/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2879015
the cool thing about being a communist is being cool with both maga hat and cat ears and convincing them we need to jump the nazi

>>2879058
expanding more on the haz thing. people like talking about how the maga communism and barista thing or now marxism = islam, but we often forget the time when he was trying to argue that we already live in socialism which is another on its face stupid thing to day. at the same time though my initial reaction was definitely that this guy was just a fucking moron but over time i have come personally to the conclusion that there really was a real grain of truth in what he was saying on that point. there has been a convergence of the economic and political spheres with financialization and monopoly capital that blurs previously established boundaries. we are most certainly not living in an anarchy of production anymore at the very least though we should probably not literally see it as socialism..

btw i am not part of the acp or even the infrared community but if there is popular demand i can explain the marxism = islam meme lol. ive taken my own interest in islam for other reasons but i dont feel like converting to the religion. it is actually somewhat thought provoking

>>2879062
to some extent yes, but if you look at the ussr, china, and other AES countries, the national question has been consistently developed into a positive direction. the material realities of imperialism no doubt accentuate this tendency. at the same time i dont think cosmopolitanism should be outright dismissed either. the national question should still be integrated within a larger globalist framework of cooperation and interaction. ive only thought a bit about this privately but i believe it is important. perhaps there needs to be an elaboration on the philosophical "place" concept

>>2879058
it is reactionary to be selfish, but it is not stupid. you can ultimately bring a selfish person over to the socialist camp (provided, of course, he will be better off, which almost everyone will be.) but someone who is fundamentally stupid is much more challenging. if someone sincerely believes in god, and sincerely believes that god hates socialism, all bets are off.

i will clarify immediately that i do not support zionism and, indeed, regard Israeli society as something of the logical end-point of rightist political drift.
anyway,social conservatism must be considered in its material context and in terms of its direction of travel: e.g. the USSR should not be judged relative to contemporary America, but to Tsarist Russia. Stalin, granted, reverted some of the liberalisation of Lenin (which - with only a little cope - we may say jumped the gun and advanced faster than the underlying productive forces) but the USSR at collapse was a much more socially liberal place than Russia in 1916. quite famously, the merger of East and West Germany represented a step backwards for LGBT rights in the East. (before culminating in a step forward in such rights in the west.) insofar as there was a large socially conservative population in the USSR, i would read this off as an artefact of its later stagnation and implosion as national chauvinism took hold. speaking personally, i would sympathise with the atomised metropolitan centre imposing its wishes over the collective self determination of petty nationalists if the result were a continued USSR.

i think you are too cozy with established traditions: a tragic reality of the world is that modernisation entails essentially obliterating such traditional ties and relationships. a substantial chunk of the divergence between China's rapid rise and India's later-and-slower rise can be attributed to the simple fact that Mao successfully declared war on the deadwood traditions of the past while India, a bourgeois democracy, allowed a more conservative streak to take hold. (Most apparent in their approach to marriage law. Indian marriage reforms began at the same period as Chinese, but while China simply pushed the reforms through, India's parliament rejected them and the minister responsible resigned in protest.) the Soviets acted similarly, particularly against religion, even if this was later toned down. all of this is a necessary part of development and (except in minor cases which can be tolerated, such as the amish) the alternatives at the national or supranational level are doom or regression to capitalism.

i think - and here i really disagree with the other anon - that new collective identities are on the whole superior to old ones. that i am a communist (even an unpopular one with atypical views) is much more meaningful than being british, or european, or white, or any of these old collective identities. this would be true also for fandom or hobby identities. i will concede that it is not all positive (i think the global Trump cult is on the whole worse than the local, often anti-american nationalist movements it has displaced) but the general trend is for a dissolution of these arbitrary group ties in favour of chosen ones, which ultimately makes uniting the workers of the world easier rather than harder. (not for nothing are socialism and communism more popular than any time since the fall of the USSR, despite socialists and communists themselves being no better at organising.)

finally, despite all of this, as a practical measure i am also basically sympathetic to localism. i think most localities will be subject to economic and technological pressures that will pull them in a certain direction (certainly this is what the Swiss experience would suggest) but, as the amish show, some are willing to pay those costs. this coheres with the prior point about new collective identities because there is a strong case for both: day-to-day services are delivered locally and you have to be able to live with the people around you, while higher-level interests and relationships are distributed all over the place (e.g. we are discussing socialism and communism right now). in such a world, a strong central monoculture controlled by a strong central authority ceases to be necessary, even if the result is bipolar collectivism rather than vulgar individualism.

>>2879095
the birth control pill is the technological achievement.
your example makes my point: we invented the triple whopper, people got fat, and despite a lot of self-righteous fat-shaming, obesity rates went up and up and up until we invented Ozempic, at which point they started to fall back. insofar as adopting their views would've avoided a lot of ineffective nastiness, fat-rights activists were correct. yes yes, you can go "but they don't like ozempic!!" and pull up some nutter. you can find any crazy person on the internet! you're talking to a communist who thinks real neoliberalism has never been tried!

>>2879109
a point to make regarding cosmopolitanism is that while china may not have embraced the standard human-rights liberalism package, it is china and not america which goes out to argue for free trade and international rules and norms today, while it is america that does its damnedest to undermine these things.

>>2879114
>the birth control pill is the technological achievement.

the triple wopper is the tehcnololgical achievement

i'm at the point now where i'm just done with middle-class white guys in terms of listening to their political views and giving them the benefit of the doubt, they're all conservative by default until they prove otherwise. and honestly they've been hogging the soapbox and being at the center of western political discourse for long enough, i'm tired of always hearing the middle class white guy's myopic hot takes about everything.

>>2879119
i'm giving you a (you) only because your inability to read or spell does more to justify my worldview than a chart ever could.

>>2879123
you've said nothing beyond "be socially liberal because of birth control "technology" "
what a retarded fucking take that can be applied to literally anything

>>2879121
no one else is taken serioiusly anymore this isn't 2020

>>2879114

it's not fast food portion sizes causing the united states increased obesity rates you white liberal reddit moron, it's poverty. that's all it is, poverty. any time people talk about the "obesity epidemic" or the "drug abuse epidemic" what they are really talking about is economic inequality and they're shifting the blame for consequences of poverty onto the poor and their consumer choices instead of the system.

>>2879119
unironically, the technical and social achievement to create an agricultural operation which produces at great scale to feed into a food processing industry which preserves food with such efficiency that the base ingredients for a hamburger can be transported to basically anywhere in the US and assembled into a burger of your choice is a big technological achievement.

>>2879132
cool now show how that has anything to do with promoting morbid obesity

>>2879130
the idea that the whopper is the underlying cause of obesity is >>2879095 's idea, not mine. i simply ran with it to illustrate the more pertinent point: rates went up and up and up until a technology was invented that eliminated the problem. it is precisely against an attitude of blaming the individual that i made such a point. (whether the cause is poverty or magic burgers doesn't matter so much: did bullying fat people work at stopping the rate from growing? no. did ozempic? yes.)

that said: i think "poverty" is too easy an explanation. while i think poverty is a major cause of US obesity, i do not believe that 40% of americans are impoverished. i will stick with UK numbers, which i know better, to show that there's still a lot to explain.
in the UK, 28% of men in the least deprived areas are obese compared with 34% of men in the most deprived areas (and the UK is very segregated by area) so there is a correlation between obesity and poverty, but the ~6% gap isn't very impressive compared to the high "base" rate, while the most obese male group by employment category (30% obese) is actually petit bourgeois small employers.

bourgeois liberals are incapable of empathy and understanding poverty, so they have utterly braindead takes about things like substance abuse and obesity. they can't comprehend the fact that a significant percentage of americans are poor and live in shitty third world areas with no resources or opportunities and their lives are miserable and they're always stressed out about money and struggling to survive and when they're not busy working and being exploited at some grueling low-paying job they're drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes and eating junk food to take the pain away.

>>2879146
the point isn't that the wopper is the underlying cause of obesity but that "support liberalism because liberal ideas led to X random technology" is udderly retarded and can be applied to anything imaginable

>>2879147
on the contrary i fully sympathise with this, which is precisely why i emphasised that obesity rates are determined by forces far above the individual. do not misinterpret my point about poverty being an "easy" explanation as disregarding the interaction between obesity and poverty. all i am drawing attention to is that there are a lot of fat middle and upper income people too.

>>2879148
i didn't say "support liberal ideas because they lead to x random technology", you dunderhead, i said "x random technology lead to liberal ideas taking root". you have it precisely backwards. learn to read.

>>2879114
>but it is not stupid
it IS stupid because it fundamentally misunderstands human existence. the idea that humans are individuals and not social animals goes against even basic anthropology. believing in the existence of god can be far more rational than believing that we are just atomic individuals

you try and try and relativize the actions of the ussr to the time in which it takes place but this partially ignores how the ussr liberalized over time and accepted more western influence not just socially but also economically. the ussr's dissolution was not a nationalistic gesture but rather a concession to globalistic liberalism. the move was greatly unpopular amongst the actual populace. we are forgetting as well how china is still socially conservative compared to the west and despite what happened in the cultural revolution, confuscianism is still very much latently present within chinese culture compared to here. we now see as well the government of china encouraging and celebrating chinese traditions such as tai chi. in my opinion a lot of the excesses of the cultural revolution came down to a conceit that eventually gave way for a more mature understanding of cultural expression. i think a similar happened with the ussr. in both cases they had this initial conception that as marxists they should be militant atheists that curb against superstition but with time they realized that these things were not actually as necessary to curb as they initially thought. they also initially identified more strongly with an idea of a world revolution and seeing themselves first and foremost as communist until eventually they settled on socialism in one country. western leftists are still in the former stage of ideological development where we still hang on to these overly cosmopolitan pretensions but i am not convinced these pretensions actually hold lasting weight. as i already pointed out, the erosion of many traditions is not merely a "tragedy of modernity" but a product of capital's deterritorialization. if that is eliminated there is no reason to assume that it would still be an ongoing affair. this would be to superimpose a whig history abstracted from the actual relations of production

i also dont believe in necessarily clinging to old collective identities, and indeed i think in the future new collectivities may develop (but at the same time, these may not at all be manifest as some humanism abstracted from nation and locality). i just dont see such a deep dichotomy, and in some cases there may be ironic turns where something that integrates older traditions ends up having the last laugh. personally i dont identify too much with any already established tradition, but i am skeptical of the sexual revolution and interested in establishing my own new tradition that might incorporate some practices and ideas of the past. i also dont think such economic and technological pressures are always as necessary as you might think. as i said technological development is not at all linear (the development of birth control did not at all happen in a vacuum), and a municipalist form of governance would likely only further enforce local identities, and maybe even lead to the organic development of new ones

btw i think the real reason why socialism has been more popular has not been the increased acceptance of neoliberalism. as you had already pointed out there has been a growth in the trump cult and hyper-nationalistic right wing sentiment within the west. moreover, there are a lot of democratic socialist in america that take patriotic postures which nevertheless resonate with a lot of people. the real reason that socialism has become more popular has been the success of china. we are all seeing what china is doing and how it is working, and people are being tempted to try and emulate those economic policies. china meanwhile, although it has a cosmopolitan geopolitics, when it comes to national politics it is still relatively socially conservative. it is largely indifferent to many of the trends that have become the rage in the west

>>2879161
not that other anon the whopper example actually really emphasizes my point about the idea of linear technological progress being absurd. in a socialist governance, whoppers would never get developed and the government would largely ban their production as it is a product that is largely predatory. the development of the whopper and subsequently ozempic is a product of the capitalist mode of production, first the exploitative tendencies of the fast food sector, and then the cynical movement of the medical industrial complex to create a cheat solution for the underlying problem, you can not divorce technological progress from cultural determinateness and material relations of production as again it paints an abstract narrative of progress that overshadows actual particular realities

>>2879147
>they can't comprehend the fact that a significant percentage of americans are poor and live in shitty third world areas with no resources or opportunities and their lives are miserable and they're always stressed out about money and struggling to survive
This is why I assume all the first worldists bitching about their being no proletariat in Burgeria are just the sheltered failsons of labor aristocrats and petty bourgeoisie who only interact with other suburboids and think the rest of the country is as annoying as their peer group. It's a fairly standard r9k normie resentment complex with some marxist jargon attached to it.

>>2879146

yeah but you see the uk didn't have this thing called plantation slavery where a large percentage of the population were enslaved black people whose descendents are now an impoverished marginalized underclass with no access to decent food or healthcare.

>>2879098
Im a good communist the "leftists" at my local DSA meetings, not so much.

>>2879172
Trvke

>>2879187
>this seems to be a common trend where ever they are regardless of a history of plantation slavery

it's almost as if some kind of terrible confluence of racist european empires spent the last 600 years robbing every uyghur on the face of the earth

>>2879209
No, what is that?

>>2879211
Leninhat’s sister.

>>2879209
>straight porn
gay

>>2879209
the glowed MAGAcom splitter chan will always remain the cucked alternative for the usual banned suspects (pedos, feds, spammers, psychos, schizos)
>porn for no reason
try to not kill yourself going 24h w/o it. consider it a dare, pussy.

>>2879244

yes it is obviously a biological trait for black people to be obese and unhealthy, and it's just a coincidence that literally every other civilization in the entire world that has been colonized by europeans, including indigenous people in the arctic circle and remote islands in the middle of the pacific ocean, also have extremely high obesity rates. there can't possibly be some obvious common thread linking all these isolated incidents together. and it certainly doesn't affect impoverished white people, you'll never see many obese white families at a walmart in west virginia or indiana.

>>2879267
> you'll never see many obese white families at a walmart in west virginia or indiana.
My god dude, I was at a Walmart in Lubbock Texas and there were fucking HAMPLANETS. Globular Americans. They have so much mass gravity was making them spherical

>>2879187
>>2879270
?

>>2879267
> and it certainly doesn't affect impoverished white people

LMAOOO most impoverished white people I see (especially when visiting shitty places in PA and VA) are all fat asf

also, a huge part of the reason islands in the pacific are super obese is because they rely on important canned goods and other shitty foods

Also, if its biological like you say, can you point to any specific biological difference that would cause that?

>>2879286
bro what that person is saying is just straight up wrong and does not correspond to reality >>2879285

>>2879175
The UK did not have any of these horrible things and yet ~30% of British men are obese, only 10% below the US rate.

>>2879267
Obesity has a lot of causes. The Pacific islands are interesting because Samoa and American Samoa are both (can you guess?) Samoan, yet American Samoa is 75% obese while Samoa is 63% obese, a gap on the order of that between the UK and USA. So it's clearly not just a racial thing. But at the same time, Polynesians skew big no matter where you go, and it would be surprising if there was zero genetic component to the difference.

It is not the case that every other colonised civilisation has high obesity rates. The Malaysian obesity rate is 23% despite now being a middle income country. The Philippines is 9.7%, and Indonesia 12%. (the same as France), Thailand 15%, once-colony-now-AES Cuba is at 25%, Iran 25% too, and Greenland is at 30% (tying back to the UK figure we started with.), just to take some random examples.
(Obviously I exclude the countries that have low rates because they're going hungry, I will not try to 'gotcha' in bad faith.)

>>2879270
Self control is basically a stupid explanation. I have never had to exercise self control in order to eat the correct amount. It is ludicrous to imagine I am some praiseworthy person for not being overweight as a result. If I felt like eating all the time, I would eat all the time, and it is sheer luck of the draw that I don't.

It also cannot explain other oddities: why is obesity rarer at higher altitudes across the world?

>>2879286
They were clearly being sarcastic when they said that.
Also the canned food explanation, while certainly part of it, can't explain high Pacific islander obesity rates in New Zealand, which has basically normal first world food supplies.

>>2879297
look at africa's obesity rate RETARD

it's becoming legitimately kind of alarming how many people can't pick up on extremely obvious sarcasm and other subtextual social cues in internet discourse. it's not an autism thing either, this is something new. or maybe i'm just getting old.

>>2879328
how would it be biological if africa has a lower obesity rate and you said wherever they are regardless of history

>>2879332
there are people that genuinely believe that black people are just biologically more impulsive and if it is just sarcasm why further justify their position?

>>2879340
whatever dude i guess the thread has gotten derailed now

>>2879271

i see them as friends and comrades, fellow misshapen diseased mutants cast down into the sewers. i feel comfortable around big lumbering fat people and coughing spitting cigarette smokers and guys who drink a beer in the morning to relieve a hangover before going to work. all that shit is real. people who are really fit and tan and always obsessed with their health and their diet and fashion and fitting in, those people are unnatural and phony and weird, i don't want to be around those people.

NO LEFTY PERSON WITH A LARGE SIZED HEAD ON THEIR SHOULDERS WOULD HAVE EVER FULLY STOMACHED ALL THE DEGROWTH, DRUG-LIBERALIZATION, PRISON ABOLITION, ANTI-GUN STUFF, STATELESSNESS ADVOCACY, FAMILY ABOLITION, ANTI-MARRIAGE, PROTECT THE INNOCENT CRACKHEADS STORIES, PRO-SEXWORK PROMOTION, KEEP THE SAME ORDER/GOV BUT REFORMED STUFF, LET PEOPLE STEAL THINGS, LET YOUR SISTER BECOME A STINKY UGLY MAN, OH THE MUSLIM TERRORIST DID IT OUT OF MARGINALIZATION,… STUFF BECAUSE THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT THE IDEAS ARE JUST SOMEWHERE FROM SHIT TO MASS DESTRUCTION FOR A POPULACE

BLACK PEOPLE AND MUSLIMS BEHAVE LIKE REAL LIFE IS SAN ADREAS THAT'S WHY THEY NEED SOCIALISM STATES IN THEIR REGIONS NOT POPULATION TRANSFER TO FAR OFF PLACES. THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT CAME BACK TO GREEN LIBYA TO LEAVE EUROPE. IF SOMEONE TELLS YOU FAKE STORIES OF PEOPLE FLEEING SOCIALISM TELL THEM ABOUT THE EU LIBYANS FLEEING TO SOCIALIST ARAB JAMAHIRYA

THE ENTIRETY OF LIBERAL CULTURE (DEFAULT LEFT CULTURE) REVOLVES AROUND PRIORITIZING AND SCREAMING ABOUT IRELLEVANT WEIRDASS STRANGERS AND ANIMALS LOOKING LIKE THE BUGS FROM STARSHIP TROOPERS FAR OFF IN TIME/PLACE AND THEIR SAD EXPERIENCES AND ABILITY TO DO ACTION X Y Z, AN OBSESSION SO SEVERE THEY BUY GIANT CAKES AND WATER TANKS AND FOR LYING BEGGARS IN UPPER VOLTA OR PLUTO AS LET THEIR OWN PETS AND CHILDREN GO HUNGRY.THIS BROTHERHOOD OF EARTH CRAP JUST DOESN'T LINE UP WITH HOW PEOPLE EVOLVED

SOCIALISM ALIGNS WITH HUMAN EVOLUTION AND SELFISHNESS DOESN'T, HOWEVER WE EVOLVED TO ALWAYS GIVE BETTER TREATMENT AND PREFER THE GENETICALLY CLOSER.

FOR EVERY LAND ANIMAL HUMANITY KILLS IT KILLS 8000 FISH, THEREFORE WHY DO VEGANISM ADVERTS NEVER SHOW FISH? WE KILL LOTS AND LOTS MORE BUGS THAN WE KILL COWS. HUMANITY'S FACIAL RECOGNITION SYSTEM IS THE SAME ONES AS COWS BUT TOTALLY 100% DIFFERENT TO FISH AND BUGS, CHICKENS HALFWAY.

HAVING EMPATHY FOR ISSUES LIBERALS DEMAND EMPATHY FOR IS REALLY ACTUALLY GETTING EMOTIONALLY MANIPULATED FOR THINGS LIBERALS WANT PEOPLE TO GET EMOTIONALLY MANIPULATED FOR WHICH IS WHY THEY PUT THE WEAK UNDER THE MICROSCOPE AND PEDESTAL HARASS THEM WITH ULTRA-AWKWARD DONATIONS AND THINK EVERYONE IS WEAK EVERYONE NEEDS HELP

IT'S EASIER TO EMOTIONALLY MANIPULATE A PERSON FOR A CAUSE IF THEY SAY THE BENEFICIARY IS PERSECTUTED BULLIED NOT THEIR FAULT THEN THE MANIPULATION IS EASIER

WHY DO WHITE NAZIS ONLY EVER BEAT UP AND ABUSE WHITE POOFTERS AND NEVER BLACK POOFTERS? FOR THE SAME REASON PEOPLE SMILE HANDSHAKE AND COMPLIMENT THEIR COUSINS WHEN THEIR COUSINS GET PREGNANT. THE WHITE LGBT IS MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A MORE RECENT COMMON ANCESTOR. INFACT THE NAZI WILL WANT ALL THE BLACKS TO BE GAY SO THERE CAN BE LESS BLACKS

PROLETARIAT IS NOT WEAK PITIFUL OR VICTIM, IT IS LIKE THE DIRECTOR THE PROTAGONIST THAT IS GONNA REVOLUTIONIZE THE FUCKED UP ECONOMY THAT CRASHES EVERY 7 YEARS SO

>>2879588
Seethe

>>2878568
A version of it called christian solidarism had some successes in Poland a place where the left is completely castrated and ineffective, and had spearheaded neoliberalism in the past.
It doesn't have any class character but it does presuppose inherent value in human life which drives some social justice.

>>2879588
>BLACK PEOPLE AND MUSLIMS BEHAVE LIKE REAL LIFE IS SAN ADREAS

NFL PLAYERS BEHAVE LIKE REAL LIFE IS MADDEN

>>2879307
>But at the same time, Polynesians skew big no matter where you go, and it would be surprising if there was zero genetic component to the difference.
They're just big yeah. I knew a Samoan guy who'd ask restaurants what the biggest thing they had on the menu. It'd be like the buffalo platter. Gimme the buffalo. He wasn't obese either he was just big.

>>2878968
>The costs of forcing lgbts to be in the closet and in relationships with straight people they’ll never be happy with are higher than allowing them to be together in functional “true” relationships even if it causes psychological distress to homophobes.
>>2878975
>Generally anti lgbt sentiment goes down the more functional, healthy lgbt people and couples one encounters in your real life.
Being in the closet also does really screwy things to gays psychologically. Just very weird and unhealthy.

>>2879015
>I think some "leftists" will have to come to grips that will have to work with socially conservative people in order to build socialism. I worry the moralism that most of the western left will not allow this and nothing will get accomplished.
I think you have to cut across the cultural / aesthetic divides that the capitalist parties play up. It'll look more like a mass movement.

>>2879034
>I do wonder if the left while still agreeing on it puts some social issues on the back burner until a time when those issues can be settled.
The crux of it is that "the left" is not really an organized movement to begin with, it's more of an attitude or set of moral positions. So someone can be "left" with respect to one thing and not another. A "left" attitude is generally supportive of the rights of gender and sexual minorities (opposition to discrimination, and also opposition to religious dogma; i.e. pro-secularism). But it also doesn't follow that any particular member of a gender of sexual minority is also to the left in every aspect. Also a movement like LGBT, or earlier forms of that (what used to be called the "gay and lesbian" movement) are cross-class alliances of people within that group who unite around a set of demands regardless of what socialists think about it. A gay and lesbian movement can include a gay Wall Street banker but also a gay person who delivers mail for a living.

There are communists who for decades have thought it's all just bourgeois stuff and wanted nothing to do with it, although some early activists (like in the 19th century) were left-wing radicals (often anarchists), but communists in North America didn't have any role in, like, stopping those people from coming together to advance their demands. It's something that emerged and developed in modern society, and has become increasingly tolerated while the same movement has also become more conventional (although trans people still face more obstacles). Also things like this can emerge and also face hostility from others, and a dialectical pattern kind of sets in, where the people who are freed up by new and more modern conventions to live differently are now being proscribed and psychiatrized and policed, so they organize themselves to push back against it.

>For example trans kids playing sports in a minor issue, we should be focusing on ending imperialism.
The way I look at it, that's an issue for trans people debate among themselves and decide how to proceed with, or not. They might succeed, or they might fail, and choose a different way to advance their cause. What mainly matters and what will affect the development of the whole thing is what they do.

>>2879058
>if we look at history and even today, pretty much everyone who has achieved some form of socialism with lasting results could be called "economically left, socially right", a lot even very much homophobic, and would have very much scorned many of the trends of the sexual revolution.
Sure but the sexual revolution also happened. It plainly occurred in history like women entering the workforce. Like the point of being a Marxist is to begin from actually existing social relations. You know what I'm saying. Like put on your Marxist thinking cap and explain to me how that happened, what contradictions it expressed as part of a whole developing process. Analyze it like a scientist would. Not saying you have to approve of it either, but it doesn't necessarily follow that people in my country (the U.S., can only really speak about that) are going back to the relatively conservative family policies of the 1950s en masse. Or will adopt the policies of the Brezhnev-era Soviet Union. Or maybe they will! But it hasn't happened yet because history happened and social development took place and so forth.

I've written a lot but what I think the left should do is just support freedom and individual rights. They should be the vanguard of that and steal it back from the libertarians and capitalists who are also RUINING THE INTERNET

>>2879109
>expanding more on the haz thing … we often forget the time when he was trying to argue that we already live in socialism which is another on its face stupid thing to day. at the same time though my initial reaction was definitely that this guy was just a fucking moron but over time i have come personally to the conclusion that there really was a real grain of truth in what he was saying on that point.
Well yeah he was trying to make the point that socialization of production occurs within capitalism, but doing it in a very crude way, since the point that Marxists have made for 150 years or so is that one of the principle contradictions of capitalism is between the development of the productive forces (including the socialization of production and labor) and the "social relations" of production about who owns what. Like you say "socialization" of labor and production but what that really means is hundreds of thousands of workers making the same thing and massive global supply chains.

>>2879171
>we are forgetting as well how china is still socially conservative compared to the west and despite what happened in the cultural revolution, confuscianism is still very much latently present within chinese culture compared to here. we now see as well the government of china encouraging and celebrating chinese traditions such as tai chi.
Also I have to address this, because Confucianism has deep roots there, but you also have to understand a lot of this is also about capitalism. Like you can buy a brand of traditional Chinese tea and boost sales during holidays. This doesn't make it "fake" or whatever but this is really hyper-modern stuff wearing traditional LARP garb because tradition has also become a commodity. They want to develop Chinese brands (it helps to distinguish the brand) and grow a domestic consumer economy.

OP here, why do my shitpost threads get the most replies? I expected this to be moved to /siberia/.

>>2879015
this is a pretty much meaningless truism that has been repeated ad absurdum but never defined what "western left" or "socially conservative" actually means

Leftists somehow manage to be double-wrong on immigration. Immigration under capitalism leads to suppressed wages and is generally not a great things AS LONG as capitalism exists. Under communism, nations will be abolished and there will be free movement of people worldwide.

So the "socially leftist" communists simultaneously support immigration in Western countries which is the single biggest reason for them not having any popularity, while also claiming that nation-states will exist in socialism, denying the inherently international nature of communism, therefore falsifying communism and making it easy for the working class to be misled by opportunist governments.

In other words, leftists are economically right and socially left when it comes to capitalism and economically left and socially right when it comes to socialism. Both are retarded.

>>2879588
>NO LEFTY PERSON WITH A LARGE SIZED HEAD ON THEIR SHOULDERS WOULD HAVE EVER FULLY STOMACHED ALL THE DEGROWTH, DRUG-LIBERALIZATION, PRISON ABOLITION, ANTI-GUN STUFF, STATELESSNESS ADVOCACY, PROTECT THE INNOCENT CRACKHEADS STORIES, PRO-SEXWORK PROMOTION, KEEP THE SAME ORDER/GOV BUT REFORMED STUFF, LET PEOPLE STEAL THINGS
That's exactly it. I'm not right-wing in any meaningful way. I'm not even a taylorist larper who needs everything to be about sweaty industrial workers, development of the means of production tends to reduce physical labor anyway. I'm all about actual, real, material progress. Many things associated with "the left" have nothing to do with that. The lumpenproletariat has nothing to do with progress by definition. The same is true of degrowth.