and started losing seats, since then he stopped overtly shilling.
This is clearly him, a bit more on the down low (same flag, same revisionist norwegian newspapers being cited). The perceptive among us sussed it out immediately and we started addressing him directly (but he hasn't responded anymore ITT).